PROJECTION, INTROJECTION,AND PROJECTIVE IDENTIFICATION 投射，内摄，和投射性认同 I am combining the discussion of two of the most primitive defensive processes, projection and introjection, because they represent opposite sides of the same psychological coin. In both projection and introjection, there is a permeated psychological boundary between the self and the world. As mentioned earlier, in normal infancy, before the child has developed a sense of which experiences come from inside and which ones have their sources outside the self, we assume that there is a generalized sense of “I” being equivalent to “the world.” A baby with colic probably has the experience of “Hurt!” rather than “Something inside me hurts.” The infant cannot yet distinguish between an internally located pain like colic and an externally caused discomfort like pressure from diapers that are too tight. From this era of relative undifferentiation come the processes that later, in their defensive function, we refer to as projection and introjection. When these processes work together, they are considered one defense, called projective identification. Some writers (e.g., Scharff, 1992) distinguish between projective and introjective identification, but similar processes are at work in each kind of operation. 我将投射和内摄这两个原始性防御过程放在一起讨论，是因为它们代表了同一枚硬币的正反两面。无论是投射还是内摄，自我与世界之间的心理边界都是处在一种可渗透的状态。如前文所述，在通常的婴儿期，在孩子发展出能够判断一种体验是来自内部还是外部的感觉之前，我们假设存在一个泛化的感觉——“我”等同于“世界”。生了疝气的婴儿或许体验到的是“痛！”而非“我身体里痛。”他们尚不能区分位于内部的疼痛（比如疝气）和外界导致的不舒服（如尿布裹得太紧）。从这个相对未分化的时代，产生了后来我们称之为投射和内摄的过程(就它们的防御功能来说)。当这些过程一起工作时，它们被看作是一种防御，称为投射性认同。一些作者(如Scharff, 1992)区分了投射性认同和内摄性认同，但在每一种操作中都有类似的过程起作用。 Projection is the process whereby what is inside is misunderstood as coming from outside. In its benign and mature forms, it is the basis for empathy. Since no one is ever able to get inside the mind of another person, we must use our capacity to project our own experience in order to understand someone else’s subjective world. Intuition, leaps of nonverbal synchronicity, and peak experiences of mystical union with another person or group involve a projection of the self into the other, with powerful emotional rewards to both parties. People in love are well known for reading one another’s minds in ways that they themselves cannot account for logically. 投射是这样一个过程，经由它，原本是内部的东西被误认为是来自外界。在其良性和成熟的形式中，它是同理心的基础。因为没有人能够进入另一个人的内心，所以我们必须利用我们投射我们自己经验的能力来达到理解他人主观世界的目的。直觉、非语言同步的飞跃，以及与另一个人或群体神秘结合的高峰体验[指人们在追求自我实现的过程中，基本需要获得满足后，达到自我实现时所感受到的短暂的、豁达的、极乐的体验，是一种趋于顶峰、超越时空、超越自我的满足与完美体验。在高峰体验时，人会产生一种存在认知，这与一般的认知不同，这种体验仿佛与宇宙融合了，是人自我肯定的时刻，是超越自我的、忘我的、无我的状态。]，都包含了将自己投射到他人的过程，对双方都有强烈的情感回报。众所周知，恋爱中的人可以读懂对方的思想，以他们自己无法从逻辑上解释的方式。 In its malignant forms, projection breeds dangerous misunderstanding and untold interpersonal damage. When the projected attitudes seriously distort the object on whom they are projected, or when what is projected consists of disowned and highly negative parts of the self, all kinds of difficulties can ensue. Others resent being misperceived and may retaliate when treated, for example, as judgmental, envious, or persecutory (attitudes that are among the most common of those that tend to be ignored in the self and ascribed to others). A person who uses projection as his or her main way of understanding the world and coping with life, and who denies or disavows what is being projected, can be said to have a paranoid character. 