Authority and freedom are connected, and both have external and internal forms. External authority, political or institutional, can impinge on internal freedom in ways that matter to psychoanalysts. Internal freedom requires an internal authority that can be trusted. The superego is an external authority masquerading as an internal one. The ego, with its compliance toward the id, the superego, and external reality, operates like a false self in the psyche. In Lacanian terms, it is of necessity alienated from itself. By contrast, the true self as described by Winnicott, and the “subject” as theorized especially in French psychoanalysis, represent an authentic conscience that allows us to become the authors of our at one’s authority. This implies two sorts of freedom: freedom from narcissistic self-investment, and the forward-looking freedom of psychic growth. The latter occurs only in a context of relatedness to others, and it entails caring for the interests of others—if necessary at one’s own expense. This vision of human beings as having an innate impetus toward psychic growth makes psychoanalysis a fundamentally optimistic endeavor. Clinical and nonclinical examples show, however, that it demands a perpetual readiness to let go of apparent certainties.

权威和自由是相互联系的，都有外在的和内在的形式。外部权威，无论是政治上的还是制度上的，都会以对精神分析学家很重要的方式影响内部自由。内部自由需要一个可以信任的内部权威。超我是伪装成内部权威的外部权威。自我对本我、超我和外部现实的顺从，在心灵中就像一个虚假的自我一样运作。用拉康的话说，它必然与自身异化。相比之下，温尼科特描述的真实自我，以及特别是在法国精神分析中理论化的“主体”，代表了一种真实的良心，它使我们能够成为我们权威的作者。这意味着两种自由：免于自恋的自我投资，以及心理成长的前瞻性自由。后者只发生在与他人相关的情况下，它需要关心他人的利益——如果有必要，需要自费。这种人类天生具有心理成长动力的观点使精神分析成为一种从根本上乐观的努力。然而，临床和非临床例子表明，它需要永远准备好放弃明显的确定性。