Introduction to Psychoanalysis

Chapter 49 Original desire to say: Narcissism (1)
Gentlemen, we have said repeatedly recently how the sexual instinct differs from the ego instinct.First, as far as repression is concerned, we see how the two instincts repel each other, and then how the sexual instincts superficially yield and seek gratification by devious ways as compensation for the loss.Secondly, from the point of view of necessity, the sexual instinct and the ego instinct have different relations from the beginning, and therefore have different developments and different attitudes towards the reality principle.Finally, it has been observed that the sexual instinct is more closely related to the affect of anxiety than the ego instinct, although this conclusion is, of course, only incomplete at a certain point.In support of this conclusion we may add the following most remarkable facts: hunger and thirst, the two most important instincts for self-preservation, never turn into anxiety, while unsatisfied libido turns into anxiety. The phenomenon is very common.

No one can deny, therefore, the validity of our reasons for drawing a sharp distinction between the sexual and the ego instincts.We say that the sexual instinct is only a special activity of the individual, and in fact the difference between the two has been acquiesced.The question is what this distinction actually means, and whether it matters to us.The answer to this question depends on two points: first, whether it is possible to determine the degree to which the physical and psychological manifestations of the sexual instincts differ from the ego-instincts; and second, the consequences of these differences. How important is it.Originally, we did not insist that the two instincts are essentially different, and even if there were differences, it seemed difficult to understand.They are also only the source of individual abilities. If we want to discuss whether they are basically the same attribute or divided into two attributes, then we must base ourselves on biological facts rather than on these concepts.At present, I still know very little about this aspect, and even if I know more about it, it will be of no benefit to the study of psychoanalysis.

According to Jung, all instincts arise from one instinct.Therefore, he called all instinctive powers "libido"; obviously, this theory is of no help to our work.In spite of this approach, however, it is by no means possible to eliminate the so-called sexual mechanism from psychic life, and the libido has to be subdivided into two types: sexual and non-sexual.However, the term "libido" is retained, which refers exclusively to the sexual instinct, as we have used it before.

It seems to me irrelevant to psychoanalysis whether a distinction should be made between the sexual instinct and the self-preserving instinct, and it is not appropriate to discuss this question within the discipline of psychoanalysis.From a biological point of view, however, there are many ways in which this distinction has been shown to be important.Because there is only one function of the organism, and that is about sex, which seems to transcend the individual and be related to the species.The use of this faculty is not as often beneficial to the individual as other activities, and is sometimes pursued in pursuit of the pinnacle of sexual pleasure without endangering life or extinction.However, an individual's life must retain a metabolic process different from other ones in order to reproduce and preserve the vitality of the race.So far, some individuals originally considered themselves extremely important, and believed that the sexual function is no different from other functions, but a means of pursuing satisfaction. However, from a biological point of view, the individual organism is only a fragment of the continuation of the species , Compared with the immortal matter, how short its life is, it is only a temporary shelter for matter.

However, if we use psychoanalysis to analyze mental illness, there is no need for an in-depth discussion.The distinction between sexual and ego instincts has been used as a key to understanding "transferred psychosis".The origins of transference psychosis can be traced back to the most basic situation in which the sexual and ego instincts are in conflict, or in biological terms, the ego's qualification as an independent organism in itself and its Another qualification of the self, that of being elements of the continuation of the race, is reciprocal resistance, though not quite precisely.Perhaps this division has only existed since the beginning of man, and in short, his superiority over other animals may simply be due to his ability to suffer from psychosis.Therefore, the excessive development of libido and the extraordinary complexity of spiritual life seem to constitute the conditions for this conflict.In any case, under these conditions man has clearly far surpassed the development of animals, so that the possibility of man's insanity seems only to confirm the opposite of his capacity for human cultural development.However, these are still only inferences we digress.

We still proceed on the basis of the hypothesis that the expression of the sexual instinct is dichotomized from the expression of the ego instinct.With regard to metastatic psychosis, the distinction is not difficult to spot.The ego's investment in the capacity of its own sexual objects we call "libido"; the effort from the ego to maintain the instinct may be called "interest"; if we reason about the investment, change and ultimate fate of the libido, We can begin to understand the operation of various forces in the spiritual life.Transferred psychosis provides an excellent material example for this research.However, we still lack knowledge of the self, its structure and the various organizations of its functioning.Therefore, we hope that the analysis of other psychosis will facilitate the understanding of these problems.