在其恶性形式中，投射滋生了危险的误解和难以言表的人际伤害。当被投射出去的态度歪曲了被投射者，或者被投射出去的东西包含了自己不想要的并且是非常负面的那部分自我，各种各样的困难就会随之而来。被投射者会对被误解感到愤怒，也许会进行报复，因为你把他当成一个武断的人、嫉妒的人、迫害者来对待。(武断、嫉妒、迫害，自我中的这些态度常常被自己无视，而归因于他人)。如果一个人使用投射作为理解世界、应对人生的主要手段，并且他否认或抵赖被投射出去的内容，那我们就可以说他是偏执性格。[发现对方投射容易，发现对方否认很难呀，要是对方不承认自己否认怎么办？] I should note that paranoia has nothing inherently to do with suspiciousness (which may be based on realistic, unprojected observation and experience, or may derive from posttraumatic vigilance), nor with whether or not an attribution is accurate. The fact that a projection “fits” does not make it any less a projection; and although it is easier to spot a projection when the attribution does not fit, it is also possible that there is some other, nondefensive reason for a misunderstanding of someone else’s motives. Popular misuse of the word “paranoid” has wrongly equated it with “fearful” or “unreasonably suspicious,” much to the detriment of precision in language, even though it is true that what people project is usually unpleasant stuff to which they then may reactwith fear and distrust (see McWilliams, 2010). 我要指出的是，偏执与多疑本身没有必然关系(多疑可能是基于现实的、未投射的观察和经验，或源自创伤后的警觉)，也与归因是否符合事实没有必然联系。投射就算符合事实，它也是投射[符合事实未必不是投射]；虽然当归因与事实不符时更容易看出这是投射，但误解他人动机也可能是出于别的非防御性的原因[不符合事实未必就是投射]。 对偏执这个词，有一种流行的错误理解，即把偏执跟“恐惧”或“不合理的多疑”划上等号(这种流行已经损害了语言的精确性)。虽然人们投射出去的东西通常是令人不快的东西(所以人们对它的反应是恐惧与不信任)，但把偏执理解成“恐惧”或“不合理的多疑”是不对的。 Introjection is the process whereby what is outside is misunderstood as coming from inside. In its benign forms, it amounts to a primitive identification with important others. Young children take in all kinds of attitudes, affects, and behaviors of significant people in their lives. The process is so subtle as to be mysterious, although recent studies of mirror neurons and other brain processes are starting to shed light on it. Long before a child can make a subjectively voluntary decision to be like Mommy or Daddy, he or she seems to have “swallowed” them in some primal way. 内摄是这样一个过程，经由它，原本是外部的东西被误认为是来自内部[跟投射正好相反]。在它的良性形式中，它相当于对重要他人的原始认同。年幼的孩子会接受生活中重要人物的各种态度、影响和行为。尽管最近对镜像神经元和其他大脑过程的研究已经开始阐明这一过程，但这个过程是如此微妙以至于令人感到神秘。在一个孩子能够主观自愿地决定要成为像妈妈或爸爸一样的人之前，他或她似乎已经以某种原始的方式“吸纳”了他们。 In its problematic forms, introjection can, like projection, be highly destructive. The most striking examples of pathological introjection involve the process that has been labeled, somewhat inappropriately in view of its primitivity, “identification with the aggressor” (A. Freud, 1936). It is well known, from both naturalistic observations (e.g., Bettelheim, 1960) and empirical research (e.g., Milgram, 1963), that under conditions of fear or abuse, people will try to master their fright and pain by taking on qualities of their abusers. “I’m not the helpless victim; I’m the powerful perpetrator” seems to be the unconscious attraction to this defense. This mechanism crosses all diagnostic boundaries but is particularly evident in characterological dispositions toward sadism, explosivity, and what is often misleadingly called impulsivity. 