Discussion

At our last meeting I made the point that in this Kris Study Group Report fear of punishment is repeatedly contrasted with the fear of the superego or guilt as the key distinction between preoedipal and postoedipal moral functioning. I want to emphasize again that fear of punishment is not the factor which distinguishes the two. The child who is upset over his bad behavior is fearful of punishment whether he is a preoedipal or postoedipal child. It is not the fear of punishment that distinguishes the two, it is the source of the punishment, whether it comes from external authority or internal authority.

As a result, I believe that the group posed questions for exploration which were so formulated that they precluded finding answers. Attempting to look for a demarcation between punishment and guilt, for example, is bound to fail because none will be found. Morality exists before and after superego formation as does fear of punishment. But important distinctions exist and these depend on where the feared punishment comes from, and what values are involved. Guilt is directly connected with fear of punishment — from the superego. This may explain why the report concludes that there are no significant distinctions between moral functioning before and after superego formation.

Two weeks ago I said that this study focused its attention on that part of our theory that deals with the unique importance of the grand internalization which forms the superego, and on the dividing line between superego precursors and the superego proper. Put another way, the study focused on the distinctions between morally guided behavior before the formation of the superego and after its formation. The report examined a number of those distinctions and without exception discarded them all as unhelpful or untenable. The conclusions are bolstered with five clinical vignettes that are meant to illustrate, support, or prove the point of view espoused in the report.