Paranoid Cognition 偏执认知 One of the dominating characteristics of paranoid cognitive behavior is the intensity of attention that paranoids bring to perceptual activity. They seem to be always actively and intensely searching the environment, scanning like a radar warning system. It involves a supicious, rigid, and tensely directed attention. Shapiro(1965) has described this mode of attention as "rigidly intentional." In part the paranoid is actively scanning his environment to pick up bits of information or data which will lend credence to his inner system. The rigidity of his perceptual anticipations, driven from within by the pressure of drive derivatives and drive-dependent processes, fosters a tendency to selectivity in attention and allows him to discredit or reinterpret incoming data in terms of inner frames of reference. This may set the stage for processes of denial as well, as we have seen. In any case, it introduces, whether by denial or interpretive distortion,a highly selective view of the world which supports and confirms the inner apperception which gives meaning and coherence to the patient's experience. The patient's intellectual resources, his native intelligence, his acuteness, his attentiveness, are mobilized not in the service of reality testing but in the service of reality distortion. Attention becomes rigidly narrowed in focus and perceptual activity becomes a suspicious search for confirming evidence of an underlying bias. Shapiro(1965) refers to such evidence as a "clue" — that piece of confirming evidence which may seem insignificant to others, but which the investigator can seize on as providing convincing proof of his inner conviction. The Sherlock Holmes model expresses this aspect of the paranoid attitude quite well, but Holmes' clues were consistent with the full body of available evidence and could be accepted by consensus of even Watson. But the paranoid clue disregards other modifying or corrective aspects of reality, and its significance is acceptable only to the patient — consensus is not possible. 偏执认知行为的主要特征之一是偏执者对知觉活动的高度关注。他们似乎总是积极和强烈地搜索环境，像雷达预警系统一样进行扫描。它包括一种怀疑的、僵硬的、紧张的定向注意力。夏皮罗(1965)将这种注意模式描述为“僵硬地有意的”。在某种程度上，偏执者正在积极地扫描他的环境，以获取一些信息或数据，这些信息或数据将为他的内部系统提供信任。在驱力衍生品和驱力依赖的过程的压力下，他的感知预期从内部变得僵硬，这助长了注意力选择性的倾向，并允许他根据内部参照框架拒绝相信或重新解释进入的数据。正如我们所看到的，这也可能为否认过程设置了舞台。无论如何，它都引入了一种高度选择性的世界观，无论是通过否认还是解释扭曲，这种世界观支持并证实了内在统觉，这种统觉赋予病人的体验以意义和连贯性[统觉（apperception）是指知觉内容和倾向蕴含着人们已有的经验、知识、兴趣、态度，因而不再限于对事物个别属性的感知。]。病人的智力资源，他天生的智力，他的敏锐，他的专注，不是为现实检验服务，而是为现实扭曲服务。注意力在焦点上变得非常狭窄，而知觉活动变成了一个可疑的搜索，以搜索底层偏见的有利证据。夏皮罗(1965)把这样的证据称为“线索”，即一条有利证据，虽然这条证据在别人看来无足轻重，但研究者却可以抓住它，作为自己内心信念的有力证据。夏洛克·福尔摩斯模型很好地表达了偏执态度的这一方面，但福尔摩斯的线索与现有的全部证据是一致的，甚至华生也能一致接受。但偏执线索忽视了现实的其他修改或纠正方面，其意义仅为患者所接受——不可能达成共识。 The paranoid construction is a form of interpretive thinking. It is the essential cognitive constituent which lies behind the formation and persistence of delusions. The whole problem of reality testing and judgment of reality is closely related to the matter of the paranoid construction, but we can do no more here than indicate the significance of the relation. Knowledge of reality does not rest on simple perceptions alone, but involves a judgment of some sort. This is true even at the level of asserting the reality of concrete objects. It becomes even more applicable at more complex levels of reality testing, when complex interpersonal or social variables are involved. Knowledge of reality always involves an interpretive judgment, but when the matter of judgment becomes more distanced from the level of simple physical perception, reality