The term "responsibility" may connote three different things. I do not, in this context, refer to dependability in the sense of fulfilling obligations or keeping promises, or to the assumption of responsibility for others. Attitudes on these scores vary too much to single out constant characteristics for all neuroses. The neurotic may be utterly reliable, or he may assume too much or too little responsibility in regard to others...
The compulsive factors in neuroses are so prevailing that
freedom of choice is negligible. For all practical purposes we take it for granted that in general the patient could not develop otherwise than he did; that in particular he could not help doing, feeling, thinking what he did do, feel, think. This viewpoint, however, is not shared by the patient. His lofty disregard for all that means laws and necessities extends to himself too. The fact that, everything considered, his development could go only in certain directions is beneath his consideration. Whether some drive or attitude was conscious or unconscious does not matter.
However insuperable the odds against which he had to struggle he
should have met them with unfailing strength, courage, and the equanimity. If he did not do so, it proves that he is no good. Conversely, in self-protection he may rigidly reject any guilt, declare himself infallible, and put the blame for any difficulties, past or present, or others.
Karen Horney - Neurosis and Human Growth (1950). Book can be found
here if someone is interested.
