Suppr超能文献

[精神分裂症矛盾情感的结构主义和元心理学方法]

[Structuralistic and meta-psychological approaches to ambivalence in schizophrenia].

作者信息

Sumida Kyoko, Tsuda Hitoshi

机构信息

Kyoto University.

出版信息

Seishin Shinkeigaku Zasshi. 2003;105(8):1037-44.

Abstract

The word "ambivalence" generally signifies a psychic state in which a subject holds a contradictory or conflicted attitude towards an object. The literal meaning of the word is that two valences occur simultaneously, and this connotes the epistemological and ethical problem of where and how the valences arise. The concept of ambivalence implies that the relationship between the subject and the world is ambivalent, that the subject has free will in the alternative evaluation, and that the meanings of the two valences derive from the meta-level outside the world. These reflections lead us to the supposition that ambivalence is closely associated with the function of language. The ambivalent attitude of the subject divides the significance of the object; the appearance of the given ambivalent meanings is the moment of the subject's choice. This phenomenon of division, choice, and given meanings is more than analogous to F. de Saussure's conception of language in terms of sign, différenciation, and l'arbitraire de langue. A view of ambivalence as a fundamental phenomenon concerning subject, world, and language affords insight specifically into ambivalence in schizophrenia. For people with schizophrenia, ambivalent conflict often takes the form of a dichotomy between "good and bad". The more severe the ambivalent symptom, the more similar it seems to a philosophical question about the nature of existence in the world. When schizophrenic people raise philosophical questions directly such as "Is my existence good or bad?" or "To be or not to be?", they seek approval for their existence, assaying to live with "good" intentions. Unfortunately they come to be blamed for harbouring "bad" intentions. When they have an interrogative attitude even to everyday matters, they cannot resolve such questions as "Is the red cup good or bad?", or "Is the green cup good or bad?", and hence "Which cup should I use?". If the projection of the self into the world is essentially the choice of a daily behavior as its own praxis, such indecisiveness thus entails existential conflict. The alternatives of choice appear before them as a tollgate to the world. Wishing admission to the world, they choose the thing that they think "good", but which later turns out to be "bad". These consequences sometimes occur in their inner conflicts and sometimes in their paranoidhallucinatory experiences. We have observed that in these processes, there is an inversion between "good and bad", and "bad" predominates, driving patients to despair. Rethinking E. Bleuler's conception of the ambivalence of schizophrenia, we have found that it is accessible to structuralistic and meta-psychological interpretations. From the viewpoint of linguistic semiology, ambivalence can be considered as a disorder of exclusive differentiation in the associative system resulting from the appearance of antithetical meanings, a phenomenon that is also common in primal words and children's thinking. In the context of psycho-analysis, it is suggested that the dominance of the negative side in ambivalence may be caused by death instinct. These interpretations are consistent with both the philosophical considerations and the clinical observations introduced above, but the problem of schizophrenic specificity is still opened beside the affinity between philosophical conflict and schizophrenic ambivalence. References to ethical and philosophical thinking shed light on the sources of the dichotomous existential conflict and the characteristic inversion between "good and bad" that schizophrenic patients experience. Descriptions of the root of ambivalence can be traced back to ancient times. In the Ecclesiastes of the Apocrypha, Jesus, son of Sirach, elucidates the fundamental ambivalence of will, teaching that the subject has the power of its own choice: at its most extreme, the choice between life and death. In the modern age, L. Wittgenstein offers a strict description of this ambivalence in his "Notebooks 1914-1916". Wittgenstein doubted the possibility of pure subjectivity without individual will and furthermore argued that the will is either good or evil, that is, the bearer of good and evil. In his view, good and evil are somehow connected with the meaning of the world, and meaning ("Sinn" in German) is discerned from significance ("Bedeutung" in German). He went on to write that the meaning does not lie in the world but outside it. As K. Shingu has noted, Wittgenstein's conception is essentially consistent with psycho-analysis. The subject recognizes the world with ambivalent will, the world appears with ambivalent significance, but its ambivalent meaning is given from outside the world, that is, from the meta-level. For E. Husserl's concept of intentionality, it is said that the fundamental disorder of schizophrenia is a preverbal or pre-predicative problem that is connected with intentionality. Yet one wonders whether or not pure, neutral intentionality is really possible. Presumably, intentionality has an intrinsic ambivalence, since the fundamental relationship between the subject and the world may itself be ambivalent. When one becomes conscious of a thing, the potential exists to divide one's intentionality between "good and bad", and the thing thus appears as "good" or "bad". In the healthy psyche, this intrinsic ambivalence emerges only in ethical or philosophical thinking. In schizophrenia, however, the ambivalence of intentionality is explicitly engaged in diverse situations. The inversion of "good and bad" observed in the clinical context signifies that the will of the patient shifts from "good" to "bad", alluding to a contradiction between the subject and the world that is logically inevitable due to the structure of their relationship. The subject objectivfies the world positively, yet is contained by the world passively. That the subject simultaneously announces and is announced in the language system also reflects this paradoxical relationship. Thus, ambivalence of dichotomy between "good and bad" is the very basic phenomenon of consciousness, and the inversion of "good and bad" is a reflection of the structure of the relationship of the subject and the world. If the schizophrenic specificity exists, it may involve the exposure of this intrinsic ambivalence and this paradoxical structure in confrontations with the tellgate into the world under the dominance of the negative side.

