Salta al menu principale di navigazione Salta al contenuto principale Salta al piè di pagina del sito

Sez. generale - Studi e ricerche

N. 44 (2019)

The Metaphor of Dissociation: Teleological, Phenomenological, Structural, Dynamical

27 June 2019


Dissociation as used in psychology and psychiatry is a troubled conceptual metaphor. The main problems include conflicting definitions and a lack of internal consistency of some of these formulations. Trying to mend the situation, Van der Hart, Nijenhuis and Steele (2006) revisited Janet’s original definition of dissociation, and referred to it as “structural dissociation of the personality”. This term is not meant to suggest that “structural dissociation” involves a particular kind of dissociation as is sometimes thought. To prevent or repair further misunderstanding, in the present article I highlight four inherent features of dissociation of the personality: teleological, phenomenological, structural, and dynamical. The article also
aims to bridge some metaphors that are commonly described and understood as dichotomies, implying dualisms that plague philosophy, science, and clinical practice. For example, personality is understood as an organism-environment system, involving subjects and “objects” (that may be other subjects) as co-dependent and co-constitutive partners. Regarding matter (brain/body) and mind as attributes of one substance reflects an attempt to avoid the problems of philosophical (substance) dualism, as well as the one-sidedness of philosophical materialism and idealism. The generation, maintenance, and elaboration of
dissociation is analyzed in terms of causing, that is, the mutual manifestation of a network of reciprocal powers. The joint analyses involve an enactive approach to life, and intend to achieve further conceptual clarity and consistency of the metaphor of dissociation.

