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.
Nunberg raises the question as to whether the concept of the demand for punishment is coincident with that of the sense of guilt. He holds that the sense of guilt arises from the fear of the loss of love. As it is associated with incorporation it means a taking of something to the self and is thus associated with possession on a primitive stage. Expulsion of the object incorporated signifies, therefore, a return of that which was appropriated, or it may mean the resurrection of the introjected parent. In either case relief is sought for by atonement and reinstatement with the loved person, with a view to libidinal satisfaction.
Demand for punishment is brought about when the incorporation is mainly of an aggressive nature. The super-ego then stems the outward flow of aggression and the ego has to suffer the hostility originally willed against the parent. But as the incorporated parent is not only hated but also loved, libido returns into the ego and it is this libidinous moment which makes the ego subject itself to the sadism of the super-ego. Fear of punishment and the demand for punishment are an expression of narcissistic libido and aggression, while a feeling of guilt is concerned with object libido and libidinal dissatisfaction.
Evidence for the above may be found in the fact that a sense of guilt predominates in hysteria, while in the obsessional neurosis, melancholia