內視,同理心,及精神健康的半圓 08

Introspection, Empathy, and the Semi-Circle of Mental Health. (1982)
Int. J. Psycho-Anal., 63:395-407 (IJP)
Introspection, Empathy, and the Semi-Circle of Mental Health
Heinz Kohut

內視,同理心,及精神健康的半圓
海因茲、科胡特

195
SUMMARY
綱要

What instruments does a critic have at his disposal to counteract Freud’s magic? Two, I believe: one weaker and one stronger. The weaker one is the attempt to undermine the power of the myth that has supported Freud’s concept by analysing it in order to demonstrate not only that it does not support the original theory but that in fact, it supports the new one that is now advanced to supplant the old. This is the rational approach. The stronger one must drive out the Devil with Beelzebub, as the saying goes,to present a dose of counter-magic in order to neutralize and overcome that which supports established rule. I will for the moment postpone the first task, the re-interpretation of the myth, and will turn directly to the second one, which, I will add, has provided me with the undoubtedly puzzling final part of the title of my paper. I will, in other words, now turn to the ‘semi-circle of mental health’.

一位批評者擁有什麼工具可供使用,來對抗佛洛伊德的魔力?我相信有兩個; 一個較弱,一個較強。較弱的工具企圖以分析支持佛洛伊德的觀念的神話的力量,來逐漸損壞它,為了不但要證明,這個力量並沒有支持原先的理論,而是事實上,它支持現在正在被提出的新的理論,用來代替舊的。這是理性的方法。較強的工具必須以惡魔驅除惡魔,如同諺語所說,為了呈現一劑對抗魔力,才能中立並克服支援既有規則的魔力。目前我將暫時拖延第一件工作,神話的重新解釋,然後直接轉向第二個工作。容我補充一下,第二個工作曾經供應我無可置疑的我的論文標題的最後一項。換句話說,我現在將轉向「精神健康的半圓」。

My counter-magic is derived from a story told by Homer. It is not a tragic story in the sense of tragos, the sacrificial he-goat of the Dionysian cult, from which tragedy, as represented by Sophocles, evolved and got its name, but tragic in a human sense, as represented by Euripides striving, resourceful man, attempting to unfold his innermost self, battling against external and internal obstacles to its unfolding; and warmly committed to the next generation, to the son in whose unfolding and growth he joyfully participates thus experiencing man’s deepest and most central joy, that of being a link in the chain of generations.

我的對抗魔力是從荷馬所說的故事得來。這並是不一個悲劇的故事,從「悲劇」的意義而言。戴奧尼修斯教派的犧性的公羊。從那裏,由索弗克利斯代表的悲劇發展然後獲得名聲,但是從人類意義來看悲劇,由尤利皮底斯奮鬥而機智的人所代表。他企圖解開他的最內在的自我,對抗外在己內部的阻礙它的展開,然後熱烈地奉獻於下一代,奉獻于兒子。在兒子的展開及成長中,他快樂地參與,因此經驗人的最深處及最中央的快樂,在世代相傳的鎖鏈的一環的快樂。

Have you guessed by now who the embodiment of my counter magic may be? And have you hit on the solution of the riddle that I posed for you when, in the title that I gave to this paper, I spoke of the ‘semi-circle of mental health’? If not, I will no longer keep you in suspense and will tell you the story that will relieve you of uncertainty.

你們現在已經猜想到,我的對抗魔力的具體代表可能是誰?你們已經想到我跟你提出的這個謎團的解答嗎?在這篇論文我給予的標題,我談論到「精神健康的半圓」?假如沒有猜想到,我不再讓你們留在謎團當中,我將告訴你們這個故事,解除你們的猜疑。

It is, I like to think, the first story concerned with an individual who, although still surrounded by demi-god heroes, is a modern man. And we can thus, I think, identify with him more easily than with the ritually destroyed victim of Sophocles’ tragedy, and can understand him and his human trials and tribulations more easily and reliably than we can King Oedipus, who is propelled toward his doom. It is the story of the first would-be draft evader in literature, the story of Odysseus.

我想要認為,這是第一個故事關係到是現代人的個人,雖然它依舊被半神的英雄所包圍。因此,我認為,我們更加容易能夠辨認他,比辨認索弗克利斯的悲劇,在儀式中被毀滅的受害者,並且能夠更加容易於可信地瞭解他和他的人性考驗及磨難,比我們瞭解伊底普斯國王,他被逼迫走向他的宿命。這是文學中第一位自願應徵的逃避者的故事,奧德賽的故事。

When, as told by Homer, the Greeks began to organize themselves for their Trojan expedition, they drafted all the chieftains to join them with their men, ships and supplies. But Odysseus, ruler of Ithaca, in the prime of young adulthood, with a young wife and a baby son, was anything but enthusiastic about going to war. When the delegates of the Greek states arrived to assess the situation and to compel Odysseus’ compliance, he malingered, faking insanity.

