Read an Excerpt
The Map of the Psyche
The Truth of Mental Illness
By Timothy R. Nuske Balboa Press
Copyright © 2013 Timothy R. Nuske
All rights reserved.
ISBN: 978-1-4525-1129-0
CHAPTER 1
Section 1
Pyramid Map
I know quite certainly that I myself have no special talent; curiosity, obsession and dogged endurance, combined with self-criticism, have brought me to my ideas.
—Albert Einstein
Mistakes are, after all, the foundations of truth, and if a man does not know what a thing is, it is at least an increase in knowledge if he knows what it is not.
—Carl Jung
1.1. Freud's Model of the Conscious
The original structural framework of the psyche model was based on Sigmund Freud's model of the conscious. The model of the conscious is divided into three types of mental processes: conscious, preconscious, and unconscious (Figure 1).
Conscious mental processes are rational, goal-directed thoughts at the center of awareness. Preconscious mental processes are not conscious but could become conscious at any point, such as knowledge of the colour of robins. Finally, unconscious mental processes are irrational, organized along associate lines rather than by logic . . . they are inaccessible to consciousness because they have been repressed—that is, kept from consciousness to avoid emotional distress. Unconscious processes, while barred from consciousness, are not inert. Because they are not consciously acknowledged, they may leak into consciousness and affect behaviour in unexpected and often unwelcome ways ... (Burton, Westen, & Kowalski, 2009, p. 417)
Freud described the conscious as what is in active awareness, while the preconscious is "not conscious but could become conscious at any point, such as knowledge". The unconscious is at the base of the model and is organized along associative lines rather than according to standard logic, and is designated a no-fly zone for the ego (see 3.1. Ego). The unconscious contains automatic processes key to survival, such as maintaining circulation, respiration, and so on. It also contains repressed or distressing processes that may leak into awareness in the form of anxiety. A leaky tap is a useful metaphor for the conscious's—or more specifically, the ego's—access to the unconscious; it may drip rarely and remain unnoticed for some time, or it may be fully open and spill over quite rapidly. If a tap represents the limited access to the unconscious, then imagine a dam holding back the weight of an ocean to represent the unconscious itself (although in fact it is much bigger even than this).
1.2. Conscious Model and Trait Theories
To further reinforce the base structure of the design, personality trait theories are used—here in part, with more in the following sections—including the 16 Personality Factors (16PF; originally produced by Raymond Cattell) and the Five Factor Model (FFM; Goldberg, 1993; McCrae & Costa, 1997). The extroversion– introversion and anxiety/neuroticism traits are placed alongside Freud's model of the conscious (Figure 2). The conscious relates to extroversion and the external (Ext) world of body, objects, and persons. The preconscious relates to introversion and the internal (Int) world of mind, thoughts, and ideas. The body and mind described here refer to a somatic and psychic base, not to something physical. The individual sub-traits of the big five overarching traits from the FFM are listed in Table 1 below.
The trait associations originate from the similarities when compared to the conscious model. Extroversion scales up alongside the conscious, which is defined as what is in active awareness, and activeness is an extroversion trait. Introversion scales down alongside the preconscious, relating to the inner world of ideas and knowledge, and is the opposite of active. The separation point for extroversion–introversion in relation to the conscious model is at the conscious–preconscious line. There is, however, some overlap, so this line is not a clearly defined one. Anxiety/neuroticism taps into the unconscious, so the experience of more anxiety suggests more unconscious influence. Neuroticism includes traits such as anxiety, sadness, and moodiness (Benet-Martinez & John, 1998). Although the unconscious is not directly accessible to the ego (see 3.1. Ego), unconscious processes may leak into awareness and manifest as anxiety.
Hans Eysenck produced another personality theory—one that has only three main traits and is referred to as the PEN (psychoticism, extroversion, neuroticism) model—and researchers exploring his theory reported the following:
Extroversion refers to a tendency to be sociable, active and willing to take risks. Introverts, who score at the low end of the extroversion scale, are characterised by social inhibition, seriousness and caution. Neuroticism defines a continuum from emotional stability to instability. It is closely related to the construct of negative affect. People high on neuroticism report feeling anxious, guilty, tense and moody, and they tend to have low self-esteem. Psychoticism describes people who are aggressive, egocentric, impulsive and antisocial. People low on psychoticism are empathic and able to control their impulses. (Burton et al., 2009, p. 434)
Although Eysenck's PEN model is useful for the description, the psyche model uses the personality theories with five main personality dimensions (FFM and 16PF) for more accuracy and detail.