在有问题的形式中，内摄，就像投射一样，是极具破坏性的。病理性内摄最引人注目的那些例子都包含了被称为“侵略者认同”(A.Freud，1936)的过程(就其原始性来说，这么叫有点不恰当)。无论是通过自然主义的观察(如Bettelheim, 1960)，还是通过实验研究(如Milgram, 1963)，都能看到一个众所周知的现象：在恐惧或虐待的条件下，人们会试图通过呈现施暴者的特质来控制他们的恐惧和痛苦。“我不是无助的受害者;我是强大的施暴者”似乎是对这种防御潜意识的吸引力。这种机制跨越了所有的诊断边界，但在倾向于施虐、易爆和冲动的性格倾向中尤为明显。 Introjection is also implicated in some kinds of depressive psychology (Blatt, 1974, 2004). When we are deeply attached to people, we introject them, and their representations inside us become a part of our identity (“I am Tom’s son, Mary’s husband, Sue’s father, Dan’s friend,” etc.). If we lose someone whose image we have internalized, whether by death, separation, or rejection, not only do we feel that our environment is poorer for that person’s absence in our lives but we also feel that we are somehow diminished, that a part of our self has died. An emptiness or sense of void comes to dominate our inner world. We may also, in an effort to feel some sense of power rather than helpless loss, become preoccupied with the question of what failure or sin of ours drove the person away. The critical, attacking voice of a lost object can live on in us as a way of keeping that person internally alive. When mourning is avoided, unconscious self-criticism thus takes its place. Freud (1917a) beautifully described the process of mourning as a slow coming to terms with this condition of loss, in which “the shadow of the object fell upon the ego” (p. 249). A person who is unable over time to separate internally from a loved one whose image has been introjected, who consequently fails to invest emotionally in other people (the function of the grieving process), will continue to feel diminished, unworthy, depleted, and bereft. 内摄也与某些类型的抑郁心理有关(Blatt, 1974, 2004)。当我们深深依恋他人时，我们内摄他们，他们在我们内心的表征成为我们身份的一部分(“我是Tom的儿子，Mary的丈夫，Sue的父亲，Dan的朋友”，等等)。如果我们失去了某个我们已经内化其形象的人，无论是由于死亡、分离，还是被拒绝，我们不仅会感到我们的环境变差了(因为那个人不在我们的生活中了)，而且还会觉得我们自己的一部分死了。一种空虚或空虚感支配着我们的内心世界[这是第一种选择：承认现实]。我们也可能(在努力去感受某种有力感而不是无助的失落时)全神贯注于这样的问题——我们的什么失败或罪恶把人家赶走了？一个丢失的东西发出的批判和攻击的声音可以在我们体内继续存在，作为保持那个人内在地活着的一种方式[这是第二种选择：通过批判自己让离去的人保持活在我们内心]。当哀悼被回避掉时[这是选择了第二种]，潜意识的自我批评就会取而代之。Freud(1917a)优美地描述哀伤的过程为一个慢慢适应失去的过程，在这个过程中，“客体的阴影落在了自我身上”(第249页) [这是选择了第一种的结果]。一个人如果无法随着时间的推移从内心深处与他深爱的人分离(爱人的形象已经被内摄)，并因此无法在他人身上投入情感(在他人身上投入感情是悲伤过程的作用)，他将持续感到被贬低、无价值、枯竭和被剥夺[这是选择了第二种的结果]。 Similarly, children in destructive families prefer to believe there is something wrong with them (preserving hope that by changing, they can improve their lot), than to take in the terrifying fact that they are dependent on negligent or abusive caregivers. Fairbairn (1943) called this process the “moral defense,” noting that it is “better to be a sinner in a world ruled by God than to live in a world ruled by the Devil” (pp. 66–67). If one regularly uses introjection to reduce anxiety and maintain continuity in the self, keeping psychological ties to unrewarding objects of one’s earlier life, one can reasonably be considered characterologically depressive. 类似地[这个“类似地”提示我们：本段要跟上一段对照着看。本段才是真正重要的，因为它指出了偏执形成的幼年原因。上一段那么长只是为了你能更好地理解这一段]，破坏性家庭中的孩子更愿意相信他们自己有问题(保留一种希望——即通过改变，他们可以改善自己的命运) [选择了第二种]，而不是接受他们依赖于疏忽或虐待的照料者这一可怕的事实[选择了第一种]。Fairbairn(1943)把这个过程称为道德辩护，同时注释道“宁可在上帝统治的世界里做罪人，也好过生活在魔鬼统治的世界里”(第66页67)。