Defensive Mechanisms of Ego

Philosophy Forums Psychology and Mind
1

Anna Freud was Doctor Sigmund Freud’s youngest lil’ girl. She wrote extensively on defense mechanisms in her 30s.

After some inspirational material, I delved into online excerpts from her publication Ego and Defense Mechanisms published [size=80]1936[/size].

Chapter 6
[i]In all these situations of conflict the person’s ego is seeking to repudiate a part of its own id. Ultimately all such measures are designed to secure the ego and to save it from experiencing unpleasure.

The greater the importance of the outside world as a source of pleasure and interest, the more opportunity is there to experience unpleasure from that quarter.

…the inner struggle between the instincts and the ego, of which neurotic symptoms are the sequel.

Under the influence of shock such as a sudden loss of a love object, it [the ego] denies the facts and substitutes for the unbearable reality some agreeable delusion.

The ego’s capacity for denying reality is wholly inconsistent with another function greatly prized by it- its capacity to recognize and critically to test the objects of reality.[/i]

So what we have here is the denial mechanism. To protect one’s ego this deluded person begins to literally make up more agreeable stories to soothe itself. Anna goes on to explain the difficulty of ridding oneself of this mechanism once it is encased in the primitive mind, and that one can only overcome it when they are mature enough to cope with reality as it is.

Other mechanisms include displacement, repression, isolation, distortion, projection, splitting of the ego, hypochondria, masochism, phantasy, dissociation, isolation and the list gets longer. Among these, reaction formation strikes an interest of mine. A young whore makes an old nun- Betschwester

Sigmund Freud sums it up nicely here:

Reaction Formation begins during a child’s period of latency and continues in favorable cases throughout his whole life… The multifariously perverse sexual disposition of childhood can accordingly be regarded as the source of a number of our virtues, in so far as through reaction formation it stimulates their development.

Sublimination is a similar term:

Sublimination enables excessively strong excitation arising from particular sources of sexuality to find an outlet and use in other fields, so that a not inconsiderable increase in psychical efficiency results from a disposition which in itself is perilous…the multifariously perverse sexual disposition of childhood can accordingly be regarded as the source of a number of our virtues…

Freud also clumped humor into the category saying:

…Humour can be regarded as the highest of these defense processes. It scorns to withdraw the ideational content bearing the distressing affect from conscious attention as repression does, and thus surmounts the automatism of defense.

He thought humor the highest, most evolved form of adaptation, even above wit, and that it was a means of obtaining pleasure despite stressing factors.

A large part of understanding defenses is the mental, egotistical maturation of a said individual, what experiences they have had in life, and how they’ve learned to react to them to avoid displeasing thoughts and feelings. Those who are not offered the proper means of achieving a well rounded ego will suffer from the more severe psychological defense disorders.

2

I’m actually looking for information on aggression defensiveness. It’s my belief that hostility is almost always a defensive act or the carrying out of past, unrelated confrontations. If someone could show me where to look that would be, like, awesome.

3

Hey Echo, check out this link I found.
www-personal.umich.edu/~bbushman/02AB.pdf
I don’t think you’ll agree with what they’re saying, but you mind find it interesting.

4

Thats absurd and flies in the face of mountains of evidence. The most hostile groups of people are young, low status, wifeless men. The most likely to murder, homicide, rape, assault, rob, etc, are regular young men.

The reason they are hostile is that they are taking a risk, risks our ancestors either took or didn’t reproduce. They are hostile because hostility helped the ancestors of modern men reproduce. It helps aquire mates/status for men to become increasingly hostile based on environmental stimuli.

For example even cultural specifics fit.

5

In southeast Asia (round there) theres a ‘unique’ psychological condition called “Amok” it is basically a beserk rampage where the man becomes insane with rage and kills anyone unfortunate enough to cross paths until he is killed, stopped or collapses from exhaustion. This is “unique” to Asian cultures, tends to be a bit contagious (one amok sets off others) anyway…

point is the Amok beserkers are under 35, set off on rampages where no family is (or they spare family) the most common precipitating events are wife/gf problems, losses of status, money.

Amok is culturally unique the causes of Amok are 100% familiar to us, we see it mirrored in ourselves and our own murderers.

No, the causes for hostility in humans are the same causes for hostility among chimpanzees, they compete with each other for resources, mates and territory and their minds have been shaped by millions of years of brutal competition.

Hostility pops up in many of the same situations in all human cultures.

6

child sexuality is dumb. The reason men sexually mature slower than females is that males build strong big bodies FIRST as sexuality before being big/strong is a death sentence for men. Men reach sexual maturity late because they require the ability to defend/fight over mates.

Were a male child sexually mature or even partially mature BEFORE near adulthood some adult would splatter their brains out. Male sexuality maturing late is an ADAPTATION.

Reaction formation is interesting when studied/viewed in an evolutionary setting not psychobabble.