Regarding the concept of psychoanalysis, someone has long used its theory to study other emotional contents. In 1908, after discussions with Mr. Abraham, I put forward and published a statement that the main feature of "schizophrenia" is that the libido does not invest in external objects.At that time, however, the question arises: what is the result of the demented patient's libido after it has been freed from its external object?Abraham does not hesitate to assert the return of the libido to the ego, and to believe that the return of the libido is the origin of a certain grandiose delusion in schizophrenia.This kind of exaggerated fantasy is just like exaggerating the value of the other party when you are in love.Thus, through the study of psychotic emotions and the normal way of life in love, we have for the first time recognized a feature of psychotic emotions.

I am here to say to you that this view of Abraham still remains in psychoanalysis and is the basis of our theory of psychosis.We have gradually come to understand the following concept: although the libido is attached to certain objects and has an expression that it is attached to these objects to seek the satisfaction of desire, it can also abandon these objects and replace them with the ego itself; this point of view After development, it gradually improves and becomes more thorough.Previously, P. Nike used the term "narcissism" to describe a sexual perversion in which an adult individual embraces and caresses a loved one.I shall now use it to express this application of the libido.

It takes only a little thought to see right away that this obsession with one's own body does exist, so it must not be entirely exceptional or meaningless.Perhaps on the contrary, this kind of narcissism is a universal and primitive phenomenon, and after narcissism comes the love of the object.However, the phenomenon of narcissism does not disappear.We must also remember the development and evolution of "object libido". During this period, children's sexual impulses can seek satisfaction in themselves. This is what we call sexual masturbation satisfaction. After that, the degradation of sexual life Rather than learning to obey the reality principle, this ability to masturbate can be explained.Masturbation, therefore, seems to us to be the sexual activity of the libido in the narcissistic phase.

To put it simply, on the issue of the relationship between "ego libido" and "object libido", we have reached a considerable concept, and we will illustrate this concept with a biological metaphor.You should understand that the simplest form of life is nothing but an undifferentiated mass of protoplasm.This protoplasm is often stretched out with so-called "false feet"; these false feet can also be retracted to make the protoplasm regroup.The extension of these false feet is like that of the libido on the object, but the greatest amount of the libido remains in the ego; according to our conjecture, in the normal state the transformation of the ego libido into the object libido is not difficult, Eventually, the object libido will return to the ego libido.

With the help of these concepts, we can analyze the whole psychological state, or, more conservatively, we may use the libido theory to express the normal state of life, such as love, physical illness and sleep.In the case of sleep, we may assume that the normal state of sleep is the desire to sleep, detached from the outside world and concentrated on.We have seen that the psychic activity in the night dream is aimed at the protection of sleep and is entirely governed by egoistic motives.With the help of libido, we can go a step further and think that during sleep all investment in external objects, whether libido or egoism, is withdrawn and concentrated in the ego.Wouldn't all this bring us to a newer understanding of the restorative and general fatigue functions of sleep?The similarity between sleep and life in the mother's womb can thus be confirmed and its significance in psychic activities can be expanded at the same time.In sleep, too, the first stage of libidinal distribution can be reproduced, when libido and ego interests are aligned, in the same room, united in the self-sufficient ego, no longer separate.

Two observations must be mentioned incidentally here.First, what is the difference between narcissism and egoism?I think of narcissism as the complement of libido to egoism.When we speak of egoism, we are concerned only with personal gain; narcissism is concerned with the gratification of libidinal needs.In real life, the two can be two separate motives.A man may be an absolute egoist, but if his libidinal satisfaction is to be found in objects, then his libido has a strong attachment to the object, and egoism then protects his ego. , to avoid being hurt by the desire for the object.Some can be egoistic, but at the same time have a strong narcissistic tendency and feel no need for objects. This narcissistic phenomenon is either expressed in direct sexual gratification, or in so-called "love", which is related to pure "carnal desire". "There is a difference.In these situations, egoism is evident and constant; so-called "narcissism" is the dynamic ingredient.The opposite of egoism is altruism, but altruism is not a term for the investment of libido; altruism is different from libido in that it does not have the desire to seek sexual satisfaction on the object.However, altruism can also project the libidinal investment onto the object, if this love rises to the highest degree.Roughly speaking, the sexual object can withdraw part of the ego's narcissism, so that the ego often overestimates the sexual desire for the object.Assuming that this is supplemented by altruism, so that the narcissist seeks the object, then the sexual object completely engulfs the ego and becomes the supreme being.