如果一个人经常用内摄来减少焦虑，保持自我的连续性，保持与早年生活中没有价值的事物的心理联系，那么他的性格就可以被合理地认为是抑郁的[选择了第二种]。 Melanie Klein (1946) was the first analyst to write about a defensive process that she found to be ubiquitous in more disturbed patients, which she called “projective identification.” This fusion of projective and introjective mechanisms has been compactly described by Ogden (1982): Melanie Klein（1946）是最早提到“投射性认同”的分析师，她发现这一防御方式在较重的心理障碍者中普遍存在。Ogden（1982）对这种融合了投射与内摄的机制进行了简要描述： In projective identification, not only does the patient view the therapist in a distorted way that is determined by the patient’s past object relations; in addition, pressure is exerted on the therapist to experience himself in a way that is congruent with the patient’s unconscious fantasy. (pp. 2–3) 在投射性认同中，患者不仅以一种扭曲的方式看待治疗师(这种扭曲是由患者过去的客体关系决定的);而且会施加压力在治疗师身上，致使治疗师用一种与患者的潜意识幻想一致的方式体验自我。（pp.2-3） In other words, the patient both projects internal objects and gets the person on whom they are projected to behave like those objects, as if the target person had those same introjects. Projective identification is a difficult abstraction, one that has inspired much controversy in the analytic literature (e.g., S. A. Mitchell, 1997). My own understanding of the term involves the ideas implied in the previous paragraph; that is, projection and introjection each have a continuum of forms, running from primitive to advanced (cf. Kernberg, 1976), and at the primitive end, those processes are fused because of their similar confusion of inside and outside. This fusion is what we call projective identification. In Chapter 4 I discussed briefly the operation of projective identification in psychotic and borderline states. 换言之，患者既投射内部客体，也迫使被投射对象表现得像这些内部客体一样(就好像是这些被投射者自己内摄了同样的客体)。投射性认同是一个复杂的抽象概念，在精神分析文献中引发了许多争议(如Mitchell, 1997)。我自己对这个术语是这样理解的(跟上一段的思想类似)：无论投射还是内摄，它们都包含了从原始到高级的一系列形式，在原始的那一端，这俩过程(即投射和内摄)融合在了一起(因为在混淆了内部和外部这点上二者是相似的)。这种融合物就是我们称之为投射性认同的东西。在第4章我曾简要地讨论了投射性认同在精神病性和边缘性状态下的运作过程。 To illustrate how that process differs from mature projection, consider the contrast between the following hypothetical statements from two young men who have come for an intake interview: 为了说明这一过程(即投射性认同)与成熟投射的不同[投射性认同比投射更原始、更幼儿，因而也更恶劣]，请考虑以下两段话的区别(这两段话分别来自两个来参加初始访谈的男性[初始访谈是指第一次见心理医生，相当于收治后的第一次谈话])： PATIENT A: (somewhat apologetically) I know I have no reason to believe you’re critical of me, but I can’t help thinking that you are. 患者A：(有点抱歉地说)我知道我没有理由认为你在指责我，但我还是忍不住这样想。 PATIENT B: (in an accusatory tone) You shrinks all love to sit back and judge people, and I don’t give a shit what you think! 患者B：(用控诉的口吻)你们这些心理医生，就喜欢靠着靠背来评判别人，老子才不管你怎么想呢！ Let us assume that in reality, the therapist began the session with a genuinely friendly, interested, nonjudgmental attitude toward each client. The content of what is bothering each man is similar; both are worried that the therapist is taking a harsh, evaluative stance. Both are projecting an internalized critical object onto the therapist. Three aspects of their respective communications, however, make them very different from each other. 让我们假设在现实中，治疗师以一种真正友好、感兴趣、不带评判的态度开始会话。困扰这俩人的事情的内容是相似的;他们都担心治疗师采取了一种苛刻的，评估性立场。俩人都正在向治疗师投射一个内化的批判性客体。然而，他们与治疗师的交流的三个方面使他们彼此非常不同。 