Introduction to Psychoanalysis

Chapter 10 Preliminary Hypotheses and Techniques of Dream Interpretation (1)
Gentlemen, if we are to succeed in our study of dreams, we must seek a new method.I can tell you frankly: First of all, we must affirm such a hypothesis as a basis for further research, that is, dreams are a psychological phenomenon, not a physical phenomenon.You should know what it means, but why make that assumption?There is no reason, nor, conversely, prevents us from making this assumption.We think that if the dream is a bodily phenomenon, we need not study it; the only way to interest us is to assume that the dream is a psychic phenomenon.Therefore, we are willing to admit the correctness of this hypothesis, and then seek the result.After obtaining the result, we can know whether the hypothesis is valuable, so as to get a more definite conclusion.Now you need to know, what is the purpose of our research, or where is our research direction?In fact, our purpose is the same as that of all scientific research, that is, to understand the research object, clarify its existing relationship, and finally gain dominance in this field.

Next, we still conduct research on the basis of the hypothesis that "dreams are a kind of psychological phenomenon".Dreams are actually the words and actions of the dreamer, but we don't understand them.If you don't understand, what will you do?You will definitely question me, right?Wouldn't we also be able to question the meaning of the dream to the dreamer?

Remember, we used the same method once when we were studying the meaning of mistakes.At that time, it was natural to discuss instances of slips of the tongue.Someone says: "So that's a mess." We ask, and the speaker explains: "No, I was wrong." Fortunately, it is people who have nothing to do with psychoanalysis and not us, so they ask , This is really inexplicable, what does it mean.The speaker immediately replied: "That's a nasty thing." But he stopped himself and said in milder terms: "There's another thing going on over there." At the time, I said that this inquiry constituted a A model for psychoanalytic research.It should be noted that the technique of psychoanalysis is to let the analysand answer all the questions asked within the possible range.So the dreamer should interpret his dream.

However, we all know that the study of dreams is not so simple.Take negligence as an example, one is that many examples can be analyzed by this method; the other is that in some cases, the person being asked is unwilling to answer, and when he hears relatives and friends answering on his behalf, he will angrily refute.With regard to dreams, however, there are no instances of the first type at all, and the dreamer often declares that he knows nothing about it.Even if he hadn't rebuked and refuted angrily, no one could answer for him.So can we not work hard to solve it?Since he doesn't understand it, we have no way of doing it, and of course others won't understand it either, so it is hopeless to find a solution to this matter.Assuming you're happy with it, that's fine.But if you don't believe me, come with me.I will tell you that the dreamer understands the meaning of the dream, but he himself mistakenly believes that he knows nothing.

Regarding this point, you may pay more attention to the fact that in the few sentences just now, I have made two assumptions, so I am afraid that it is difficult to say how reliable my method is.Since dreams are a kind of psychological phenomenon, and I know that some things are originally clear, but I just don’t know them, just like this assumption!You must understand that these two hypotheses cannot coexist, and you may not be interested in the conclusions drawn from them.

In fact, I am not here to give a speech to deceive.Although I have called this lecture an "Introduction to Psychoanalysis," I am not here to be an "Oracle" to give you easy-to-coherent facts, hide all the flaws, and make you easily believe that I have gained a lot.In fact, it is not so. In the face of beginners like you, I am so eager to tell you the true face of this science in detail, its cumbersomeness and immaturity, its requirements and possible criticisms, and fully tell you.I understand that no matter what kind of science, especially for beginners.I have also known many people who, in teaching other sciences, at first try to hide their difficulties and defects.Yet psychoanalysis should not be like this.I therefore propose these two hypotheses, one of which is covered by the other.If anyone thinks it is too far-fetched or too uncertain, or prefers more reliable or accurate facts and deduction, they need not follow my research.I would like to give them a piece of advice: put psychology aside altogether.In the field of psychology, I am afraid that they cannot find the practical and reliable path they want to take.What's more, even though a science contributes to human cognition, it doesn't have to be convincing.Believe it or not, it depends on the results. As long as you wait patiently for the research results to appear, it will surely attract the attention of the world.

However, there are those who are not discouraged by this, and I will warn them that the two hypotheses are not of equal importance.The first hypothesis "dreams are a psychic phenomenon" will be confirmed in our research.The second hypothesis is already well documented in other fields, we just borrow it here.

"Dreamers have knowledge but don't know it themselves", how can we prove and associate it so that this assumption is correct?It is true that this fact is astounding, and there is no need to hide that it will change our understanding of spiritual life.By the way, once this fact is stated, it must be misunderstood, but it is true.All in all, the words are full of contradictions.However, the dreamer will never have any attempt to hide.We blame neither ourselves nor the fact that people are ignorant or uninterested, because these psychological problems are ignored by definitive observation and experimentation.