If, after these monotonous and dry scientific speculations, we quote poems showing the difference between narcissism and love, and add an "economic" analogy, then you will be at ease.We will quote Goethe's poems in "The Song Girl of the West and East" as the dialogue between Sulika and her lover Hardan:

Surika: Slaves, Winners, and Crowds
They all declared in unison,

the existence of self,
is a person's true happiness.

If he can keep himself,
There is no need to reject others;

If he is still him,
All property losses can be tolerated.

Hartan: Even if you are like this!
And I'll show you another way,

In Surika I saw
all the happiness in the world.

If she loves me,
I am willing to sacrifice everything;
If she leaves me,

My ego also annihilates at once.

Where Hattan shall forever be past;

If she loves a happy lover,

I will change my identity,

in imagination,

Become one with him.

Secondly, it is the extension of the theory of dreams.The origin of dreams is inexplicable unless we assume that in the unconscious the repressed ideas proclaim their independence from the ego, which, in order to protect sleep, remains detached from the dominion of sleep, even though it has withdrawn its investment in objects. Keep yourself active.With the aid of this hypothesis we can see how the unconscious material takes advantage of the disappearance or weakening of the nocturnal censorship to reshape the residual experience of the day in order to produce a desire for a dream which the individual forbids.On the contrary, these residual experiences originally have a connection with the repressed subconscious material, which may produce a kind of resistance force, resisting the desire to sleep and the return of libido.We must therefore reincorporate into this important dynamic the previously discussed theory of dream construction.

Circumstances, such as bodily illness, the stimuli of pain, and inflammation of the organs, evidently return the libido from the object to the ego.Such a return makes the libido reattach itself to the ego and focus on bodily ailments.In such a case we might almost say that the return of the libido from the object is more appalling than the withdrawal of the ego's interest from external things.It seems to help us understand melancholia, in which organs that do not see any wound on the surface demand the attention of the ego.I shall, however, say no more about this or any other case which may be explained by the return of the libido to the ego; I think you must have two doubts.First, you will ask why I have to insist on the distinction between libido and interest, sexual instinct and ego instinct, when discussing sleep and disease, when in fact, for the explanation of these phenomena, we need only assume that any individual has a free The power of the unity of activity, acting on the object or concentrating in the ego, so as to achieve this or that end.Secondly, you will ask why I am so bold as to regard the return of the libido from the object as the cause of the disease, and this process of transformation from the object libido to the ego libido, and even to the general capacity, is the cause of the disease. It is a normal psychological activity that often occurs day and night.

Here is my answer to you.Your first question sounds like a good reason.In the study of sleep, disease, love, etc., the difference between ego libido and object libido, or libido and interest, may not be obvious.On this point, however, you seem to have forgotten our original studies, on which the psychological situation we are now discussing is in fact based.We have seen the conflicts arising from transference psychosis, and it is therefore necessary to distinguish libido from interest, sexual instinct from ego instinct.We have often been concerned with this distinction ever since.Moreover, for narcissistic psychosis such as schizophrenia, to explain or fully analyze their similarities and differences with hysteria and obsessive-compulsive psychosis, it is necessary to assume that object libido is very likely to be transformed into ego libido, that is, , it must be assumed that we admit the existence of libido.We then refer to the resulting undeniable theories to explain sickness, sleep, and love.We tried out these ideas here and there to see where they worked.Therefore, there is no direct experience based on analysis, but only one conclusion: whether the libido is attached to the object or the ego, there are always some libido interests that cannot be transformed into ego; ego interests must not be transformed into libido.However, this sentence is only used to show the difference between the sexual instinct and the ego instinct; we have already made a critical examination of this difference, so it can be seen that it is still valid for the time being, and hold on to this point until they have promoted the value.

(End of this chapter)