Part 37

Amongst these acquired unitary systems there are certain ones which are of preëminent importance for the personality in the determination of mental behavior. I refer to those complexes known as the _sentiments_. By this term, as we have seen, is understood the organization of an acquired disposition—the idea of an object—or complex of such dispositions (the psychic whole of idea plus its “meaning” derived from the setting of associated experiences) with one or more innate emotional dispositions. It must not be overlooked for one moment that a sentiment is something more than the organization of an emotion or other affect with an idea. There is nothing novel or fruitful in such a limited conception of the structure of a sentiment as this. A sentiment in its structure is the organization of an idea and meaning with an emotional instinct which has an aim and end which the instinct strives to attain and which alone satisfies the urge of the instinct. Such a structure has great significance and the conception is a most fruitful one. For because of this structure the excitation of the idea necessarily involves the excitation of the instinct and the impulse of the latter determines behavior in reference to the object of the idea and carries the instinct to fruition. Thus if the sentiment be one of love the excitation of the instincts organized with the object determines through their urge the behavior to cherish or possess the object of the sentiment. And the attainment of this aim alone satisfies it. If the sentiment be one of apprehension of an object the instinct of fear incites behavior to escape from the danger contained in the meaning of the object. A sentiment in the hierarchy of units is a unitary system built up by the organization (through experience) of primary units with a secondary unitary complex (idea, meaning, etc.).

The importance of the sentiments in the dynamics of personality and therefore in the determination of mental and bodily behavior I have already dwelt upon (Lecture XV). But there is one sentiment which plays such an important rôle both in these respects and in that unitary system which we know as the empirical self, or consciousness of self that something more needs to be said about it. This sentiment is that which McDougall has termed the “self-regarding sentiment” which is intimately bound up with the idea or conception of the empirical self, and both should be considered together. It is only by regarding, as it seems to me, the conception or idea of the empirical self as a secondary unitary complex organized by experience that we can approach the solution of the problem of the self and understand the phenomenon of two selves in one personality, as so often occurs in multiple personality.

The self-regarding sentiment, according to McDougall’s theoretical analysis—and I may say his analysis has been confirmed by my own practical analyses of concrete cases—has structurally organized within it by experience the two opposing instincts, self-abasement and self-assertion, but either may be the dominating one. The idea or conception of self, proper, is, according to the theory, a complex and integrated whole organized by experience like the self-regarding sentiment. “McDougall has argued,” to quote what I have written in a study of multiple personality,[263] “and I think soundly ‘that the idea of self and the self-regarding sentiment are essentially social products; that their development is effected by constant interplay between personalities, between the self and society; that, for this reason, the complex conception of self thus attained implies constant reference to others and to society in general, and is, in fact, not merely a conception of self, but always one’s self in relation to other selves.’ But, as I would argue, this formulation must be considerably broadened. Every sentiment (and therefore the self-regarding sentiment) has roots in and is consequently related to what has gone before. And the experiences of what has gone before of the self, i.e., what has been previously experienced (ideally or realistically) by the individual in reference to the object of the sentiment, determines the attitude of mind and point of view towards that object, and is responsible for the organization of the object and instinct into a sentiment. The sentiment is the resultant and the expression of those antecedent experiences. They form its setting and give it meaning beyond the mere emotional tone. You cannot separate sentiment, conceived as a linked object and emotional instinct, from such a setting. They form a psychic whole. This is not only theoretically true, but actual dealings with pathological sentiments (in which the principle can be most clearly studied), called phobias and other emotional obsessions, bring out this intimate relation between the sentiment and the conserved setting of antecedent experiences. Such practical dealings also show not only that the sentiment is the outgrowth of and the expression of this setting, but that by changing the setting the sentiment can be correspondingly altered.... I want to emphasize that in the dynamic functioning of a sentiment the setting coöperates in maintaining and carrying it to the fruition and satisfaction of its aim.”