依照荷馬所描述的,希臘人開始組織自己為了特洛伊的遠征。他們徵召所有的族長帶著部下,船隻及補給。但是奧德賽,這位伊沙卡的族長,正在青春盛年,有一位年輕的妻子及小男孩,對於參加戰爭,並不是很熱衷。當希臘城邦的代表到達,評估這個情況,並且逼迫奧德賽同意,他就假裝瘋狂,逃避責任。

The emissaries Agamemnon, Menelaus, and Palamedes found him ploughing with an ox and an ass yoked together, and flinging salt over his shoulders into the furrows; on his head was a silly, conically shaped hat, as usually worn by Orientals. He pretended not to know his visitors and gave every sign that he had taken leave of his senses. But Palamedes suspected him of trickery. He seized Telemachus, Odysseus’ infant son, and flung him in front of Odysseus’ advancing plough. Odysseus immediately made a semi-circle with his plough to avoid injuring his son. The movement demonstrated his mental health and made him confess that he had only feigned madness in order to escape going to Troy.

阿加曼諾,門尼勞斯,及帕拉米底斯等特使,發現他帶著公牛跟驢子套軛在一塊犁田,往後撒鹽,進入犁溝,頭上戴著一頂難看的圓錐形的帽子,如同東方人通常所戴的。他假裝不認識他的訪客,裝模作樣,他已經喪失理智。但是帕拉米底斯覺察出他的詭計。他捉住鐵力馬丘斯,奧德賽的小嬰孩,將他投擲在奧德賽前進的犁前。奧德賽立刻將他的犁轉半圈,以避免傷害他的兒子。這個舉動證明他的精神健康,使他不得不承認,他僅是偽裝瘋狂,為了要逃避前去特洛伊。

Here then is the solution to the puzzle. It is the semi-circle of Odysseus which, as the semi-circle of mental health, I am holding up against the father murder of Oedipus non-scientific, perhaps, and emotional in its appeal (and appealing in its simple humanness); but then, so is the appeal of King Oedipus and his complex.

在此就是這個謎團的答案。我正在舉措奧德賽的半圓,作為精神健康的半圓,以對抗伊底普世的弑父。這可能不合乎科學,卻是訴諸於它的情感(單純人性的訴求)。但是伊底普斯及其情結的訴求,也是如此。

The semi-circle of Odysseus’ plough proves nothing, of course, but it is a fitting symbol of that joyful awareness of the human self of being temporal, of having an unrolling destiny: a preparatory beginning, a flourishing middle, and a retrospective end; a fitting symbol of the fact that healthy man experiences, and with deepest joy, the next generation as an extension of his own self.

當然,奧德賽的犁的半圓並沒有證明什麼,但是它是一個適當的象徵,愉悅地知道人性的自我是短暫,擁有展開的命運:它是一種準備的開始,一種興盛的中間,及一個回顧的結尾。這是一個事實的適當象徵:健康的人,深深歡喜地經驗到下一代,作為他自己自我的延伸。

It is the primacy of the support for the succeeding generation, therefore, which is normal and human, and not intergenerational strife and mutual wishes to kill and to destroy however frequently and perhaps even ubiquitously, we may be able to find traces of those pathological disintegration products of which traditional analysis has made us think as a normal developmental phase, a normal experience of the child.

因此,對於接續的一代的支持,具有優先地位,這是正常而合乎人性,而不是兩代之間的衝突與互相願望殺害及毀滅,雖然我們不時在許多地方,發現那些病態的解離的產物。傳統的精神分析使我們想到,那是小孩作為一個正常的發展的部分,一個正常的經驗。

It is only when the self of the parent is not a normal, healthy self, cohesive, vigorous, and harmonious, that it will react with competitiveness and seductiveness rather than with pride and affection when the child, at the age of 5, is making an exhilarating move toward a heretofore not achieved degree of assertiveness, generosity, and affection. And it is in response to such a flawed parental self which cannot resonate with the child’s experience in empathic identification that the newly constituted assertive-affectionate self of the child disintegrates and that the break-up products of hostility and lust of the Oedipus complex make their appearance.

只有當父母的自我不是一個正常,健康的自我,具有凝聚性,活力性及和諧,它才會以競爭及誘拐作為反應,而不是以驕傲及情感。當小孩在五歲時,他舉止令人高興,直到當時,他尚未獲得任何主張,慷慨及情感。就在回應父母具有瑕疵的自我,這種自我無法跟小孩的經驗共鳴,在同理心認同。小孩剛剛形成都主張與情感的自我會解離,伊底普斯情結的敵意與欲望的解離產物,就會出現。

雄伯譯
32hsiung@pchome.com.tw
https://springhero.wordpress.com

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Google photo

You are commenting using your Google account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s


%d bloggers like this: