Within the Pleasure Principle—Child Analytic Perspectives on Aggression

In formulating his dual instinct theory, Freud (1920) postulated that aggression was the death instinct, the polar opposite of libido, the life instinct, and thus it does not follow the rules of the

pleasure principle. The central thesis of this paper is that while aggression may manifest itself as a negative, hostile, or destructive drive derivative, it can nevertheless be defined as a positive force in psychological growth and development. Emphasis on the positive qualities of the aggressive drive allows for a more cogent theoretical synthesis of the contribution of the drives to ego development. Infantile aggression, analogous to infantile sexuality, can be conceptualized as commencing with a state of primary omnipotent illusion fueled by aggression. Divergences in drive development are more apparent. During development aggression undergoes a muting of its potentials for direct drive discharge. In object relations, aggression functions to differentiate self from love objects. Libido aims at physical merger and psychological fusion with love objects, and evolves toward direct sexual gratification in later life. These drive characteristics become important determinants of object constancy. The transitional object comes into being as a secondary illusion replacing the fading primary aggressive illusion of omnipotence. It knits together aggressive and libidinal drive elements in a preliminary attempt to establish safe, enduring object relationships. The transitional object serves as a precursor to the establishment of object constancy. The dynamism of object constancy involves aggressive energies serving the pole of self differentiation and individuation, while libidinal energies act on the pole of deindividuation and fusion with the love object.