Critically contrast Aquinas and Freud on conscience.

In this short 8 minute film, Peter Baron discusses a possible Ethics (H573/2) exam question: “Critically contrast Aquinas and Freud on conscience.” Use it as a basis for your essay plan or to generate a discussion on how best to handle this question.
Notes:
"Critically contrast Aquinas’ and Freud’s theory of conscience."
Aquinas argues for an innate synderesis then applied by practical wisdom using human reason. Freud argues for an inculcated conscience formed in early childhood guiding us by feelings of guilt, quite often irrational and unconscious. Freud’s theory is behaviourist and determinist, and Aquinas’ theory determinist in the sense of determined by God-given rational goals or precepts designed into us. The essential difference perhaps resides in the functions of instinct and will.
Aquinas’ theory of conscience employs two ideas. Synderesis is the orientation of our instincts towards good ends by inbuilt habits or tendencies. We by our nature pursue good ends. But our ratio requires freedom given also by God to our human natures to determine applications of the natural law (secondary precepts). Aquinas calls this conscientia. Notice though that he assumes human freedom and it is hard to prove we are born with a conscience. Human selfishness and egoism can suggest otherwise and group pressures revealed by the Milgram experiment, for example, suggest freedom is in practice debatable.
Aquinas’ weakness is actually Freud’s strength as his theory is highly deterministic. Conscience is determined by the formation of the superego in early childhood. Here conscience is attempting to resolve conflicts both within the id - where the pleasure principle is combatting aggression and desire for self-destruction, and between ego and id, where our sense of reality conflicts with our desires for self- satisfaction. Superego then regulates behaviour and yet is an imposition of parental praise and blame. It’s a rather pessimistic view, as it doesn't allow much dignity to reject parental values and reason our way out of feelings of guilt.
Moreover, Freud’s view is reductionist because humans become programmed animals with no higher calling or higher sense of right and wrong that that imposed by the herd or by the group. Freudian theory thus allows us to be programmed to be guilty about not killing innocent civilians in war, or to obey a dictator blindly who is bent on genocide. But the evils done by such as Eichmann, tried in 1963 for atrocities against the Jews, suggest to coin Hannah Arendt’s phrase, a banality of evil. “Banal’ here suggests two things; lack of reflection and depth and lack of sympathy.
To conclude:
Aquinas sees conscience as God-given and innate, an internal compass to guide us to pursue good ends. Freud sees conscience as determined by upbringing. Aquinas’ theory has weaknesses - human beings seem to be selfish and malleable. Eichmann is a warning to us. Whereas Freud argues for a conscience programmed by upbringing to control us by guilt - a pessimistic view of human nature suggesting the road to freedom and responsibility is hard and may never be achieved - with human beings locked in an infantile state.
More information can be found on peped.org

[@evie5025]

this was so good thank you

[@willpocock1825]

Thank you for these videos!

[@damnedjuggernaut1051]

Awesome content.

[@JohnSmith-io8iv]

Perfect - cheers