Abstract
This study examines how external support can enhance an individual’s capability and allow him or her to become a greater man or woman. I propose that one surpasses one’s own natural ability when the self is augmented by selfobjects, allowing one to function on a level that could not have been achieved otherwise. The question of how we can become a greater woman or man thus necessitates the consideration of self-augmenting communal resources in the form of selfobject experiences. Drawing on Heinz Kohut’s self psychology, I closely examine the dynamic among self-state, external environment as selfobjects, and self-performance utilizing notions that I call self-preservation, self-loss, and selfobject-augmentation. I then apply these understandings from self psychology as a hermeneutical lens to interpret Moses’s life as depicted in the Scripture and to demonstrate God’s function as a selfobject providing selfobject-augmentation that turns an ordinary man into a great man. More specifically, God’s functioning as a selfobject strengthens Moses enough to allow him to overcome narcissistic injuries that manifest in shame and rage and ultimately to achieve greater things than what he had been capable of achieving by himself.
This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.
Similar content being viewed by others
Notes
Although I disagree with some of the discussion in their article, I recommend Knabb and Newgren (2011) for the application of self psychology in proposing the selfobject relationships between Jesus and God.
Instead of delving into a more detailed discussion of the key concepts of Kohut’s self psychology, I explore mainly the notions of the selfobject and of shame and rage as the byproducts of narcissistic injury in order to focus my discussion. See my article “Relationality in Kohut’s Psychology of the Self” (Son 2006) for a more detailed discussion of key concepts in self psychology.
See my book Spirituality of Joy: Moving Beyond Dread and Duties (2013) for Jesus’ demonstration of resilience or self-preservation at the wedding in Cana (pp. 76–78).
Kohut later added twinship selfobject responses as the third aspect of the cohesive self.
See Rowe (1994) for a criticism of the object relations spin on the notion of selfobject by Bacal, Stolorow, Lichtenberg, etc., who emphasize the role of the object in providing the needed functions as an independent object. Rowe instead appeals for preservation of Kohut’s original notion of selfobject, underscoring the role of the object in replacing the needed functions as a part of the subject.
Kohut initially used a hyphen between self and object and later removed it to present it as a sustainable concept.
See Morrison (1989) for a discussion of various positions on the relationship between shame and anger (rage) and shame and narcissism.
While Freud’s Moses and Monotheism is a pioneering work and raises compelling issues related to the psychological dynamics of oedipal relationships with respect to Moses and the birth of monotheism among Israelites, this study aims to stay focused on an analysis of the relationship between Moses and God through the lens of self psychology and does not engage in Freudian or any other understanding of Moses in order to address fully and clearly the complexities and subtleties of the newly introduced ideas.
See Cooper and Randall (2011) for the role of grace in the healing of the narcissistically injured self as well as Randall’s interview of Kohut on the role of religion as selfobject.
This juxtaposition of Moses’s narcissistic rage toward and compassion for the Israelites is depicted in Freud’s (1914) interpretation of the Moses of Michelangelo as one superior to the biblical Moses because Michelangelo’s Moses has not fully succumbed to his narcissistic rage and successfully curbs it.
From the perspective of Freudian psychology and employing the paradigm only of the self-object relationship, Zeligs (1986) interprets Moses’s harsh punishment of the Israelites as something that stems from his insecurity as their leader and his desire to reinstate his authority, his narcissistic identification with God as an independent object, and his repressed anger against his brother, Aaron (pp. 171–172).
References
Assmann, J. (1997). Moses the Egyptian: The memory of Egypt in Western monotheism. Cambridge: Harvard University Press.
Bacal, H. A. (1994). The selfobject relationship in psychoanalytic treatment. In A. Goldberg (Ed.), Progress in self psychology: A decade of progress (Vol. 10, pp. 21–30). Hillsdale, NJ: Analytic Press.
Basch, M. F. (1994). The selfobject concept: Clinical implications. In A. Goldberg (Ed.), Progress in self psychology: A decade of progress (Vol. 10, pp. 1–7). Hillsdale, NJ: Analytic Press.
Bernstein, R. (1998). Freud and the legacy of Moses. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Cooper, T. D., & Randall, R. L. (2011). Grace for the injured self: The healing approach of Heinz Kohut. Eugene: Pickwick Publications.
Daiches, D. (1975). Moses: The man and his vision. New York: Praeger Publishers.
Freud, S. (1914). The Moses of Michelangelo. In J. Strachey (Trans. & Ed.) & A. Freud (Collab. Ed.), The complete psychological works of Sigmund Freud (Vol. 13, pp. 209–238). London: Hogarth Press, 1955.
Freud, S. (1939). Moses and monotheism. (K. Jones, Trans.). New York: Vintage Books.
Harris, M. D. (2012). Moses: A stranger among us. Eugene: Cascade Books.
Johnson, B. (2010). Moses and multiculturalism. Berkeley: University of California Press.
Kirsch, J. (1998). Moses: A life. New York: Ballantine Books.
Knabb, J. J., & Newgren, K. P. (2011). The craftsman and his apprentice: a Kohutian interpretation of the gospel narratives of Jesus Christ. Pastoral Psychology, 60, 245–262.
Kohut, H. (1971). The analysis of the self. New York: International Universities Press.
Kohut, H. (1972). Thoughts on narcissism and narcissistic rage. In P. H. Ornstein (Ed.), The search for the self: Selected writings of Heinz Kohut, 1950–1978 (Vol. 2, pp. 615–658). Madison, CT: International Universities Press.
Kohut, H. (1977). The restoration of the self. Madison: International Universities Press.
Kohut, H. (1980). Four basic concepts in self psychology. In P. H. Ornstein (Ed.), The search for the self: Selected writings of Heinz Kohut: 1978–1981 (Vol. 4, pp. 669–674). Madison, CT: International Universities Press.
Kohut, H. (1984). How does analysis cure? (A. Goldberg, Ed.). Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
Kohut, H. (1985). Self psychology and the humanities: Reflections on a new psychoanalytic approach. (C. Strozier, Ed.). New York: W. W. Norton & Co.
Lewis, H. (1971). Shame & guilt in neurosis. New York: International Universities Press.
Lewis, H. (1987). Shame and the narcissistic personality. In D. L. Nathanson (Ed.), The many faces of shame (pp. 93–132). New York, London: Guilford Press.
Morrison, A. P. (1989). Shame: The underside of narcissism. Hillsdale: Analytic Press.
Olson, D. T. (1994). Deuteronomy and the death of Moses. Minneapolis: Fortress Press.
Olson, D. T. (2010). Literary and rhetorical criticism. In T. B. Dozeman (Ed.), Methods for Exodus, methods in biblical interpretation (pp. 13–54). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Paul, R. A. (1996). Moses and civilization: The meaning behind Freud’s myth. New Haven: Yale University Press.
Rowe, C. E. (1994). Reformulations of the concept of selfobject: A misalliance of self psychology with object relations theory. In A. Goldberg (Ed.), Progress in self psychology: A decade of progress (pp. 9–20). Hillsdale: Analytic Press.
Segal, R. A. (Ed.). (1996). Psychology and myth. New York: Garland Publishing.
Silver, D. J. (1982). Images of Moses. New York: Basic Books.
Son, A. (2006). Relationality in Kohut’s psychology of the self. Pastoral Psychology, 55, 81–92.
Son, A. (2010). Pastoral care of Korean American women: The degeneration of mothering into the management of an inadequate sense of self. In J. Stevenson-Moessner & T. Snorton (Eds.), Women out of order: Risking change and creating care in a multicultural world (pp. 57–77). Minneapolis: Fortress Press.
Son, A. (2013). Spirituality of joy: Moving beyond dread and duties. Seoul: Jeyoung Communications.
Von Rad, G. (2011). Moses (K. C. Hanson, Ed.) (S. Neill, Trans.). Cambridge: James Clarke & Co.
Yee, G. (2010). Literary and rhetorical criticism. In T. B. Dozeman (Ed.), Methods for Exodus, methods in biblical interpretation (pp. 193–234). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Yerushalmi, Y. H. (1991). Freud’s Moses: Judaism terminable and interminable. New Haven: Yale University Press.
Zeligs, D. F. (1986). Moses: A psychodynamic study. New York: Human Sciences Press.
Acknowledgments
This work is an expanded version of a presentation to the unit of Psychology and Bible at the Society of Biblical Literature in November 2011.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Additional information
While Moses’s life is employed for illustration, the word great in the title suggests a broad, relative, or even symbolic concept that can apply to ordinary people in their daily life, as opposed to the notion of “the great man” that Freud engages in his discussion in Moses and Monotheism. The term is utilized to underscore the extreme importance of the role God and others serve when they function as a selfobject, allowing an individual to surpass his or her ability.
Rights and permissions
About this article
Cite this article
Son, A. Making a Great Man, Moses: Sustenance and Augmentation of the Self through God as Selfobject. Pastoral Psychol 64, 751–768 (2015). https://doi.org/10.1007/s11089-015-0666-0
Published:
Issue Date:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11089-015-0666-0