1.3. Moral Compass
Morals help to define what is considered right or wrong within a society or culture. However, what is deemed right and wrong may not equate to what is good and evil. Social and cultural morals are actually mostly social norms. And a norm is merely a generally accepted way of thinking, feeling, or behaving—what most people in a group consider to be right and proper (Thibaut & Kelley, 1959). But just because something is considered right and proper or is the accepted behaviour in a group or society does not necessarily make it morally good. For example, a member of the Ku Klux Klan may be subject to a norm of racial discrimination. But just because discriminating against people of other races is a social norm within the Klan, considered among that group's members to be right or to be an acceptable way of thinking or acting, does not make it morally good. Moral views vary depending on the individual, group, society, or culture as a whole, and they can change over time or be modified through social norms.
Morals are subject to change on a yearly, weekly, or even daily basis, and what one considers right one day may be considered wrong the next. Although our experience of morals can be extremely dynamic in nature, the psyche model (being a single design) requires a stable and universal moral foundation. Campbell, Christopher, and Bickard (2002) previously examined morality theories produced or accepted by the field of psychology and considered them inadequate. They discussed the failings of current psychological morality theories by looking at morality from a different angle, taking into account a philosophical and somewhat spiritual component of morality. I, too, perceived inadequacies in contemporary psychological morality theories and, as a result, looked outside the field of psychology and towards the moral-alignment classifications described in the roleplaying game Dungeons and Dragons (D&D). These alignments are represented with the moral compass (Figure 3), with an alternative compass (Figure 4) showing a split between active and passive/ neutral morals for Ext and Int.
Social and cultural norms that indicate what is acceptable moral conduct can differ between individuals and groups, yet the moral compass and alignments from D&D provide a universal and stable moral foundation, a one-for-all type of design. The moral opposites of good (G) and evil (E), and the opposites of law (L) and chaos (C), represent Life and Laws respectively, and indicate an individual's value or respect for each. The moral compass is depicted like a standard compass, with G and E running east–west, and with L and C running north–south. True neutral (N) is dead center, having no sway in any direction (Figure 3). The distance from center suggests the strength of conviction towards that moral alignment. Figure 4 shows an alternative compass split for active and neutral morals. Ext relates to extroverted, or active, morals, and Int refers to introverted, or passive/neutral, morals. The split between active and passive morals also shows a difference between thoughts and actions. For example, the thought of killing is technically an evil thought (although having a bad thought does not make someone evil, per se), yet it remains neutral unless it manifests externally in an action. The thought of killing can be changed. The act of killing cannot.
Detailed Moral Alignments
Following are the good–evil and law–chaos descriptions and nine alignment definitions reproduced from the D&D Player's Handbook (Cook, Tweet, & Williams, 2000, pp. 88–90) to describe in detail the different moral alignments. An unedited recount is required so as to display the information as it was originally written to offer in its entirety something untainted by personal or psychological bias. The reader should note that these definitions were developed for a fantasy platform, a role-playing game based on sword and sorcery in a world of orcs and goblins, wizards and warriors. Although one is unlikely to run across a sorcerer or a paladin, the descriptions mirror the 'real world' surprisingly easy.
Good and Evil (Life)
Good characters and creatures protect innocent life. Evil characters and creatures debase or destroy innocent life, whether for fun or profit.
Good implies altruism, respect for life, and a concern for the dignity of sentient beings. Good characters make personal sacrifices to help others.
Evil implies hurting, oppressing, and killing others. Some evil creatures simply have no compassion for others and kill without qualms if doing so is convenient. Others actively pursue evil, killing for sport or out of duty to some evil deity or master.
People who are neutral with respect to good and evil have compunctions against killing the innocent but lack the commitment to make sacrifices to protect or help others. Neutral people are committed to others by personal relationships. A neutral person may sacrifice himself to protect his family or even his homeland, but he would not do so for strangers who are not related to him.
Being good or evil can be a conscious choice, as with the paladin who attempts to live up to her ideals or the evil cleric who causes pain and terror to emulate his god. For most people, though, being good or evil is an attitude that one recognizes but does not choose. Being neutral between good and evil usually represents a lack of commitment one way or the other, but for some it represents a positive commitment to a balanced view. While acknowledging that good and evil are objective states, not just opinions, these folk maintain that a balance between the two is the proper place for people, or at least for them.
Animals and other creatures incapable of moral action are neutral rather than good or evil. Even deadly vipers and tigers that eat people are neutral because they lack the capacity for morally right or wrong behavior.
Law and Chaos (Laws)
Lawful characters tell the truth, keep their word, respect authority, honor tradition, and judge those who fall short of their duties. Chaotic characters follow their consciences, resent being told what to do, favor new ideas over tradition, and do what they promise if they feel like it.
