3. The way SPs are formed: a hypothesis based on Ferenczi’s
theory
Introjection and “dissociative introjection”
First, we look at the mechanism of introjection. Many of
the above-mentioned clinical examples seem to involve this process. Ms.B, who
starts scolding her pupil in a tone of voice reminding her of her own mother,
especially exemplifies this process. Generally, introjection is regarded as the
process where the subject replicates in itself attributes and behaviors of
other subjects.
To look into the history of analytic theory,”it was Sandor Ferenczi who introduced the term ‘introjection’, which he coined as the opposite of ‘projection’. In ‘Introjection and Transference’ (1909)( Ferenczi, S. First Contributions.:40) he writes: ‘Whereas the paranoiac expels from his ego the impulses that have become unpleasant, the neurotic helps himself by taking into the ego as large as possible a part of the outside world, making it the object of unconscious phantasies. ”(Laplanche & Pontalis.) “In adopting the term, Freud distinguishes it clearly from projection. His most explicit text on this point is ‘Instincts and their Vicissitudes’ (1915SE19,p.111), which envisages the genesis of the opposition between subject (ego) and object (outside world) in so far as it can be correlated with that between pleasure and unpleasure: the ‘purified pleasure-ego’ is constituted by an introjection of everything that is a source of pleasure and by the projection outwards of whatever brings about unpleasure.”（L & P, 229） Although the above-mentioned process of introjection appears to be compatible with the way SPs are formed, there is one decisive point which makes the latter distinct from the former; when SP is formed, introjection occurs literally and concretely instead of figuratively in a sense opposite of projection. If introjection occurs on the level of imagination, introjection in dissociative disorders occurs beyond that level; it occurs outside of one’s imagination. It seems as though there is some locus formed in the individual’s central nervous system where an independent ego function is allowed to exist, which exercise some influence on the host personality. It addresses to, talks to, observes, and takes by surprise the host personality, in a way that other person outside of him/herself does. I would like to call it “dissociative introjection” in order avoid confusion of two distinct types of introjection.
To look into the history of analytic theory,”it was Sandor Ferenczi who introduced the term ‘introjection’, which he coined as the opposite of ‘projection’. In ‘Introjection and Transference’ (1909)( Ferenczi, S. First Contributions.:40) he writes: ‘Whereas the paranoiac expels from his ego the impulses that have become unpleasant, the neurotic helps himself by taking into the ego as large as possible a part of the outside world, making it the object of unconscious phantasies. ”(Laplanche & Pontalis.) “In adopting the term, Freud distinguishes it clearly from projection. His most explicit text on this point is ‘Instincts and their Vicissitudes’ (1915SE19,p.111), which envisages the genesis of the opposition between subject (ego) and object (outside world) in so far as it can be correlated with that between pleasure and unpleasure: the ‘purified pleasure-ego’ is constituted by an introjection of everything that is a source of pleasure and by the projection outwards of whatever brings about unpleasure.”（L & P, 229） Although the above-mentioned process of introjection appears to be compatible with the way SPs are formed, there is one decisive point which makes the latter distinct from the former; when SP is formed, introjection occurs literally and concretely instead of figuratively in a sense opposite of projection. If introjection occurs on the level of imagination, introjection in dissociative disorders occurs beyond that level; it occurs outside of one’s imagination. It seems as though there is some locus formed in the individual’s central nervous system where an independent ego function is allowed to exist, which exercise some influence on the host personality. It addresses to, talks to, observes, and takes by surprise the host personality, in a way that other person outside of him/herself does. I would like to call it “dissociative introjection” in order avoid confusion of two distinct types of introjection.
