Chertok L
J Nerv Ment Dis. 1975 Dec;161(6):367-78. doi: 10.1097/00005053-197512000-00001.
A historical outline is given of the search for an explanation of the still elusive nature of hysteria and hypnosis, their mutual relationship, and that which they bear to psychopathology. Charcot regarded hypnosis as an artificially induced hysterical neurosis, and it was he who first introduced Freud to these two states. Freud was the first to see in hypnosis an experimental instrument for understanding psychopathological mechanisms. His subsequent conceptualization of psychoanalysis derived from these two phenomena at this decisive period. In 1895 Freud attempted to achieve a psychophysiological synthesis of the mental apparatus in his "Project for a Scientific Psychology," but then decided not to publish it. Whether or not recent advance in neurophysiology are sufficiently important bo bring about this synthesis remains an open question. In recent years some psychoanalysts have become interested in hypnosis, which one of them described as a focus for psychophysiological and psychoanalytic investigations. Any theory of the psychical apparatus which does not account for such an obvious psychical phenomenon must necessarily be incomplete. Since Charcot, hysteria presents hardly any new openings for experimental work. It is suggested that the solution of psyche-soma interaction might be sought in the study of hypnosis. It is postulated that hypnosis is a "fourth organismic state," not as yet objectifiable (in contradistinction to the waking state, sleep, and dreaming): a kind of natural or inborn mechanism which acts as one of the regulators of man's relationships with the environment. The author discusses briefly the aims and methodology of future interdisciplinary research on hypnosis, and the study of the transition from one state of consciousness to another, and their potential application to a wide range of subjects, namely, wherever man's relations with the environment are involved.
本文给出了一段历史概述,内容涉及对癔症和催眠术仍难以捉摸的本质、它们之间的相互关系以及它们与精神病理学的关系的解释探寻。夏科将催眠视为一种人为诱发的癔症神经症,正是他首次将弗洛伊德引入这两种状态。弗洛伊德是第一个将催眠视为理解精神病理机制的实验工具的人。他随后对精神分析的概念化就源于这一关键时期的这两种现象。1895年,弗洛伊德试图在其《科学心理学大纲》中实现心理装置的心理生理学综合,但后来决定不发表。神经生理学的最新进展是否足以实现这种综合仍是一个悬而未决的问题。近年来,一些精神分析学家对催眠术产生了兴趣,其中一人将其描述为心理生理学和精神分析研究的焦点。任何不解释这种明显心理现象的心理装置理论必然是不完整的。自夏科以来,癔症几乎没有为实验工作提供任何新的切入点。有人认为,心理 - 躯体相互作用的解决方案可能要在对催眠术的研究中寻找。据推测,催眠是一种“第四种机体状态”,尚未可客观化(与清醒状态、睡眠和做梦不同):一种自然或天生的机制,是人类与环境关系的调节者之一。作者简要讨论了未来关于催眠术跨学科研究的目标和方法,以及从一种意识状态向另一种意识状态转变的研究,及其在广泛主题中的潜在应用,即涉及人类与环境关系的任何地方。