Law implies honor, trustworthiness, obedience to authority, and reliability. On the downside, lawfulness can include closemindedness, reactionary adherence to tradition, judgmentalness, and a lack of adaptability. Those who consciously promote lawfulness say that only lawful behavior creates a society in which people can depend on each other and make the right decisions in full confidence that others will act as they should.
Chaos implies freedom, adaptability, and flexibility. On the downside, chaos can include recklessness, resentment toward legitimate authority, arbitrary actions, and irresponsibility. Those who promote chaotic behavior say that only unfettered personal freedom allows people to express themselves fully and lets society benefit from the potential that its individuals have within them.
People who are neutral with respect to law and chaos have a normal respect for authority and feel neither a compulsion to obey nor to rebel. They are honest, but can be tempted into lying or deceiving others.
Devotion to law or chaos may be a conscious choice, but more often it is a personality trait that is recognized rather than being chosen. Neutrality with respect to law and chaos is usually simply a middle state, a state of not feeling compelled toward one side or the other. Some few neutrals, however, espouse neutrality as superior to law or chaos, regarding each as an extreme with its own blind spots and drawbacks.
Animals and other creatures incapable of moral action are neutral. Dogs may be obedient and cats free-spirited, but they do not have the moral capacity to be truly lawful or chaotic.
Lawful Good (L–G), "Crusader"
A lawful–good character acts as a good person is expected or required to act. She combines a commitment to oppose evil with the discipline to fight relentlessly. She tells the truth, keeps her word, helps those in need, and speaks out against injustice. A lawful–good character hates to see the guilty go unpunished. A paladin who fights evil without mercy and who protects the innocent without hesitation is lawful–good.
Lawful–good combines honor and compassion.
Neutral Good (N–G), "Benefactor"
A neutral–good character does the best that a good person can do. He is devoted to helping others. He works with kings and magistrates but does not feel beholden to them. A cleric who helps others according to their needs, is neutral–good.
The common phrase for neutral–good is "true good."
Being neutral–good means doing what is good without bias toward or against order.
Chaotic Good (C–G), "Rebel"
A chaotic–good character acts as his conscience directs him, with little regard for what others expect of him. He makes his own way, but he's kind and benevolent. He believes in goodness and right but has little use for laws and regulations. He hates when people try to intimidate others and tell them what to do. He follows his own moral compass, which, although good, may not agree with that of society. A ranger who waylays the evil baron's tax collectors is chaotic–good.
Chaotic–good combines a good heart with a free spirit.
Lawful Neutral (L–N), "Judge"
A lawful–neutral character acts as law, tradition, or personal code directs her. Order and organization are paramount to her. She may believe in personal order and live by a code or standard, or she may believe in order for all and favor a strong, organized government. A monk who follows her discipline without being swayed by the demands of those in need nor by the temptations of evil is lawful–neutral.
The common phrase for lawful–neutral is "true lawful."
Being lawful–neutral means being reliable and honorable without being a zealot.
Neutral (N), "Undecided"
A neutral character does what seems to be a good idea. She doesn't feel strongly one way or the other when it comes to good vs. evil or law vs. chaos. Most neutrality is a lack of conviction or bias rather than a commitment to neutrality. Such a character thinks of good as better than evil. After all, she would rather have good neighbours and rulers than evil ones. Still, she's not personally committed to upholding good in any abstract or universal way. A wizard who devotes herself to her art and is bored by the semantics of moral debate is neutral.
Some neutral characters, on the other hand, commit themselves philosophically to neutrality. They see good, evil, law, and chaos as prejudices and dangerous extremes. They advocate the middle way of neutrality as the best, most balanced road in the long run.
The common phrase for neutral is "true neutral."
Being neutral means you act naturally, without prejudice or compulsion.
Chaotic Neutral (C–N), "Free Spirit"
A chaotic–neutral character follows his whims. He is an individualist first and last. He values his own liberty but doesn't strive to protect others' freedom. He avoids authority, resents restrictions, and challenges traditions. The chaotic–neutral character does not intentionally disrupt organizations as part of a campaign of anarchy. To do so, he would have to be motivated either by good (and a desire to liberate others) or evil (and a desire to make those different from himself suffer).
(Continues...)
Excerpted from The Map of the Psyche by Timothy R. Nuske. Copyright © 2013 Timothy R. Nuske. Excerpted by permission of Balboa Press.
All rights reserved. No part of this excerpt may be reproduced or reprinted without permission in writing from the publisher.
Excerpts are provided by Dial-A-Book Inc. solely for the personal use of visitors to this web site.
