You do not currently have permission to view the full text for this document. Please sign in to an account with an active subscription or contact support.
The aim of this paper is to show how much may be gained for the understanding of psychology by a comparison of the findings of the psycho-analytical school with those of the school of genetic child study represented by Piaget, Luquet, etc. The differences of approach between the two schools are compensatory and to study the problems of child psychology from one standpoint only is likely to lead to unnecessary mistakes, while to understand the laws of children's thinking from the facet of what is conscious may be a help even in psycho-analytic therapy.
The three subjects chosen for this study are the psycho-analytical theory of infantile amnesia, penis envy and the formation of the super-ego (Uber-ich) in the boy. Saussure shews how well the intellectual aspects of infantile sexual amnesia and penis envy fit into the discoveries made by the genetic school of psychology with regard to children's thinking.
The last part of the paper is concerned with a comparison of the formation of the super-ego as described by Freud and Alexander and the genesis of the child's moral sense as seen by Piaget and Bovet. Though in some respects the conclusions which the two schools have arrived at are compatible there are differences. For instance, the Oedipus complex and the castration complex have no great importance according to the genetic school of child study. On the other hand, this school has discovered that there is a great change in the affective and moral spheres of the child's psyche in the seventh and eighth years.
The problem of the jealousy of children among themselves depends on the stage of moral development of the older children.
Saussure holds that an understanding of the work of the genetic school is very useful in therapeutic work.