So far as concerns the incorporation of the two instincts, self-abasement and self-assertion, “McDougall with keen insight and analysis, has argued that the self-regarding sentiment is organized with these two innate dispositions, but in different degrees in different individuals, and with the growth of the mind one may replace the other in the adaptation of the individual to the changing environment. Taking two extreme types, he draws a picture of the proud, arrogant, self-assertive, domineering person, with the feeling of masterful superiority, and angry resentment of criticism and control, and who knows no shame and is indifferent to moral approval and disapproval. In this personality the instincts of self-assertion and anger are the dominating innate dispositions of the self-regarding sentiment. On the other hand we have the type of the submissive, dependent character, with a feeling of inferiority, when the contrary disposition is the dominating one. McDougall’s analysis was beautifully illustrated in the case of Miss Beauchamp by two personalities, BI and BIV, fragments of the original self, which were actual specimens from real life of his theoretic types. Again McDougall’s theoretic analysis of the conception of self, showing the idea to be one ‘always of one’s self in relation to other selves,’ is concretely illustrated and substantiated by the dissection of this mind effected by trauma.”

The study of another case, that of “Maria” furnished the same results as respects the two personalities that were manifested, as did that of “B. C. A.”

As to the conception of the empirical self and as “an important addition to this theory both from a structural and dynamic point of view, I would insist again that the complex conception of self includes a setting of mental experiences of much wider range, in which the idea of self is incorporated and which gives the idea meaning. The range of this setting extends beyond ‘other selves’ and ‘society in general’ and may include almost any of life’s experiences.” By way of illustration let us take the two selves known as the “Saint” (BI) and the “Realist” (BIV) in the case of Miss Beauchamp. "Concretely and more correctly the psychological interpretation of the ‘reference to others and society in general,’ of the relation of one’s self to other selves, would in this particular instance be as follows: the Saint’s conception of self (with the self-regarding sentiment) was related to an ideal world and ideal selves contained in religious conceptions; and hence it became organized in a larger setting which gave it a meaning of divine perfection such as is obtained, or aspired to by saints, and in which were incorporated the emotional dispositions of awe, reverence, love, self-abasement, etc. This conception was not a product of, or related to the social environment. Rather it was the product of an ideal world. She, as has been said, lived in a world of idealism, oblivious of the realities round about her, which she saw not ‘clearly and truly’ but as they were colored by her imagination. Her idea of self thus became the ‘saintly sentiment’ of self-perfection.

“On the other hand the conception of self in BIV, the Realist, was related to and set in the realities of this social world as they clearly are, the world of her objective environment. And in this conception of self the instinctive dispositions of self-assertion and anger contributed the promptings and motive force to dominate these realities and bend them to her will.”

It must be an obvious conclusion from the numerous and multiform subconscious phenomena which were cited in previous lectures that all the unitary and complexes and systems which enter into the composite structure of personality do not necessarily emerge into awareness. Some function subconsciously and in this way determine conscious mental processes and behavior. Many remain conserved in the unconscious and have only a potential reality in that they remain latent but susceptible of being awakened into activity. It is also true that in the course of the growth of the personality many become modified by experience and metamorphosed into new sentiments, new ideals, new desires, new apprehensions, new meanings, etc.

The necessity for adaptation of the personality to the realities of life necessarily gives rise to conflicts, for the urges of some unitary complexes cannot be satisfied, and some are incompatible with the situations which reality presents, or with one another. A practical solution of the problem is compulsory. Compensation is sought. Sometimes compensation or compromise is successfully attained; sometimes it is not. Or the solution may be accepted and the urge of a rebellious system incompatible with the demands of reality is suppressed by voluntary or automatic repression. When neither compensation nor compromise is attained, or when the situation is not accepted and the rebellious urge continues, then disruption or disarrangement of the personality may follow with such resulting phenomena as have been already described. Integrated systems may become disintegrated or dissociated, permitting of independent autonomous functioning of conflicting systems. And of the unitary systems taking part in such conflicts one or more may, as we have seen, function subconsciously. Furthermore, as observation shows, dissociated complexes may take on growth independently of the integrated systems of the personal consciousness and thus create large subconscious systems. On the other hand both one or more primary units (innate dispositions) and secondary unitary complexes and systems (acquired dispositions) may by the force of conflicts be completely repressed and cease to function within the personality. Thus, for example, certain instincts may be suppressed and systematic amnesia and other defects be produced. And so on.