7

Reaction formation in terms of “oh porn is gross!” when unconsciously the person enjoys porn. With an evolutionary framework you can predict in what circumstances should that be common. Obviously its a type of self deception to manipulate other’s assesment of how well you follow social rules, it tends to be common in close knit social circles usually containing moral guidelines.

lots of interesting stuff but Freud was largely full of shit so…

8

Theres no such thing as the “ego” thats a simplified psychological construct that simply doesn’t exist. Breaking the mind or brain up into modules or organs that struggle with each other is apt. But not ego, super ego, ID, thats creationist stupid.

If you cut the corpus collasum a human being splits into 2 theres one reported case of a man attempting to kill his wife guided by personality A with his right hand while personality B tries to save her with the left hand.

Various forms of brain damage reveal instead of Ego, ID and Sego. There are hundreds of specialized modules like ego, for various tasks.

The fusiform gyrus helps facial recognition for example. We also have areas devoted to moral thought, others yet dedicated to cold calculation, or food aversion or mate aquisition.

Instead of the ego, ID and superego theres hundreds of specialized neuromachinery (adaptations)

9

Thanks x.

Cyrene, err ok how do I put this lightly, I know you’re big on the natural sciences and evolutionary explanations but pscyhology isn’t science, and shouldn’t be confused as being on the same scale or to be measured against it. Male testosterone raging for reproduction reasons is common, and does count where we could cross out gangs, drugs, theft, general male to male status, or child abuse. Provocation and frustration are important triggers to note. I suggest you read the link xzc gave and review the amount of mental framework that goes into aggression. Torwards the end of the article it mentions how Kant once said research without theory is blind. We aren’t mating-only machines, although reproduction and sexuality is a large part of our behavior.

What I mean by self-defense is ego defense, it doesn’t have to be directly linked to the current situation, but a part of a long line of past self-esteem issues, out of a need to assert oneself and defend against unpleasurable feelings. It’s a reaction to aquire one’s needs and ward against intruders or obstacles that may be interfering. Perhaps the person feels lonely and unnoticed or out of control and so to protect their self-esteem they act out violently for the aquisition of respect.

In your second paragraph you admit that there are territorial reasons like invasion of personal space, and you can add to this cultural influence to enourage aggressive behavior.

Where was anything stated about male/female sexuality maturation rates? I think you misread some passages. Freud can get dense.

Ok, now I think we’re hitting reaction formation in the right context. And yes, you’re correct, and also it can be a form of self-denial not requiring cultural ignominy.

Care to elaborate?

Ok…

well um, thanks. I’ll take it into consideration.

Science of neurology isn’t a necessary replacement of Freudian terminology.

10

Psychology is a science and when the scientific method is applied its good science. Standard psychology, like Freudian analysis just abandons it.

For example certain morals are universal and produced by adaptations in the brain. Thats psychology but also scientific becomes it testable, makes predictions, etc.

pregnancy sickness is a psychological condition but obviously its an adaptation to avoiding teratogens in fetal development esp during organogenesis.

humans come equipped with a folk biology, folkphysics and folkpsychology all scientifically discovered.

psychology is science. The eye is a psychological adaptation, the idea psychology isn’t science is horse shit. Bad psychology isn’t science. The study of the eye is the study of a psychological adaptation.

11

First Freud was a hardcore adaptationist or evolutionist. He tried to understand the origins and functions of mental traits looking past proximate explanations for those based on adaptive significance of mental phenomena. He tried to explain how these were shaped by the distant past.

but he was a group selectionist, overly lamarckian, and followed haeckels dictum that ontogeny recapitulates phylogeny.

Freud was an evolutionary psychologist who MISSED the idea that SURVIVAL guided evolution and he embraced dozens of biological theories and based his psychologies on them, but we now know they are wrong.

Freud was a staunch adaptationist, he just didn’t get how adaptations were produced, that only traits that positively influence survival evolved into complex adaptations so he proposed ad hoc drives like the death instinct because he was an evolutionist without any conceptual anchor, he misunderstood Darwin.

12

Shrug.

You say there is no ego, superego and id, but when they look at the brain they find there are hundreds of mechanisms for things.

What you don’t get is that psychology is the study of the mind, the subjective experience. It’s different to use ego, id and superego as conceptual mechanisms that seem to ring true to one’s subjective struggles, and to actually believe those three are existing things in one’s brain. :laughing:

13

I’m not supporting Freud’s death instinct (especially not what what may be your view of it…),

but seriously?

What about traits that have both positive and negative affects? Or what if they have a negative affect, or neutral effect, but simply don’t impede survival much (may come with advantages that counter the disadvantages)?

14

You do know that all her attempts to add to her father’s greatness failed and that the most successful application of Freud’s insight were done by his nephew Bernays, don’t ya?

This reaches a height within environment that guarantee survival by dealing with reality, allowing the individual to spend his time escaping it…only asking for submission in return.

And culling would ensue, if not for the aforementioned.

Given that the environment worships and promotes adolescence, domestication being a stunting of the maturing process (retardation) - and we see this all over our western culture - maturity is rarely achieved, unless some mitigating circumstances force the individual into traumatic experiences that force it to face reality.

The inexperience with suffering, on a level above a slight discomfort (the culture of immediate gratification) and with fear, fear being considered a destructive emotion rather than a self-disciplining one that breeds care and self-control, is what this stunting is.

