Path: utzoo!mnetor!uunet!actnyc!gcf
From: gcf@actnyc.UUCP (Gordon Fitch)
Newsgroups: sci.psychology
Subject: Re: superego/ego/id : some general questions
Message-ID: <774@actnyc.UUCP>
Date: 6 Apr 88 21:49:04 GMT
References: <6171@watdragon.waterloo.edu> <14830004@hpisod2.HP.COM>
Reply-To: gcf@actnyc.UUCP (Gordon Fitch)
Organization: InterACT Corporation
Lines: 41

In article <14830004@hpisod2.HP.COM> decot@hpisod2.HP.COM (Dave Decot) writes:
} This doesn't really answer your question, but here's some related
} terminology from another school of mental science called Dianetics,
} developed by L. Ron Hubbard.
} 
} The kinds of behavior caused by the "id" and "superego" would be classified
} as two varieties of subconscious "circuits" of the "reactive mind", which
} as its name indicates, operates on a simple, associative, reactive basis
} without involving the analytical mind.
} 
} The only distinction between these two facilities of the reactive mind
} is that the "id" part records bodily sensations and offers them up for
} reperception later under similar circumstances, and the "superego" part
} is responsible for storing verbal judgements and ways to determine that
} others are wrong and oneself is right.  This only appears to be
} useful information in that it helped somebody win when it was originally
} experienced, but since it does not involve the analytical mind, it
} usually results in aberrative behavior.

A huge amount of human behavior is socially learned and not subsequently
analyzed -- for example, the use of language on the part of most people.
An individual who tried to analyze the totality of his behavior would
not have time to actually do anything.  In any case, such behavior
can't be called aberrative if the roots of the word mean anything -- 
wandering away (from an accepted norm.)  Unanalyzed behavior _is_
the norm.

} Thus, you don't need your id or superego for anything in particular.

Then you wouldn't have them.  Evolutionary pressures quickly get
rid of characteristics which waste large amounts of energy.

} Anything good about your behavior comes from your analytical mind
} (aka your "ego").

I don't see how anything can be called good on the basis of pure
analysis.  Some kind of primordial sense of good or benefit would
have to come first.  Some kinds of supposedly good behavior derive
from: desire for survival of self, desire for survival of the group, 
love/altruism, religious belief, "art".  How would you produce
these by means of analysis?  What are your primitives, your axioms?