Freud’s topological model (topological basically meaning putting things into set categories) separated the mind into three regions: the conscious, preconscious, and unconscious. The conscious are the things that we are aware of thinking in our minds at any given time. The preconscious are things that while we may not be actively thinking about them, are easily recalled to the conscious mind. The unconscious, which Freud believed to be the largest portion, is all the desires, drives, instincts, repressed memories and anything else that is contributing to our behaviors that we are unaware of under the surface. In contrast the structural model was developed later by Freud and built off his previous ideas to better explain abnormal personality development. This structural model was made up of the id, the ego, and the superego which relatively fall over the topographical model. The id is the unrestrained unconscious desires that are most apparent in infants but continue to be the underlying force of our desires all throughout life. Later the ego is formed which attempts to rationalize and control some drives of the id in order to get what the id wants in a way that is compatible with reality. The superego then is the overlying control asserted on the id and ego whereby outside influences of upbringing and imposed morality as well as the development of a personal ideal are internalized and form a conscious controller for the unconscious desires.

While Freud’s examples are sometimes psudoscientific and exaggerated I do believe there to be many grains of truth with regards to childhood experience and later sexual paraphilias. Many of the resulting issues arising from suppression of desires in the phases as Freud describes them seem to make sense to me. This is not to say that he got these stages correct or universal, but I will give one example of what I mean. If, during the latent stage of development, a child is chastised for participating in self exploration or “doctor” games with another child, due to the extreme neuroplasticity and high amount of synaptic connections that are still being honed, this child may then associate their feelings of sexuality with that feeling of shame for the rest of their life. This could easily also incorporate some transference if for example around this time that child had been beaten with a belt in response to some action and perhaps later can only become sexually aroused with sadomasochistic role play and feelings of shame. This is perhaps not as direct an example as you were asking for, so I will give a brief second example to ensure I have completed the assignment, someone who was weaned from the breast early may continue to have an oral fixation as an adult and may be a smoker to fulfill that desire.

I will compare Freud with Adler who was originally a student of Freud but eventually broke off from him with some differences of opinion. Adler also believed in certain underlying drives but he added a drive towards perfection or striving for superiority as he called it. This competed with Freud’s idea that the sex drive was the most powerful drive. Freud later did add the death drive as well, but in the beginning there was a lot of contention between the two theories. Freud had even appointed Adler as the head of the Viennese Analytic Society, but following their disagreements Adler and some followers left to form their own society instead. To me, Adler’s idea of striving for superiority is reminiscent of the philosophical concept of telos, or the purpose of a thing. Human’s have their idea of telos and in striving to reach that ideal we can cause ourselves a lot of unhappiness as well. I would lean more towards Freud in this debate personally because I believe the telos of humans by our biological nature is in fact sex and procreation. I believe a lot of secondary self actualization is based on gaining the status and ability to be sexually marketable. Obviously that is a generalization and that drive is very well buried in the subconscious for many people, but just looking at pop culture and advertisements can show how thinly veiled this drive is and how it runs just below the surface. I also agree more with Freud when it comes to teleology. I am more of a determinist like Freud and I believe in the biological/chemical sources of our behaviors. This is not to say that for practical purposes we should not adopt Adler’s teleological approach to achieving our goals in life. The current use of cognitive behavioral therapies to which Adler was a contributor blends the two outlooks in such a way as to achieve maximum results. The way I look at it is, it is important to know the biological basis for behavior which still understanding that the conscious mind, the ego and super ego as Freud would call them, does have the ability to change behavior as well to a large extent. It’s almost like we have the ability to download different operating systems into our brain to assist us with navigating the world. We can choose to entertain a belief system about the world and ourselves to help us feel more fulfilled. Although Stirner would call these systems spooks, they can be quite useful, so it’s important not to discount our conscious choices. Aristotle said the mark of an intelligent mind is to entertain an idea without subscribing to it. Being able to consciously take charge of our operating system, as modern CBT assists with doing, while still remembering that it is a spook but it is a useful tool and is very important. This is a key concept in Buddhism as well, the concept of upaya or expedient means. This makes it very obvious where I see the links between psychology and philosophy. In fact I think Freud was more of a philosopher than a psychologist in a lot of respects. His concepts work well as narratives to assist with understanding but don’t often contain the data necessary to make it a science. Adler seemed much more into what was observable and scientific in this regard.

Freud used projective tests as a means for accessing the unconscious. By looking at an abstract image, for example, and quickly saying things that come to mind before the conscious mind has a chance to consider them is thought to assist with bringing unconscious concepts to the conscious. This is not to say that this is an easy thing to do. Sometimes a cigar is just a cigar. Much like with Jungian dream analysis, different symbols can often mean different things to different people. Although there is something to be said on the subject of the many cross cultural shared symbols of the collective unconscious. So with projective tests must also come much discussion with the psychologist as well to determine the underlying meaning of the associations. Whether this is science or pseudoscience it may still be a good way of initiating this discussion which could eventually be fruitful regardless.

Boeree, G. (2006). Sigmund Freud. Retrieved February 28, 2019 from http://webspace.ship.edu/cgboer/freud.html

Bornstein, R. (2014). The Psychodynamic Perspective. Retrieved February 28, 2019 from https://content.umuc.edu/file/0895a78b-95fc-41d4-afb1-79ce622652d9/1/ThePsychodynamicPerspective.pdf