Mizen Richard
J Anal Psychol. 2009 Apr;54(2):253-72. doi: 10.1111/j.1468-5922.2009.01773.x.
This paper considers Fonagy et al's concept of mentalization and contrasts aspects of this with aspects of Bion's model of the mind. The author argues that although mentalization adds to our understanding of mind it has limitations; that it may tend to over-emphasize certain types of external interaction between infant and carer and under-emphasize internal psychobiological processes. What is at issue here is the way in which an infant's carers facilitate the development of meaning out of experience. Bion's concept supposes a relatively 'interior' model in which, in important ways, the carer enables the infant to derive the meaning of his or her experience, whilst on the other hand Fonagy et al tend to talk more in terms of the ways in which the carer endows the infant's experience with meaning. Reference is made to Fordham's concept of states of 'Identity'. Fordham has pointed out that Freud's model is one in which mind is conceived of as evolving out of an infant's complex identifications with his or her carer(s); Jung's model envisages developmentally early states of identity as the means by which inherent capacities are realized.
本文探讨了费纳吉等人的心理化概念,并将其与比昂的心智模型的各个方面进行了对比。作者认为,尽管心理化增进了我们对心智的理解,但它也有局限性;它可能倾向于过度强调婴儿与照顾者之间某些类型的外部互动,而忽视内部心理生物学过程。这里的关键问题是婴儿的照顾者如何从经验中促进意义的发展。比昂的概念假设了一个相对“内在”的模型,在这个模型中,照顾者在重要方面使婴儿能够理解其经历的意义,而另一方面,费纳吉等人倾向于更多地谈论照顾者赋予婴儿经历意义的方式。文中还提到了福特汉姆的“身份认同状态”概念。福特汉姆指出,弗洛伊德的模型认为心智是从婴儿与其照顾者的复杂认同中发展而来的;荣格的模型则设想早期发展阶段的身份认同状态是实现内在能力的手段。