Where shall we look for evidence for the second hypothesis?The answer is the study of hypnotic phenomena. In 1889, in Nancy, France, I watched the experiments of Liebert and Bernhai on hypnosis.The experiment puts people into a sleep state and produces various hallucinations.After waking up, the hypnotized person seems to have no idea what happened during sleep.Although Bo Enhai asked him to tell the experience of being hypnotized many times, he himself did not remember anything.However, Bo Enhai firmly believed that he should always know something and remember something.The hypnotized person was shaken and began to recall. At first, he remembered the hint given by the hypnotist, and then remembered another thing. His memory gradually became complete, and finally nothing was missed.At that time, no one told him anything, and everything was remembered by the hypnotized person himself.From this we can see that this kind of memory has been kept in his heart from the beginning, but he has no way of knowing it; he doesn't know it himself, so he has to believe that he doesn't know it.This situation is exactly the same as that of the dreamer we are studying.

If the above facts are true, I think you will be very surprised and ask: "When you discussed negligence, you said that people's slips of the tongue actually have hidden intentions, but you are not aware of them and strongly oppose them. At this time, you did not raise This evidence, why? If it is possible to be sure that a person can have a memory of which he is unaware, it is possible that other mental processes are going on in him without his being aware of it. Bring out this earlier Arguments will make us more convincing and allow us to understand our mistakes more deeply." Indeed, I had this intention at the time, but I saved it for later use when it is more needed.For some faults are easy to understand in themselves, and for others, we must assume the existence of mental activities of which he himself is not aware, if we want to understand their meaning.As for dreams, we must seek an explanation elsewhere, and if the evidence is obtained by hypnotic means, it is easy to accept.The situation of negligence is different from the state of hypnosis, which is normal. The main condition of dreams is sleep, and there is obviously a close relationship between sleep and hypnosis.Hypnosis is also called "unnatural sleep". The hints we start to say to the hypnotized person such as "sleep" are compared with the dreams of natural sleep, and they have similar psychological situations.During natural sleep, we are completely isolated from the outside world, and the same is true for hypnosis, which is just to communicate with the hypnotist.In fact, most of the nanny's sleep can be called "normal hypnosis". Although the nanny is asleep, she will not stop communicating with the child, and only the child can wake her up.Therefore, it is not audacious to use hypnosis to simulate natural sleep.And the assumption that "the dreamer knows about dreams, but has little contact with them, so he does not know them himself" is hardly absurd fabrication.With regard to dreams, we used to study sleep-disturbing stimuli and daydreams, and now there is a third way, which is to start with dreams caused by "suggestion" during hypnosis.

Now we come back to the discussion of dreams, perhaps with greater certainty.We already believe that the dreamer has knowledge of the dream, but we do not know how to obtain this knowledge from the dreamer. Of course, we do not want him to say the meaning of the dream at once, but we can certainly deduce from this the origin of the dream and the reason for the dream. thoughts and emotions.For negligence, someone mistakenly said it as "fa Di", if you ask why you said it wrong, his first association is the explanation of the negligence.Dream interpretation is also very simple, let's take this example as a model.When we ask the dreamer why he has such a dream, his answer can be used as the interpretation of the dream.And whether he thinks he doesn't know or knows, it doesn't matter, we will all treat him equally.

Dream-interpretation is originally very simple, but I fear that your opposition will be more severe.You want to say: "It's time to make the third assumption, which is even more unreliable! When I ask the dreamer what impression he has of the dream, do you think his first association is really the interpretation we want? In fact, it may He wasn't thinking of anything at all, or God knows what he was thinking of. I really can't imagine why you expect so much. In fact, you rely too much on chance, but there needs to be more critical elements here. And the dream Clearly distinct from a single slip of the slip of the tongue, it is constructed from many elements. So which association should our study be based on?"

In all non-essential respects, what you say is true.You are right that dreams are not the same as slips of the tongue, and that they consist of many elements.Of course our dream interpretation takes it into account.We have to decompose dreams into multiple single elements and discuss them one by one, so that dreams are very similar to slips of the tongue.You also suggest that it would be fine if we asked the dreamer about all the single elements in his dream, which he might not know.For some instances, this answer can be accepted, and I'll come back to you in the future to tell you which examples; strangely, we all have a clearer view of these instances.The general idea is that if the dreamer claims that he has no knowledge of dreams, we will refute him and ask him to answer, telling him that he must have some ideas, and of course we are not wrong.He will then have an association, and what his association is is not our concern.It is easier to associate with the past.He might say: "It seems to have happened yesterday." Then he listed two dreams that were not incomprehensible. Perhaps "he thought of something that happened recently." Therefore, the impression of the previous day is easy to be associated with the dream. Unexpected.He may start with a dream, think of things that happened very early, and finally remember the distant past.

(End of this chapter)