Without pursuing further this exposition of the empirical personality or going into details, it would seem that some such conception of the structure of personality as that of which I have given a mere outline will alone satisfy the phenomena actually observed under normal and abnormal conditions. Indeed the theory would seem to be a compelling induction from the phenomena derived from clinical observation and experiment.

Against this preliminary sketch of the structure and dynamic mechanisms of the normal personality as a background I will in the next lecture present a study of a case of dissociated and multiple personality, as the alterations of structure and the dynamic manifestations observed in cases of this kind, on the one hand, concretely illustrate the principles involved, and, on the other, present some of the most important data on which the theory is founded.

Footnote 261:

“Intelligence tests” therefore do not afford tests of character which is the most important element of personality from a sociological point of view. (See “Character vs. Intelligence in Personality Studies” by Dr. Guy Fernald, _Jour. Abnormal Psychology_, Vol. XV, No. 1.)

Footnote 262:

Indeed I cannot see that mental “disposition” has any reality excepting so far as it is derived from its correlated physiological disposition. (See p. 266.)

Footnote 263:

Miss Beauchamp: “The Theory of the Psychogenesis of Multiple Personality”; _Journal of Abnormal Psychology_, Vol. XV, Nos. 2-3; pp. 108, 120-121.

LECTURE XVIII THE PSYCHOGENESIS OF MULTIPLE PERSONALITY[264] THE CASE OF B. C. A.

I

As an introduction let me say that in a previous lecture (The Unconscious, Lecture VIII) I pointed out that in a general way alteration of personality is effected through the primary organization by experience and later coming into dominating activity of particular unitary systems of ideas with their affects, on the one hand, and the displacement by dissociation or inhibition of other conflicting systems on the other. In slighter degrees and when transient this alteration may be regarded as a mood. When the alteration is more enduring, and so marked by contrast with the preceding and normal condition as to obtrusively alter the character and behavior of the individual and his capacity for adjustment to his environment, we have a pathological condition. When the alteration is slight and affects few systems it may be easily overlooked; or when it is accompanied, as it often is, by physiological disturbances, it may be so masked by them as to be mistaken for so-called neurasthenia. It is when the dissociation is so comprehensive as to deprive the individual of memory of his previous phase of personality, or of certain acquired knowledge or other particular experiences that the personality is easily recognized as a dissociated one. When the inhibiting or repressing force that induces dissociation ceases to be effective, that is when the dissociated systems come again into activity and repress the temporarily dominant systems, then the individual returns to his normal condition (in which he may or may not remember the dissociated state), just as a person returns to his habitual character after the passing of a mood. We may speak of the two phases—the normal and the altered one—as constituting together _multiple personality_. As these two phases may continue to alternate with one another they are also alternating personalities. The second or altered state is also sometimes called a _secondary personality_. There may be several such secondary personalities which may alternate with each other or the normal personality.

It should be noted that the formation of a secondary personality is primarily the result of two processes, _dissociation_ and _synthesis_ though it is subject to _secondary growth_ through various processes. As a result of the first process, dissociation, systems of thought, ideas, memories, emotions and dispositions previously habitual in the individual may cease to take part in the affected person’s mental processes. The influence of these systems with their conative tendencies is therefore no longer for the time being in play.

When we pass in review a large number of cases, we find that the systems of ideas, which (through the dissociating process) cease to take part in personality, may be quite various. One or more “sides” to one’s character, for instance, may vanish, and the individual may exhibit always a single side on all occasions; or the ethical systems built up and conserved by early pedagogical, social, and environmental training may cease to take part in the mental processes and regulate conduct; or, again, the ideas which pertain to the lighter side of life and its social enjoyments may be lost and only the more serious attributes of mind retained. There may even be amnesia in consequence of dissociation for chronological epochs of the individual’s life, or for certain particular episodes, or for certain specific knowledge, such as educational acquirements (mathematics, Greek, Latin, music, literature, etc., or knowledge of a trade or profession, and even of language). Amnesia alone, however, does not constitute alteration of personality strictly speaking; for a person may have complete loss of memory for certain specific experiences without true alteration of character. It is of important significance, as we shall see, that the dissociated or inhibited[265] systems may include emotions, instincts and innate dispositions.

