Philosophical analysis reveals Kant's ideas of authority in moral psychology, suggesting deeper implications for self-understanding.
In recent decades, philosophers have turned to Freud’s last metapsychology of id, ego, and super-ego in order to reconstruct a naturalistic, developmental account of a Kantian moral psychology. In this paper I try to show that Freud’s conception of the super-ego as the intra-psychic source of authority presents a challenge to Kantian conceptions of conscience. I argue that the recent philosophical reconstruction of Freud omits a crucial and unusual detail: according to Freud, the super-ego has a ‘double aspect’ (Doppelangesicht), at once commanding and prohibiting that the ego become like the ego-ideal. After defending this more unusual interpretation of the super-ego, I argue that, on the one hand, Freud’s ‘contradictory’ moral psychology is quite different than Kant’s ‘conflicted’ moral psychology, and yet on the other hand, I argue that Kant’s discussion of self-conceit brings his moral psychology unexpectedly closer to Freud’s. I then suggest how Freud’s picture contributes to our own practical self-understanding, and close by clarifying the nature of Freud’s challenge to our ordinary and/or Kantian conception of moral psychology and moral authority. After Freud, it is not clear that our moral and psychic ideals come out unscathed.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Francey Russell (2025) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: