5+1 Sentences On The Walking Dead s3e2 Sick

Posted on by TheLastPsychiatrist and tagged . Bookmark the permalink.

pop quiz: were you more worried about Hershel dying or Lori getting bit by Hershel?

Here’s your five sentence introduction to psychoanalysis in the age of atheism: “Wherefore if thy hand or thy foot offend thee, cut them off, and cast them from thee: it is better for thee to enter into life halt or maimed, rather than having two hands or two feet to be cast into everlasting fire.”  Funny how it’s the old (ex-) Christian father who is “saved” by a literal reading of the Bible.

Meanwhile, back with the Left Behind, Rick has to decide if pre-emptively killing a couple of convicts is morally justified to protect his own group, and his wife, the voice of sanity and reason, the hypercritical back seat driver of his life, tells him, “[kill them all] with a clear conscience,” which is translated to, “don’t ask me, I’m just a girl.”

That’s the standard line of maternal superego, as distinct from the now defunct paternal superego, and its main job is to make you feel guilty for failing to be happy, and if you can’t understand the analogy imagine the convicts were women and she told him, “[bend them over a sink] with a clear conscience, you deserve it, you’re you.”

Everybody knows that morality is a function of society and if there’s no society, anything goes, but you may want to be careful that there’s not another society waiting around the corner, in this world or the next, which will judge your utilitarianism by different standards.


And yet still they do not call them zombies.


Related posts:

  1. 5+1 Sentences On The Walking Dead “Judge, Jury, Executioner” s2e11
  2. 5+1 Sentences On The Walking Dead s3e1 Seed
  3. 5+1 Sentences On The Walking Dead: “Triggerfinger” s2e9
  4. 5+1 Sentences On The Walking Dead “18 Miles Out” s2e10
  5. 5+1 Sentences On The Walking Dead “Beside The Dying Fire” s2e13

4 Responses to 5+1 Sentences On The Walking Dead s3e2 Sick

  1. notmygoodies says:

    *fart noise*

  2. JohnJ says:

    Are you basically saying that the “maternal” superego is useless, or even worse than useless? You’re essentially talking about the voice that rationalizes for us when we want to do something but know it’s wrong.

    I can appreciate that. I know all the other commenters here are geniuses, but I like having someone who can explain some of the more interesting points of art for me.

    • Guy Fox says:

      Genius reporting for duty, sir.
      The ‘maternal superego’ is the one that will love you no matter what. The upshot is that you can resist killing yourself when you forget the milk or drink too much, but also that you’re plunged into cognitive dissonance whenever you’re unhappy ’cause the feedback says you’re perfect and beautiful just the way you are. The paternal version makes you feel like a jerk for not studying/working harder, but it also lets you take credit (and responsibility) for your successes (and failures), allowing you to feel satisfied (and guilty) in the first place.
      You can probably think of them in terms of countervailing pushes and pulls without ascribing pure virtue/sin to either (unless you’ve read too much Carl Schmitt, really like a world of good Guys and bad Guys, and don’t have a problem swallowing the fascism involved).

      • JohnJ says:

        So we’re essentially talking about the mechanism that reassures us after we’ve done something wrong, but which also has the unfortunate tendency to kick in when we’re thinking about what to do in the future. If I had done X by mistake, it reassures me that I’m not a bad person. But when I’m thinking about whether or not to do X, it also reassures me that whichever choice I choose, it still will not make me a bad person.

        Now that’s interesting.