First, Patient A shows evidence of the capacity for self-reflection (observing ego, reflective functioning), the ability to see that his fantasy may not necessarily conform to reality; his projection is ego alien. Patient B, on the other hand, experiences what is projected as an accurate depiction of the therapist’s state of mind; his projection is ego syntonic. In fact, he believes in the reality of his attribution so absolutely that he is already launching a counterattack against the assault that he is certain the therapist is planning. The fusion of cognitive, affective, and behavioral dimensions of experience typical of primitive processes is discernible here. 首先，患者A显现出具有自我反省能力(观察性自我、反思功能)的迹象，能够看到自己的幻想不一定符合现实;他的投射是自我不协调的。而患者B，他把被投射出去的内容体验为治疗师心理状态的准确描述;他的投射是自我协调的。事实上，他绝对相信他的归因符合现实，以至于他已经对这种攻击(他确信治疗师正在谋划这种攻击)发起了反击。在这里，我们可以发现体验的三个维度(认知、情感、行为)的融合，这正是原始过程[幼儿特色]的典型特征。 Second, these patients differ in the extent to which their projective process has successfully done the job for which the defense was called upon, namely, to get rid of a troublesome feeling. Patient A has ejected the critical attitude and presumably feels some relief in reporting it, while Patient B both projects it and keeps it. He ascribes a critical attitude to the other person, yet that does not relieve him of feeling censorious himself. Kernberg (1975) has described this aspect of projective identification as “maintaining empathy” with what has been projected. 其次，这俩患者区别在，他们的投射性过程在多大程度上成功地完成了任务。防御被召唤出来，就是为了完成这个任务，即驱除不舒服的感觉。 患者A已经驱除了批判性态度[这种态度来自内化的批判性客体]，或许在报告时还感到了轻松，而患者B把它[即来自内部批判性客体的批判性态度]投射出去并保留了下来[竟然在投射的同时还能保留]。他把批判性态度归因于他人，但这并不能减轻他自己感受到的批判性。Kernberg(1975)将投射性认同的这一方面描述为对所投射事物“保持同理心”。 Finally, these patients’ respective communications will likely have very different emotional effects. The therapist will find it easy to like Patient A and will readily form a working alliance. With Patient B, however, the therapist will rapidly begin feeling like exactly the sort of person the patient is already convinced he is sitting with: uncaring, ready to judge, and disinclined to exert the energy it will take to try to care about this man. In other words, the countertransference toward the first man will be positive and mild, while toward the second it will be negative and intense. 最后，这些患者各自的沟通可能会产生非常不同的情绪影响。治疗师会发现自己很容易喜欢患者A，并且会很乐意易形成工作联盟。然而，对于患者B，治疗师很快就会有这种感受，自己就是患者所认为的那种人:漠不关心，随时准备做出评判，不愿花力气去关心患者。换句话说，治疗师对第一个患者的反移情是积极而温和的，而对第二个患者的反移情是消极而紧张的。 The late Bertram Cohen once explained the “self-fulfilling prophecy” quality of projective identification to me as a natural consequence of a person’s being disturbed enough to have very primitive but not psychotic perceptions. A woman who is invested in staying anchored in reality will feel less crazy if she can induce in someone else the feelings she is convinced the other person already has. A frankly psychotic woman will not care whether her projection “fits,” and will therefore spare others the pressure to confirm its appropriateness and hence her sanity. 已故的Bertram Cohen曾经这样向我解释投射性认同的“自我实现预言”特点，这是一个人受到足够的干扰而产生的非常原始但还不是精神病性的感知的自然结果。如果一个女人现实感尚存，那么如果她能促使别人产生她认为别人本来就有的感受，那她就不会觉得自己是个疯子[这是边缘性偏执]。一个真的疯子是不会在意自己的投射是否符合客观现实的，故而也不会给他人以压力[所谓压力，是指采用各种手段指促使别人产生她认为别人本来就有的感受]来进一步证明投射的正确性和自己神志正常[这是精神病性偏执]。 