If the classical definition of the supereu as deriving from the Oedipus complex, presented in "The ego and the id" (Freud,1923/1989), has a long history, what could be said about the other definition of the supereu according to which it is heir of the id and sub-rogate to the death drives? How to harmonize the union of the two thesis that define the supereu - as heir to Oedipus and heir to the id? Through careful analysis of three exerts extracted from "The ego and the id" (Freud, 1923/1989) we argue that the concept of aggressiveness seems capable of dealing with the relation between the supereu and the death drives. The death drive not only cooperates to conform the imperative character of the supereu, its tendency to attack the ego, but is responsible for the variants of this attack - pressure, criticism, punishment, destruction. Furthermore, the extension of the theory of identification, its association with the process of drive disfusion, and the assumption of originating investments of object in the id allows Freud to unite, in the supereu, a legislative aspect, arising from its oedipal heritage, to the drive aspect.
Freud (Sigmund); Metapsychology; Superego; Death drive; Agressivity