"Unconscious and Delirium" is a theoretical study of the dynamics responsible for the formation of the unconscious and the psychotic delirium. The book dissects the desires of the self and examines the way these desires are managed.

Unlike the Freudian concept that deals with the psyche in terms of apparatus as an inert thing not as a living thing, the author gives an important place to the will. He does not deny the importance of the superego and the id but he does not consider them as the main authorities, approaching the mind by considering that this role of main authorities is played only by the self and the individual.

If man is a wolf to his fellow as Freud says, the will has to play a role in the psychological dynamics, and the management of personal interests must be given a greater importance. The author starts by overseeing the Freudian vision and he introduces the reader to the importance of the environment that eventually shapes a cohesive unit with which man has to deal; the personal interests are always confronted to this environment. Man’s self progresses both in the way of selfishness and in the way of respect of others’ rights, in order to be accepted by them and to ensure the survival among them. Being in the midst of a general order which is reflected in flora, fauna and others’ rights, man is torn between what favors him at the expense of others and the respect of this order to which the author points by "coherence". If man seeks pleasure and avoids displeasure, interests are always present and solicit his management, which sometimes leads to delay pleasure or to reject it. Thus, there are, in the ego, two tendencies that, by their antagonism, ensure its development. It is the tendency to respect others by not infringing on their rights and to consolidate the self with what it may possess, this tendency allows itself, just to end in a rapid development of the self, not to respect others’ rights. The tendency respecting the environment and refusing to deal with selfishness, is the coherent-self. The one which is turned towards the ego to consolidate it even at the expense of others’ rights, is the ego-self. Man chooses the proposal sponsored by one of these two tendencies of the self and so, he favors it and puts at disadvantage the other. Doing so, he promotes the “awakening to oneself” of his consciousness at the expense of the “awakening to coherence” or he promotes the “awakening to coherence” and restructures the “awakening to oneself”, taking more into account others’ presence. The dynamics of these awakenings is that of the consciousness; their modification causes a modification of the consciousness and of the psychological reality that is the sum of the subjective realities.

The self oversteppes man’s temporal needs; he is only interested to grow and to respond to coherence on which his growth depends. By favoring a tendency of the self compared with the other, man acts fully as an authority since he is able to modify the development of his psyche, he acts as the authority individual.

This psychological picture overhangs the Freudian dynamics: the authority individual acts by using her will. To choose the camp of the ego-self or that of the coherent-self, this authority must first decode the timeless tendencies of the self. Then she must choose and take action to make a place to her choice in the psychological reality. These stages of the intervention of the authority individual correspond to a management whose result will modify the consciousness and channel the activity of the self.

However, choosing is not something easy for the individual. He must live the conflict and assume the consequences of his choice, which may sometimes push him to take shelter in resignation. To escape the conflict between the ego-self and the coherent-self, he must neutralize the conflict of interests. To do so while valuing his selfish desires, he must annihilate any evidence of lack of respect to others. He will therefore develop some dynamics between the “awakening to oneself” and the “awakening to coherence” that does not allow selfish desires, oedipal desires above all, to emerge. He will love and respect the hated parent and he will respect the coveted one. In addition, to maintain this situation, he will develop a continuous force of censorship which is the superego, its role is to hold these obliged love and respect to avoid leaving the oedipal desires emerge. Thus the superego is not an authority, despite its presence at the forefront of the psychological dynamics; its role is to serve the ego-self and the resigned authority individual by keeping between the two awakenings of the consciousness an activity capable of excluding the possibility of expression of the selfish desires.

But if the superego serves to keep the disruption in the management of interests, it has a positive aspect, that of keeping the oedipal desires on hold and thus saving a space for others in the psychological reality of the individual. The activity of the superego is the result of a superficial resignation of the individual. However, a deeper resignation from the individual will dispense from the role of the superego and it will divest consciousness. If this divestment extends in a large proportion, it paralyzes the majority of human consciousness and man falls into psychosis.

The distance from the Freudian logic becomes more acceptable if one studies the brief therapies and if one analyzes the work of a pioneer in this field : Milton H. Erickson.