Repression of self, where certain drives are taught to be considered evil, and this inexperience with anything real beyond the human constructs and sheltering environments, comes out as neurosis.

And isn’t it interesting how Freud’s genius is dismissed today as overcome, when marketing is based on his insights and much of what he said can be witnessed all around us?

an adaptation only within human environments.

And is not ego degraded and labeled as the source of suffering and taught to be denied?

Do you not even see how it is slandered in eastern philosophies?

15

Freud didn’t think much of his nephew Bernays by all accounts but that is besides the point. After all it’s all about what is successfully applied. Ms Freud may well have been right about ego.

Two questions formulated to promote discussion:

What might happen if 6 billion people ‘suddenly’ stopped denying their ‘ego’?

What does it tell us about humans if both western and eastern cultures attempt to deny or slander the ego?

and another

Where do humans go from accepting ‘ego’ and accepting suffering as inevitable?

16

A return to the wild.

Like with Judaism a religion begins as a political method of controlling the population…Morals are really social laws restricting behaviors so as to ensure coexistence.

Look how well ego slandering has worked in the east where the population resembles an ant-farm.

Strength.

17

A culture of the stunted, overly enabled. Longer life spans also add to this loss of struggle. Where in some time periods one was lucky to live to age 21, in our society it’s a drinking age so that ‘children’ (stunted adults) can party another 10 years until they’re expected to show some sign of responsibility working inside an air conditioned office.

Whilst their food is processed and prepackaged. Their needs are met according to demand be it a pizza at 2am or 24hr entertainment in their living rooms- and this being lowerclass amenities.

Make 50 grand a year and travel from here to Japan for next to nothing, enjoy world cuisine whether you have 10 dollars in your pocket or hundreds- globalization has brought it to you free of expense.

Back before industrialization you would be on a horse and buggy to get a loaf of bread 20 miles away.

Stunted because of ease of access. Stunted because we live like royalty off the labor of machines and third world countries.

It’s interesting how many ideas of yesterday have been ‘overcome’, and yet by dissmissing these ideas as below us we’re becoming more naive and self-absorbed. We’re in a stagnant state, seeing progress soar before us on a treadmill.

Eastern philosophies do tend to negate the ego as burden to the ‘higher state’. There are many disadvantages to escapism as a daily meditation because the pain and discomforts we experience in life are internal alarms of outside dangers. When forcefully shut from what ails us, we lose the ability to discern the source and eventually to overcome the pain successfully without coverups.

It’s much like a pain killer, or alcohol addiction. There are instances where these substances are helpful in overcoming excruciating discomfort or simply relaxing, but when abused, or used ‘religiously’, it’s a failed defense mechanism, and the abuser becomes dependent and prone to psychotic behavior.

There is, by contrast, major self-discipline and awareness involved in eastern physical defense, and meditative exercises that enhance flexibility and overall performance.

Eastern techniques for enduring torture when applied under the right circumstances can also be an advanced, and praise worthy defense mechanism. This branch of zen may appear to be self-mutilation, but the benefits of the practice could very well outweigh this.

If 6 billion people ‘suddenly’ stopped doing anything there would be a cataclysmic shift. I imagine there would be a chaotic disaster.

That it’s a human trait designed to aid in survival. It’s extreme usage, the never ending excapism, and inability to overcome without these crutches that makes us weak. Worst of all it’s the lack of self awareness- not knowing that one is compulsive and delusional that prevents this.

Even religion, put to the test, makes one happier and healthier statistically. It’s not innately negative. It’s only when people actually believe that there is a true spiritual entity shaped according to mythology, and don’t just go to church to gather with the family and community to participate in tradition that it can become a problem.

Better able to observe outside oneself, to have enough self-awareness and courage to let go, and allow for even the unpleasant to take precedence as it too has its evolutionary advantages.

18

You can see now how every benefit has a cost, even if most choose to ignore it and are angered when someone like me brings it up, and every cost has a benefit, no matter how dreadful it may be.

My “negativity”, as even your boyfriend commented on it, is based on this culture’s obsession with turning a blind eye to the costs, living in la-la-land or Disney World, always cheery and over-optimistic, and then always disappointed and surprised by the world.
Then, when they get hurt and disappointed instead of blaming their own judgment, for overestimating themselves or underestimating the difficulties, they blame the world for not living up to their expectations.

Then they dream of changing the world, instead of themselves…and the naive idealist is born.

In a world of stunted psychologies, and adolescent minds, where Santa Clause is still taken as self-evident, then anyone that even hints the Santa is a farce…will be attacked as a cynic, a pessimist, a negative and a hater.

And how much more happier people were, willing to make do with what they had because they were not told that they should want more or that that they deserve more, in a hyper-inflated marketing ploy to keep minds forever striving for shit that rarely lives up to their expectations even if they do mange to attain them, after years of toil and stress; people with more down to earth dreams - less is more.

Minimalism, quietude…humility in the face of nature…reasonable expectations, an ability to cope with less…preferring it, in fact - asceticism.