Mestrović S G
Soc Sci Med. 1985;21(8):835-48. doi: 10.1016/0277-9536(85)90139-x.
The epistemological difficulties with the model of 'stressful life events' are reviewed and contrasted with the epistemologies of the pioneers of stress research: Cannon, Selye, Durkheim, Freud, Bernard and Dubos. The paper focuses on the question 'What is an event?' as opposed to a fact and on the neo-Humean difficulties of relying upon explanations of events. It is demonstrated that the pioneers of stress research avoided event-explanations and relied instead (sometimes implicitly) on the notion of 'trauma'. A trauma is not just an event. The concept of trauma is linked to the ideas of arrangements and derangements of collective representations in the context of society conceived of as a cybernetic system.
本文回顾了“应激性生活事件”模型在认识论上的困难，并将其与应激研究先驱者（坎农、塞利、涂尔干、弗洛伊德、伯纳德和杜波依斯）的认识论进行了对比。本文关注的问题是“什么是一个事件？”，以区别于事实，以及依赖事件解释所面临的新休谟主义困难。研究表明，应激研究的先驱者们避免了事件解释，而是（有时是隐含地）依赖“创伤”这一概念。创伤不仅仅是一个事件。创伤的概念与在被构想为一个控制论系统的社会背景下集体表象的排列和紊乱的观念相关联。