Riferimenti bibliografici

  1. Allport G.W. (1961). Pattern and growth in personality. New York: Holt, Rinehart, Winston.
  2. Barbaras R. (1999). Le désir et la distance. Paris: Vrin. English translation by P.B. Milan, Desire and distance: Introduction to a phenomenology of perception. Stanford: Stanford University Press.
  3. Bolles R.C. (1970). Species-specific defense reactions and avoidance learning. Psychological Review, 71: 32-48.
  4. Bolles R.C.F., Fanselow M.S. (1980). A perceptual-defensive-recuperative model of fear and pain. Behavioral Brain Sciences, 3: 291-301.
  5. Cardeña E. (1994). The domain of dissociation. In: Lynn S.J., Rhue J.W. (eds.), Dissociation: Clinical and theoretical aspects. New York: Guilford, pp. 5-31.
  6. Carver C.S., Scheier M.F. (2000). Scaling back goals and recalibration of the affect system are processes in normal adaptive self-regulation: Understanding “response shift” phenomena. Social Science & Medicine, 50: 1715-1722.
  7. Cohen Varela A.C. (2002). One idea: On the path of F.J. Varela. European Journal of Psychoanalysis, 14.
  8. Deleuze G. (1988). Spinoza: Practical philosophy (transl. R. Hurley.). San Francisco: City Lights Books.
  9. Descartes R. (1984). The philosophical writings of Descartes, Volume II. (transl. J.
  10. Cottingham, R. Stoothoff, D. Murdoch). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
  11. Dewey J. (1934). Art as experience. New York: Perigee/Berkley.
  12. Fanselow M.S., Lester L.S. (1988). A functional behavioristic approach to aversively
  13. motivated behavior: Predatory imminence as a determinant of the topography of
  14. defensive behavior. In: Bolles R.S., Beecher M.D. (eds.), Evolution and learning. Hillsdale, NY: Erlbaum, pp. 185-212.
  15. Gallagher S. (2017). Enactivist interventions: Rethinking the mind. Oxford: Oxford
  16. University Press.
  17. Gibson J.J. (1977). The theory of affordances. In: Shaw R., Bransford J. (eds.), Perceiving, acting, and knowing. Hoboken, NY: Wiley, pp. 67-82.
  18. Heil J. (2012). The universe as we find it. Oxofrd: Clarendon Press.
  19. Hurley S.L. (1998). Consciousness in action. London: Harvard University Press.
  20. Husserl E. (1989). Ideas pertaining to a pure phenomenology and to a phenomenological philosophy. Second book: Studies in the phenomenology of constitution (transl. R. Rojcewicz and A. Schuwer). Dordrecht: Kluwer Academic.
  21. James W. (1878). Remarks on Spencer’s definition of mind as correspondence. Journal of Speculative Philosophy, 3: 1-18.
  22. Janet P. (1889). L’automatisme psychologique: Essai de psychologie expérimentale sur les formes inférieures de l’activité humaine [Psychological automatism: An experimental psychological essay on the inferior forms of human action]. Paris: Felix Alcan; Paris, Société Pierre Janet/Payot, 1973.
  23. Janet P. (1907). The major symptoms of hysteria. London/New York:Macmillan.
  24. Janet P. (1911). L’état mental des hystériques [The mental state of hystericals (2nd ed.)]. Paris: Félix Alcan (Reprint: Lafitte Reprints, Marseilles, 1983).
  25. Järvilehto T. (1998a). The theory of the organism-environment system: I. Description
  26. of the theory. Integrative Physiological and Behavioural Sciences, 33: 321-334.
  27. Järvilehto T. (1998b). The theory of the organism-environment system: II. Significance of nervous activity in the organism-environment system. Integrative Physiological and Behavioural Sciences, 33: 335-342; 343.
  28. Järvilehto T. (1999a). The theory of the organism-environment system: III. Role of
  29. efferent influences on receptors in the formation of knowledge. Integrative Physiological and Behavioural Sciences, 34: 90-100.
  30. Järvilehto T. (2000a). Theory of the organism-environment system: IV. The problem on mental activity and consciousness. Integrative Physiological and Behavioural Sciences, 35: 35-57.
  31. Järvilehto T. (2001a). Feeling as knowing: Part 2. Emotion, consciousness, and brain activity. Consciousness & Emotion, 2(1): 75-102.
  32. Johnson M. (2010). Metaphor and cognition. In: Schmicking D., Gallagher S. (eds.),
  33. Handbook of phenomenology and cognitive science. Dordrecht: Springer.
  34. Jonas H. (1992). Philosophische Untersuchungen und metaphysische Vermutungen
  35. [Philosophical investigations and metaphysical presumptions]. Frankfurt am Main und Leipzig: Insel.
  36. Kull K. (2000). An introduction to phytosemiotics: Semiotic botany and vegetative sign systems. Sign Systems Studies, 28: 326-350.
  37. Lakoff G., Johnson M. (1980). Metaphors we live by. Chicago: The University of Chicago Press.
  38. Lakoff G., Johnson M. (1999). Philosophy in the flesh: The embodied mind and its
  39. challenge to Western thought. New York: Basic Books.
  40. Lang P.J., Bradley M.M., Cuthbert B.N. (1998). Emotion, motivation, and anxiety: Brain mechanisms and psychophysiology. Biological Psychiatry, 44: 1248-1263. doi: 10.1016/S0006-3223(98)00275-3.
  41. Liotti G. (2004). Trauma, dissociation and disorganized attachment: Three strands of a single braid. Psychotherapy: Theory, Research, Practice and Training, 41: 472-486. doi: 10.1037/0033-3204.41.4.472.
  42. Liotti G. (2006). A model of dissociation based on attachment theory and research. Journal of Trauma & Dissociation, 7(4): 55-73. doi: 10.1300/J229v07n04_04.
  43. Locke J. (1690/1978). An essay concerning human understanding. P.H. Nidditch (ed.). Oxford: Clarendon Press.
  44. Loevinger J. (1976). Ego development. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.
  45. Mead G.H. (1934). Mind, self, and society. Chicago: Chicago University Press.
