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.
When the concept of sublimation was first introduced by Freud in 1905 it referred to every conceivable result of instinct development except direct satisfaction and repression. Thus sublimation comprised reaction-formation, reversal of an instinct into its opposite, the turning of an instinct back upon the subject, as well as that which we call sublimation today. In the Three Contributions to the Theory of Sex the paragraph on sublimation makes it obvious that reaction-formation at that time denoted just one special form of sublimation. Later Freud showed us that sublimation cannot take place if the instinct is repressed, whereas one of the conditions for reaction-formation is repression.
Since then most authors have agreed to use the term 'sublimation' to denote only that outcome of instinct development which is characterized by: (1) deflection of the instinct from its original aim; (2) deflection of the instinct from its original object; (3) gratification of the instinct by means of activity having a more acceptable social or cultural value than that of the original form of expression.
It might seem somewhat unusual to introduce the idea of value into a scientific definition, but we need only ask what actually causes the child to reject its original satisfaction (this being the prerequisite of sublimation). Those forces which meet the rising impulse at the threshold of consciousness and divert its direction are generated by the social, ethical or cultural demands of education. Thereby the concept of value enters the picture. It is obvious that the result of the ensuing sublimation must show the marks of this.
It might be worth while to consider which parts of the instinct are amenable to that most acceptable form of ego defense, sublimation. Freud defines mental illness as an impairment of the capacities for achievement and enjoyment