Donald Winnicott and his theory of the false self

Donald Winnicott was a famous English psychiatrist, psychoanalyst and pediatrician who developed an interesting approach to personality.. Due to her training as a pediatrician, she focused her reflections on children. Particularly, in the relationship between the mother and the nursing baby and the consequences that arise from this.

He worked together with the famous psychoanalyst Melanie Klein, even in the treatment of one of his own children. He was also president of the British Psychoanalytic Society and a very famous thinker of the 20th Century.

One of his most interesting contributions is that of the false self or false self. Also her concepts of “good enough mother” and “banally devoted mother.” Likewise, his concept of the “transitional object” has been adopted by many schools of psychology.

The relationship between mother and baby, according to Winnicott

In line with other psychoanalysts, Winnicott suggests that during the first year of life the mother and the son constitute a unit. You cannot talk about the baby as a separate entity from its mother. The two make up an indivisible psychic unit.

Winnicott says that the mother is the first environment that a human being has. The total basis of its further development. Therefore, and especially in the first months of life, the mother is the baby’s universe.. The world is practically synonymous with the mother.

Then the concept of “good enough mother” appears. This is the one that provides the necessary care to the baby, spontaneous and sincerely. She is willing to be that foundation and environment that the child needs. Without being perfect, she does not overdo her care, nor does she neglect the baby. This mother gives rise to a true self, or true self.

Meanwhile, the “banally devoted mother” is one who develops excessive attachment or overprotection of her child. She is also the one who is not able to respond to the child’s spontaneous manifestations. It gives rise to what Winnicott calls the false self or “false self.”

Winnicott and the false self

The mother is like a mirror for the child. The little boy sees himself the way she sees him. He learns to identify with the human race through her. Little by little, the baby is separated from her mother and she must adapt to it. The child has spontaneous gestures that are part of his individuation. If the mother welcomes them, he experiences the feeling of being real. If he doesn’t do it, he creates a feeling of unreality.

When this interaction between the mother and her baby fails, what Winnicott calls “cutting through existential continuity” occurs.. This, in other words, means a radical interruption of the baby’s spontaneous development. This is what gives rise to the false self or false self.

Winnicott points out that in these circumstances, the baby becomes “its own mother.” This means that He begins to hide his own self to protect himself. She learns to show only what, so to speak, her mother wants to see.. It becomes something it is not really.

The effects of the false self

There are different levels of distortion in the self. According to Winnicott, at the most basic level are those who adopt a courteous and fully adapted attitude to the rules and mandates. At the other extreme is schizophrenia, a mental condition in which the person is dissociated, to the point where their real self virtually disappears.

For Winnicott, in all serious mental pathologies a false self predominates.. In this case, the person uses all the resources at his disposal to structure that false self and maintain it. The purpose of this is to be able to confront a world that he perceives as unpredictable or unreliable.

Winnicott indicates that Much of the efforts of a person with a very strong false self are directed toward the intellectualization of reality.. That is, to convert reality into an object of reason, but not of emotions, affections or creative acts. When such intellectualization succeeds, the individual is perceived as normal. However, he does not experience what he experiences as something his own, but as something foreign.

He cannot feel happy about his triumphs, nor feel valued even if he is.. For him, it is his false self who has achieved it or who is being valued. With this, he marks a break with himself and with the world. His true self remains confined, fantasizing and experiencing a discomfort that he never understands on his own.

Is there really a Self?

An interesting debate about the real existence of the “I” could be added to Winnicott’s theory. In order to exist a “false self” there must first exist an “I”. From the Budis PsychologyYou can have a very interesting conversation with Winnicott’s “false self.” In essence, Buddhist Psychology states that nothing exists as we believe it exists. This corresponds to the concept of Emptiness.

We tend to understand the “I” as a static and immutable entity over time. We identify and cling to the self for fear of loss of identity. However, everything changes, including our “I”. Therefore, our “I” from a year ago would not be the same as the “I” of today. So, the existence of a self is there, but self in the way we believe. Winnicott states that the individual is capable of falsifying the self, therefore, according to his theory, a person would have the power to change the “I.” This aspect becomes relevant since, together with Buddhist Psychology, supports the theory of a changeable and non-static “I”.

Winnicott’s “I” could ultimately be seen as a socially expected “I.” Just like the “I” that predominates today. We build an “I” that adapts, but do we identify with it? Our “I” is correct, but we observe everything from a distance because we do not believe that it is us. With which, from Buddhist Psychology we can delve into this theory from another point of view and adapt it to us to try to find that real and changeable “I” and know who we really are.

You might be interested…