Projective identification is a particularly powerful and challenging operation, one that strains the therapist’s capacities. While all the defenses in this section are considered primitive, this one, along with splitting, which I discuss next, has a special reputation for causing headaches to clinicians. When one is caught in the patient’s certainty about how the therapist “really” feels, along with the patient’s unrelenting struggle to induce just those feelings, it is hard to withstand the emotional barrage. Moreover, since all of us share in the predicament of being human, and hence contain already within ourselves all the different emotions, defenses, and attitudes that get projected onto us, there is always some truth in the projective identifier’s belief. It can be very confusing to figure out in the heat of the clinical moment where the patient’s defense ends and the therapist’s psychology begins. Perhaps the capacity of this defense to threaten the therapist’s confidence in his or her own mental health accounts for the fact that projective identification, along with splitting, is implicated in borderline personality organization. In particular, because the projective piece of it is so powerful, it is associated with borderline levels of paranoid personality. 投射性认同是一种特别强大和具有挑战性的操作，它会耗尽治疗师的能力。虽然本节中所有的防御都被认为是原始的，但是这一个，连同我接下来要讨论的分裂，在让临床医生头痛方面是出了名的。一旦患者认定治疗师“其实”是怎么想的，并为迫使治疗师产生这些感受而进行持续不断的努力时，治疗师就很难抵挡住情绪的冲击。此外，由于我们所有人都处于作为人类的困境中，因此我们自身已经包含了投射到我们身上的所有不同的情感、防御和态度，所以投射性认同里总是有说对的成分。在临床的白热化时刻，要弄清楚病人的防御在哪结束，治疗师的心理活动又在哪开始，是很不容易的。也许这种防御[指投射性认同]威胁治疗师对自己心理健康信心的能力，导致了投射性认同，跟分裂一起，被纳入在边缘性人格组织水平中。特别是，因为其投射性部分是如此强大，它[指投射性认同]与偏执型人格的边缘性水平有关。 Contrary to professional popular opinion, however, projective identification is not used exclusively by people whose character is essentially borderline. There are numerous subtle and benign ways that the process operates in everyday life irrespective of psychopathology. For example, when what is projected and identified with involves the loving, joyful affects, a contagion of good feeling can occur in a group. Even when what is projected and identified with is negative, as long as the process is not relentless, intense, and unmodulated by other interpersonal processes of a more mature sort, it is not unduly harmful. There has been a tendency in recent American psychoanalysis to reframe the unconscious as an intersubjectively shared phenomenon rather thanas one’s individual “stuff” (see Aron, 1996, or Zeddies, 2000, on the relational unconscious) and also to see it as creative and positive rather than as Freud’s seething cauldron of dangerous desire (Eigen, 2004; Grotstein, 2000; Newirth, 2003; Safran, 2006). The positive aspects of projective identification are implicit in such formulations. 然而，与专业的流行观点相反，并不是只有性格处在边缘水平的人才会使用投射性认同。这个过程在与精神病学无关的日常生活中也有许多微妙而良性的应用。例如，当被投射和认同的事物涉及到爱和快乐的情绪时，好的感觉就会在一个群体中传播开来。即使被投射和认同的东西是负面的，只要这个过程不是无情的、强烈的、不受其他更成熟的人际过程调节的，它也不是过度有害的。近来美国精神分析界有一个趋势，即将潜意识重塑为一个主体间共享的现象，而不是一个人自己的东西(见Aron, 1996, 或 Zeddies, 2000关于关系潜意识的讨论)，同时也认为它是具有创造性和积极的，而不是弗洛伊德所说的充斥着危险欲望的沸腾大锅(Eigen, 2004; Grotstein, 2000; Newirth, 2003; Safran, 2006)。投射性认同的积极方面隐含在这些观点当中。