摘要

“矛盾情感”一词通常指一种心理状态,即主体对某一客体持有矛盾或冲突的态度。该词的字面意思是两种价值同时出现,这暗示了价值产生的地点和方式所涉及的认识论和伦理学问题。矛盾情感的概念意味着主体与世界的关系是矛盾的,主体在进行选择性评价时有自由意志,且两种价值的意义源自世界之外的元层次。这些思考使我们推测,矛盾情感与语言的功能密切相关。主体的矛盾态度将客体的意义一分为二;给定的矛盾意义的出现是主体进行选择的时刻。这种划分、选择和给定意义的现象与费迪南·德·索绪尔关于语言的符号、差异和语言任意性的概念极为相似。将矛盾情感视为关乎主体、世界和语言的基本现象的观点,能让我们特别深入地洞察精神分裂症中的矛盾情感。对于精神分裂症患者而言,矛盾冲突常常表现为“好与坏”之间的二分法。矛盾症状越严重,就越类似于一个关于世界存在本质的哲学问题。当精神分裂症患者直接提出诸如“我的存在是好是坏?”或“生存还是毁灭?”这样的哲学问题时,他们在寻求对自身存在的认可,试图怀着“好”的意图生活。不幸的是,他们却因怀有“坏”的意图而受到指责。当他们甚至对日常事务都持有疑问态度时,就无法解决诸如“红色杯子是好是坏?”或“绿色杯子是好是坏?”以及“我该用哪个杯子?”这样的问题。如果将自我投射到世界本质上是选择一种日常行为作为自身的实践,那么这种犹豫不决就必然会引发存在冲突。选择的可能性在他们面前就如同通往世界的关卡。他们渴望被世界接纳,选择他们认为“好”的东西,但后来却发现是“坏”的。这些后果有时出现在他们的内心冲突中,有时出现在他们的偏执幻觉体验中。我们观察到,在这些过程中,“好与坏”之间存在颠倒,且“坏”占主导,使患者陷入绝望。重新审视尤金·布洛伊勒关于精神分裂症矛盾情感的概念后,我们发现它可以从结构主义和元心理学的角度进行解读。从语言符号学的角度来看,矛盾情感可被视为由于对立意义的出现而导致的联想系统中排他性区分的紊乱,这种现象在原始词汇和儿童思维中也很常见。在精神分析的背景下,有人认为矛盾情感中负面的主导可能是由死亡本能引起的。这些解读与上述哲学思考和临床观察结果一致,但在哲学冲突与精神分裂症矛盾情感的相似性之外,精神分裂症的特殊性问题仍然存在。对伦理和哲学思考的提及揭示了二元存在冲突的根源以及精神分裂症患者所经历的“好与坏”之间的特征性颠倒。对矛盾情感根源的描述可以追溯到古代。在次经的《传道书》中,西拉之子耶稣阐明了意志的基本矛盾情感,教导人们主体拥有自主选择的权力:在最极端的情况下,是生与死之间的选择。在现代,路德维希·维特根斯坦在他的《1914—1916年笔记》中对这种矛盾情感进行了严格描述。维特根斯坦怀疑没有个体意志的纯粹主观性的可能性,进而认为意志要么是善的,要么是恶的,也就是说,意志是善恶的承载者。在他看来,善与恶在某种程度上与世界的意义相关联,而意义(德语中的“Sinn”)是从重要性(德语中的“Bedeutung”)中辨别出来的。他接着写道,意义并不存在于世界之中,而是在世界之外。正如新宫义久所指出的,维特根斯坦的概念与精神分析本质上是一致的。主体以矛盾的意志认识世界,世界以矛盾的意义呈现,但它的矛盾意义是从世界之外,即从元层次赋予的。对于埃德蒙德·胡塞尔的意向性概念,有人认为精神分裂症的根本紊乱是一个与意向性相关的前语言或前谓述问题。然而,人们不禁要问,纯粹、中立的意向性是否真的可能。据推测,意向性具有内在的矛盾情感,因为主体与世界之间的基本关系本身可能就是矛盾的。当一个人意识到某一事物时,就有可能在“好与坏”之间划分自己的意向性,于是该事物就呈现为“好”或“坏”。在健康的心理状态中,这种内在的矛盾情感仅在伦理或哲学思考中出现。然而,在精神分裂症中,意向性的矛盾情感在各种情况下都会明确显现。在临床情境中观察到的“好与坏”的颠倒意味着患者的意志从“好”转向“坏”,这暗示了由于主体与世界关系的结构,两者之间存在逻辑上不可避免的矛盾。主体积极地将世界客观化,但又被动地被世界所包含。主体在语言系统中同时既宣告又被宣告,这也反映了这种矛盾关系。因此,“好与坏”之间的二分矛盾情感是意识的基本现象,而“好与坏”的颠倒是主体与世界关系结构的反映。如果精神分裂症的特殊性存在,它可能涉及在负面主导下与通往世界的关卡对峙时,这种内在矛盾情感和这种矛盾结构的暴露。

文献检索

告别复杂PubMed语法,用中文像聊天一样搜索,搜遍4000万医学文献。AI智能推荐,让科研检索更轻松。

立即免费搜索

文件翻译

保留排版,准确专业,支持PDF/Word/PPT等文件格式,支持 12+语言互译。

免费翻译文档

深度研究

AI帮你快速写综述,25分钟生成高质量综述,智能提取关键信息,辅助科研写作。

立即免费体验