Libido and psychic energy – Freud's concepts reconsidered

Abstract

The author examines different definitions and applications of the terms “psychic energy” and “libido.” With regard to the “psychic energy” terminology, he shows that its application and usage relate in particular to the perspective of Brenner and not to Freud's definition. He argues that Freud uses the term “psychic energy” as a synonym for “libido,” and not “libido” as a synonym for “psychic energy.” It is demonstrated that in Freud's view, up until 1914, “libido” relates to manifestations of bodily sexual tensions, and subsequently this term applies to the manifestations of sexual energy in the psychic field. The author rejects this change in terminology and also challenges Freud's attempt to use dynamic-economic considerations as an explanatory device for epistemological reasons. Freud's concept of energy is inconsistent with the meaning of energy as defined in the physical sciences, and whereas the metapsychological topographical, dynamic, and structural viewpoints have a solid foundation in the representational world to which the psychoanalytic process affords unique access, this is not true of the economic viewpoint. It is claimed that bodily tensions only exist in the representational world in the form of affects, so that, in the author's opinion, the economic viewpoint should be abandoned in favour of an affective one. In the context of the endeavour to obtain pleasure and avoid unpleasure adduced by Freud, this viewpoint focuses on the relationships between affects and the different elements of the representational world, thereby serving as the subject of metapsychological investigation.

Keywords:

• psychic energy
• libido
• affects

Acknowledgements

Thanks to Simon Thomas, London, for his translation of this piece, and to David Turnbull, Ontario, for his editing.

Notes

¹For instance, B.B. Rubinstein (1976, p. 654) questions what metaphor psychic energy represents as follows: “A metaphor is a statement of an event with at least one attribute in common with another event so we can describe the second in terms of the first. What is described in terms of psychic energy? If it only describes experience, it is descriptive rather than explanatory, whereas if it is a metaphor of neurophysiology, it is a poor one, for it and brain function share no common attribute.”