Examination of recorded cases shows too that besides mental memories, physiological functions may be involved in the dissociation. Thus there may be loss of sensation in its various forms, and of the special senses, or of the power of movement (paralysis), or of visceral functions (gastric, sexual, etc.). Dissociation may, then, involve quite large parts of the personality including very precise and definite physiological and psychological functions. We see examples of these different dissociations in numerous cases.

As to the mechanism by which pathological dissociation is effected, it may be well to point out here that there is no reason to suppose that it is anything more than an exaggeration of the normal mechanism by which, on the one hand, mental processes are temporarily inhibited from entering the field of consciousness, and, on the other, physiological functions are normally suppressed and prevented from taking part in the psychophysiological economy. (For instance, the suppression of the gastro-intestinal functions by an emotional discharge.) Every mental process involves the repression of some conflicting process; otherwise all would be chaos in the mind. And every physiological process involves some repression of another process. The movements of walking involve the inhibition alternatively of the flexor and extensor muscles according as which is active in the movement.

This principle is conspicuous in absent mindedness and voluntary attention when every antagonistic or irrelevant thought and even consciousness of the environment is prevented by a conflicting force from entering the field of consciousness. In other words, every mental process involves a conflict and inhibition: in physiological terms a raising of the threshold of the antagonistic mental process in consequence of which it cannot function unless the stimulus be increased. This is a normal mechanism and process. The conditions which determine absolute and continuous dissociation or inhibition become the object of study.

By the second process, synthesis, particular unitary systems of ideas with the conative tendencies of their feeling tones rise to the surface out of the unconscious and become synthesized with the perceptions, and such memories and other mental systems and faculties of the individual as are retained. Thus it may be that unitary dispositions, sentiments and systems belonging to a particular “side” of the character—the amiable or the brutal, the unselfish or the selfish, the ungenerous or the generous, the practical or the idealistic, the literary or the business, the religious or worldly, the youthful and gay, or the mature and serious, etc., to any side may become uppermost and be the dominant trait of the secondary personality. Or it may be that the systems of ideas, disposition, etc., belonging to childhood and long outgrown, but conserved nevertheless in the unconscious, may be resurrected and becoming synthesized with other systems form a personality childish in character. Or, again, sentiments, thoughts, dispositions, tendencies, instincts which, though intimately belonging to the individual, have been restrained, repressed, concealed from the world for one reason or another, may, being set free through dissociation from the repressing thoughts, rise to the surface and take part in the synthesis of the new personality.

In other words there is a rearrangement and readjustment of the innate dispositions and those deposited by the experiences of life which go to form personality. Some by the process of dissociation are expelled from the personal synthesis; some which had been previously expelled (repressed) by education, maturity of character, direct volition, and other processes of mental development are brought back into it.

It is obvious that when such rearrangements and readjustments have occurred the mental reactions of the individual will vary largely from what they were before. The reaction to the environment will become altered. When systems which give rise to the habitual modes of thought are dissociated, naturally the reactions of the individual will not be influenced by them but by those of the new synthesis, and the character will be correspondingly changed. Inasmuch as out of the great storehouse of the unconscious any number of combinations of systems may be arranged, it is obvious that any number of secondary personalities may be formed in the same person. As many as ten or twelve have been observed.

A study of cases which have come under my personal observation, and the reports to be found in the literature of those cases of multiple personality which have been studied with sufficient intensity and exhaustiveness, allow these general and preliminary statements, which are little more than descriptive of the facts, to be verified.[266] One of the best examples is the case of B. C. A. which I had an opportunity of studying over a long period of time, and to which reference has been frequently made. I shall take this as the object of our study in psychogenesis.[267]