200 Part II Psychodynamic Theories
principle he refused to sign the oath. Although the Committee on Privilege and
Tenure recommended that he retain his position, Erikson left California and
returned to Massachusetts, where he worked as a therapist at Austen Riggs, a treat-
ment center for psychoanalytic training and research located in Stockbridge. In
1960, he returned to Harvard and, for the next 10 years, held the position of pro-
fessor of human development. After retirement, Erikson continued an active
career—writing, lecturing, and seeing a few patients. During the early years of his
retirement, he lived in Marin County, California; Cambridge, Massachusetts; and
Cape Cod. Through all these changes, Erikson continued to seek his father’s name.
He died May 12, 1994, at the age of 91.
Who was Erik Erikson? Although he himself may not have been able to
answer this question, other people can learn about the person known as Erik
Erikson through his brilliantly constructed books, lectures, and essays.
Erikson’s best-known works include Childhood and Society (1950, 1963,
1985); Young Man Luther (1958); Identity: Youth and Crisis (1968); Gandhi’s Truth
(1969), a book that won both the Pulitzer Prize and the National Book Award;
Dimensions of a New Identity (1974); Life History and the Historical Moment (1975);
Identity and the Life Cycle (1980); and The Life Cycle Completed (1982). Stephen
Schlein compiled many of his papers in A Way of Looking at Things (Erikson, 1987).The Ego in Post-Freudian Theory
In Chapter 2, we pointed out that Freud used the analogy of a rider on horseback to
describe the relationship between the ego and the id. The rider (ego) is ultimately at
the mercy of the stronger horse (id). The ego has no strength of its own but must
borrow its energy from the id. Moreover, the ego is constantly attempting to balance
blind demands of the superego against the relentless forces of the id and the realistic
opportunities of the external world. Freud believed that, for psychologically healthy
people, the ego is sufficiently developed to rein in the id, even though its control is
still tenuous and id impulses might erupt and overwhelm the ego at any time.
In contrast, Erikson held that our ego is a positive force that creates a self-
identity, a sense of “I.” As the center of our personality, our ego helps us adapt to the
various conflicts and crises of life and keeps us from losing our individuality to the
leveling forces of society. During childhood, the ego is weak, pliable, and fragile; but
by adolescence it should begin to take form and gain strength. Throughout our life, it
unifies personality and guards against indivisibility. Erikson saw the ego as a partially
unconscious organizing agency that synthesizes our present experiences with past self-
identities and also with anticipated images of self. He defined the ego as a person’s
ability to unify experiences and actions in an adaptive manner (Erikson, 1963).
Erikson (1968) identified three interrelated aspects of ego: the body ego, the
ego ideal, and ego identity. The body ego refers to experiences with our body; a
way of seeing our physical self as different from other people. We may be satisfied
or dissatisfied with the way our body looks and functions, but we recognize that
it is the only body we will ever have. The ego ideal represents the image we have
of ourselves in comparison with an established ideal; it is responsible for our being
satisfied or dissatisfied not only with our physical self but with our entire personal
identity. Ego identity is the image we have of ourselves in the variety of social