ABSTRACT
In the introduction to this book, I put forward the case that in everyday life, judgment as to what is right or wrong, that is to say, the taking up of a “moral position”, is as frequently made by individuals on the basis of what is perceived to be personally safe or threatening as it is through appeal to any other principle. I have argued, with reference to his earliest understanding of the roots of conscience that this was also Freud’s belief. His view was that conscience originates in the relationship between the individual and the primary protective object: the totem. I have shown that notwithstanding this, his 1923 formulation of the oedipal superego neglected the idea that the superego had its origin in the survival instinct. I have argued for, and formulated, its reinstatement, and in so doing, have found that augmentation of the concept of the superego along these lines yields two distinct stages to superego development: an archaic superego that, in healthy development gives rise to a superego negotiated by the ego. Research of clinical material, predominantly from the past half-century and analysis of clinical material from my own practice suggests that mature superego functioning is distinguished by the way in which “moral evaluations”, about both individuals and society, are made by an ego that is forged through challenge to archaic superego dominance. I found that the 92differentiation of these two stages of superego development implies two types of morality. I have taken care to emphasise that attainment of the second does not mean that the first is somehow dispensed with. On the contrary, ego-negotiated morality defines itself in reference to survival morality. In cases of immature superego functioning, we find that a petrified embryonic ego has become trapped in a state of deference to survival morality.