  46. Mead G.H. (1968). The genesis of the self. In: Gordon C., Gergen K.J. (eds.), The self in social interaction. Volume I, Classic and contemporary perspectives. New York: Wiley, pp. 51-59 (Reprinted from The genesis of the self and social control. International Journal of Ethics, XXXV, April 1925, 3: 251-273.)
  47. Messerschmidt R.A. (1927-1928). Quantitative investigation of the alleged independent operation of conscious and subconscious processes. Journal of Abnormal and Social Psychology, 22: 325. doi: 10.1037/h0074439.
  48. Metzinger T. (2003). Being no one: The self-model theory of subjectivity. Cambridge, MA: MIT.
  49. Nijenhuis E.R.S. (2015a). The trinity of trauma: Ignorance, fragility, and control. Volume I. The evolving concept of trauma. Göttingen: Vandenhoeck & Ruprecht.
  50. Nijenhuis E.R.S. (2015b). The trinity of trauma: Ignorance, fragility, and control. Volume II. The concept and facts of dissociation in trauma. Göttingen: Vandenhoeck & Ruprecht.
  51. Nijenhuis E.R.S. (2015c). Boundaries on the concepts of dissociation and dissociative parts of the personality: Required and viable. Psichiatria e Psicoterapia, 34, 1: 55-85.
  52. Nijenhuis E.R.S. (2017). The trinity of trauma: Ignorance, fragility, and control. Volume III. Enactive trauma therapy. Göttingen: Vandenhoeck & Ruprecht.
  53. Nijenhuis E.R.S., Van der Hart O. (2011a). Dissociation in trauma: A new definition and comparison with previous formulations. Journal of Trauma & Dissociation, 12: 416-445. doi: 10.1080/15299732.2011.570592.
  54. Nijenhuis E.R.S., Van der Hart O. (2011b). Defining dissociation in trauma. Journal of Trauma and Dissociation, 12: 469-473. doi: 10.1080/15299732.2011.570235.
  55. Noë A. (2009). Out of our heads. New York: Hill and Wang.
  56. Northoff G. (2003). Philosophy of the brain: The brain problem. Amsterdam/ Philadelphia: John Benjamins.
  57. Panksepp J. (1998). Affective neuroscience: The foundations of human and animal
  58. emotions. New York: Oxford University Press.
  59. Panksepp J., Biven L. (2012). The archeology of mind: Neuroevolutionary origins of human emotions. New York: Norton.
  60. Rosch E. (1977). Human categorization. In: Warren N. (ed.), Advances in crosscultural
  61. psychology. London: Academic Press, Vol. 1, pp. 1-49.
  62. Ross C.A. (2014). Unresolved problems in the theory of structural dissociation. Psichiatria e Psicoterapia, 33: 285-292.
  63. Schopenhauer A. (1819/1958). The world as will and representation, Vol. I (transl. R. Burdon, H. Haldane, J. Kemp). Clinton, MA: The Falcon’s Wing.
  64. Schopenhauer A. (1844/1958). The world as will and representation, Vol. II (transl. R. Burdon, H. Haldane, J. Kemp). Clinton,MA: The Falcon’s Wing.
  65. Schopenhauer A. (1889/2007). On the fourfold root of the principle of sufficient reason (transl. K. Hillebrand). New York: Cosimo.
  66. Spinoza B. (1677). Ethics (transl. and ed. E. Curley). London: Penguin.
  67. Steele K., Van der Hart O., Nijenhuis E.R.S. (2005). Phase-oriented treatment of structural dissociation in complex traumatization: Overcoming trauma-related phobias. Journal of Trauma and Dissociation, 6(3): 11-53. doi: 10.1300/J229v06n03_02.
  68. Thompson E. (2007). Mind in life: Biology, phenomenology, and the sciences of mind. Cambridge, MA: Belknap Harvard.
  69. Thompson E. (2014). The embodied mind: An interview with Evan Thompson. Fall 2014. http:/
  70. Thompson E., Lutz A., Cosmelli D. (2005). Neurophenomenology: An introduction for neurophilosophers. In: Brook A., Akins K. (eds.), Cognition and the neuroscience movement. New York: Cambridge University Press, pp. 40-97.
  71. Timberlake W. (1993). Behavior systems and reinforcement: An integrative approach. Journal of Experimental Analysis of Behavior, 60(1): 105-128. doi: 10.1901/jeab.1993.60-105.
  72. Timberlake W., Lucas G.A. (1989). Behavior systems and learning: From misbehavior to general principles. In: Klein S.B., Mowrer R.R. (eds.), Contemporary learning theories. Hillsdale, NY: Erlbaum, pp. 237-275.
  73. Van der Hart O., Nijenhuis E.R.S., Steele K. (2005). Dissociation: An insufficiently recognized major feature of complex posttraumatic stress disorder. Journal of Traumatic Stress, 18: 413-424. doi: 10.1002/jts.20049.
  74. Van der Hart O., Nijenhuis E.R.S., Steele K. (2006). The haunted self: Structural
  75. dissociation and the treatment of chronic traumatization. New York: Norton.
  76. Van Der Hart O., Nijenhuis E., Steele K., Brown D. (2004). Trauma-Related Dissociation: Conceptual Clarity Lost and Found. Australian & New Zealand Journal of Psychiatry, 38(11-12): 906-914. doi: 10.1080/j.1440-1614.2004.01480.x.
  77. Varela F.J. (1979). Principles of biological autonomy. New York: Elsevier-North Holland.
  78. Varela F.J. (1996). Neurophenomenology: A methodological remedy for the hard problem. Journal of Consciousness Studies, 3: 330-349.
  79. Varela F.J. (1999). Steps to a science of interbeing: Unfolding the dharma implicit in modern cognitive science. In: Watson G., Stephen B., Claxton G. (eds.), The psychology of awakening. York Beach ME: Samuel Waiser, pp. 71-89.
  80. Varela F.J., Thompson E., Rosch E. (1991). The embodied mind: Cognitive science and human experience. Cambridge, MA: MIT.
  81. Von Uexkü ll J. (1934/2010). A foray into the worlds of animals and humans: With a theory of meaning (transl. J.D. O’Neill). Minneapolis, MN: University of Minnesota Press.
  82. Vörös S. Bitbol M. (2002). Enacting enaction: A dialectic between knowing and being. Constructivist Foundations, 13(1): 31-40.
  83. Weber A., Varela F.J. (2002). Life after Kant: Natural purposes and the autopoietic
  84. foundations of biological individuality. Phenomenology and the Cognitive Sciences, 1: 97-125. doi: 10.1023/A:1020368120174.
  85. Wittgenstein L. (1953). Philosophical investigations. New York: MacMillan.


Caricamento metriche ...