Introjects as Structure 内摄物作为结构 Similarly introjection is a dynamic process. There is a progression in the organization of introjects from the more primitive and instinctually derived to the more integrated and composite fusions of introjects (Greenson, 1954). This patterning of the fusion of introjects takes the form of what Kernberg (1966) calls the active valence of introjects. Introjects of positive affective valence, i.e., libidinally gratifying, become organized into good internal objects. Conversely, negative introjects, i.e., those derived from destructive aggression, become organized into bad internal objects. As this organization proceeds, there is an evolution of inner structure by which the internal organization becomes more elaborate and more integrated. Each level of structuralization permits further evolution of structure formation and internalization. The introjects serve an important set of functions, both defensive and developmental, in the mastery of instinct and in the development of inner systems of regulation. It achieves a relative binding of significant amounts of instinctual energy in internal structural forms. 同样，内摄是一个动态的过程。在内摄物的组织中，有一个从 更原始和本能衍生的 到 更整合和复合的 对内摄物的融合 的进程(Greenson, 1954)。这种内摄物的融合模式采用了Kernberg(1966)所称的“内摄物的主动效价”的形式。对正面情感效价(即力比多上的满足)的内摄物，会组织成好的内部客体。相反，负面的内摄物，也就是那些来自破坏性攻击的，会被组织成坏的内部客体。随着组织的发展，内部结构会发生演变，内部组织会变得更加精化和更加整合。每一层次的结构化都允许结构形成和内化的进一步演化。在对本能的掌握和内部调节系统的发展中，这些内摄物提供了一系列重要的功能，包括防御性的和发展性的。它在内部结构形式中实现了大量本能能量的相对结合。 We cannot regard these modifications of the inner world in simply representational terms. Introjection has been described in terms of the assimilation of object representations to the self-representation. This is undoubtedly part of the effect of introjective processes, but it tends to leave out the structuralizing aspects of introjection. The structural perspective regards the introject as a source of intrapsychic influence and quasi-autonomous activity which can substitute for the object as a source of either narcissistic gratification or aggressive impulse. The introject is thus a center of functional organization that possesses its own relative autonomy in the economy of psychic functioning. Even so, they remain tied to instinctual derivatives and relatively susceptible to drive influences. 我们不能用简单的表征方式来看待内心世界的这些改变。内摄被描述为吸收客体表征形成自体表征。这无疑是内摄过程影响的一部分，但它往往忽略了内摄的结构化方面。结构观点认为内摄物是一种内部心理影响和半自主活动的来源，它可以替代客体作为自恋满足或攻击冲动的来源。因此，内摄物是一个功能性组织的中心，在精神功能的经济中拥有自己的相对自主权。即便如此，它们仍然与本能衍生品联系在一起，相对容易受到驱力因素的影响。 Schafer (1968a) has used the term "primary-process presence" to describe the subjective presentation of introjects. They represent fixation points of a more or less primitive level of organization within the psyche. That organization is more primitive when it reflects earlier levels of development, as well as reflecting a susceptibility to regressive pulls which is also increased at more primitive levels. Thus the introjection, functioning within the subject's inner world, reflects a primary process influence even after the transitional type of object representation has been internalized. Where the introjects function at a higher level of organization and are less intensely effected by specifically drive derivatives, further consolidation by identificatory processes is more likely and the susceptibility to regression is minimized. Schafer (1968a)使用了术语“初级过程存在”来描述内摄物的主观呈现。它们代表着心灵中或多或少处于原始层次的组织的固着点。当它反映了早期的发展水平，以及反映了对退行拉力的敏感性时，这个组织就更原始了，退行拉力也在更原始的水平上增加。因此，在主体的内心世界中发挥作用的内摄，反映了一种主要的过程影响，即使在过渡类型的客体表征已经内化之后。当内摄物在更高层次的组织中发挥作用，并较少受到特定驱力衍生物的强烈影响时，认同过程更有可能进一步巩固，退行的敏感性也被最小化。 Related to this aspect of the internal organization of introjects is the whole question of projection. We have observed that the processes of introjection and projection are correlative—and this aspect of their involvement will be taken up more specifically in the consideration of the mechanism of projection itself. But it can be pointed out here that the more primitive the level of organization, the more intense the relationship and influence of drive derivatives, the more susceptible are introjects to subsequent projection. To round off this attempt to define more specifically the nature of introjection and the introjected object, let me quote a somewhat lapidary formula from the previously cited study. The formulation is given there in the following terms. 与内摄物内部组织的这个方面有关的是整个投射的问题。我们已经观察到，投射和投射的过程是相互关联的——在考虑投射本身的机制时，将更具体地考虑它们的这方面的作用。但这里可以指出，组织层次越原始，驱力衍生品的关系和影响越强烈，内摄物就越容易受到后续投射的影响。为了使更具体地定义内摄和内摄客体的性质的尝试圆满结束，让我引用前面引用的研究中一个有点精粹的公式。公式如下所示。 Introjection is a process of internalization through which transitional object relations are replaced by an internal modification of the self in the form of an introject. Introjects are thus primary process presences which enjoy a quasi-autonomous state within the self that permits them to substitute for the transitional object as sources of instinct-related and drive-dependent activity. (Ibid. p. 300). 内摄是一个内化的过程，在这个过程中，过渡性客体关系被自体的内部改变所取代，以内摄物的形式。因此，内摄物是基本过程存在，它在自体中享有准自主的状态，允许它们代替过渡性客体，成为与本能相关和驱力相关的活动的来源。(Ibid. p . 300)。 While these considerations are unavoidably abstract and even abstruse, they do not in any sense rule out the important aspects of our consideration of introjection in relationship to the paranoid process. They provide a rather spare skeleton to which a considerable amount of meat must be added. As Shafer (1960) observed, Freud's original formulation of the notion of the superego was based particularly on his observations of melancholia, obsessional neurosis, and paranoia. The introjective pathology we are concerned with in the present study is not simply a superego pathology. Nonetheless the introjective aspects of it are a primary element. It is our assumption, and at this point in the evolution of this study, our conviction, that the understanding of the paranoid process has a great deal to teach us about the basic processes that are involved not merely in superego formation, but even more broadly in the wider latitude of personality formation. 虽然这些考虑不可避免地是抽象的，甚至是深奥的，但它们并没有在任何意义上排除我们考虑的内摄与偏执过程的重要方面。它们提供了相当空的骨架，必须在骨架上添加相当多的肉。正如Shafer(1960)所观察到的，弗洛伊德关于超我概念的最初构想是基于他对忧郁症、强迫性神经症和偏执症的观察。我们在本研究中所关注的内摄性病理并非简单的超我病理。尽管如此，它的内摄方面是一个基本的元素。这是我们的假设，在这项研究进展的这一点上，也是我们的信念，即，对偏执过程的理解，将使我们获得大量关于基本过程的知识，这些基本过程不仅涉及到超我的形成，而且更广泛地涉及到人格形成的更宽广的纬度。