becomes increasingly a function of judgment rather than perception. Such judgment is interpretive in that it is never a matter of simple mechanical reaction to the impression of stimuli. Reality is grasped and acknowledged in reference to meanings, which are at once resident in the structure of reality but which are constituted subjectively by interpretive and symbolic processes in the mind. The data of experience must be organized and integrated into a coherent and meaningful context before they can be used as the basis for decision and action. The answer to the question "Is it real?" rests in part on the extent to which that part of experience can be integrated with the rest of the subject's inner frame of reference. 偏执的建构是一种解释性思维。它是错觉形成和持续背后的基本认知成分。现实检验与现实判断的整个问题与偏执建构的问题密切相关，但我们在这里只能指出这种关系的重要性。对现实的认识不仅依赖于简单的知觉，而且还涉及某种判断。即使在断言具体对象的真实性方面也是如此。当涉及到复杂的人际或社会变量时，它在更复杂的现实检验级别上变得更加适用。对现实的认识总是包含着一种解释性的判断，但当判断的内容与简单的物理感知的层次越来越远时，现实就越来越成为判断的功能，而不是感知的功能。这种判断是解释性的，因为它从来不是对刺激印象的简单机械反应。现实是根据意义来把握和认识的，这些意义既存在于现实的结构中，又由思维中的解释性和符号性过程主观地构成。必须将经验数据组织起来并整合进一个连贯和有意义的环境中，然后才能将其作为决策和行动的基础。“这是真的吗?”这个问题的答案部分取决于这部分经验能在多大程度上与主体内在参照框架的其他部分整合在一起。 That context of meaning is normally developed through a gradual assimilation of interpretive norms in the course of development and a continual process of consensual validation with other humans, who face the same realities and can correct their interpretive judgments by continual feedback and comparison with other sets of perceptions and judgments. The paranoid is not altogether in that position. The inner necessities which drive him to a suspicious guardedness not only force his attention to a rigid intentionality and directedness but also make it impossible for him to entertain that degree of mutual communication of his inner convictions which would allow some degree of consensual validation. His judgments, therefore, are made without the benefit of such socially derived cognitive correctives. The constant threat that is posed to his sense of autonomy and self-esteem makes the inner system and his conviction of it terribly important, so that his efforts are directed to the preservation, reinforcement, and enlargment of that system. The primacy of the system, together with the disengagement from validating mechanisms, gives rise to the paranoid construction. 意义的上下文通常是在发展过程中，以及与其他人(他们面临同样的现实并能通过不断反馈和与其他认知和判断进行判断来修正他们的解释性判断)持续的双方确认过程中，通过逐步吸收解释性规范发展出来的。偏执者并不完全处于这种状态。内在的需要驱使他产生怀疑的戒心，这不仅迫使他把注意力集中在僵硬的意向性和方向性上，而且也使他不可能接受他内在信念在那种程度上的相互交流，而这种交流将允许某种程度上的一致认可。因此，他的判断并没有得益于这种社会衍生的认知矫正。对他的自主性和自尊所构成的持续威胁使他的内在系统及他对其的信念变得极其重要，因此他的努力方向是保护、加强和扩大这个系统。系统的首要性，以及对验证机制的脱离，导致了偏执的建构。 By the "paranoid construction" I am specifically designating that cognitive process by which incoming impressions are organized into a pattern of meaning which is primarily validated by reference to subjective needs rather than objective evidence or consensual agreement. That inner pattern of meaning receives the primary cathexis of narcissistic libido, so that its preservation and reinforcement are closely affiliated with the subject's preservation of self and self-esteem. The pressure to maintain this inner perspective forces the individual to adopt a suspicious attitude towardall fresh input. New information is always a danger to the system, in that it offers the threat of contradiction or refutation. It must be treated in such fashion as to allow the inner system to persist without challenge or confrontation. Incoming input may thus be handled by mechanisms of selection, distortion, or denial as we have indicated, insofar as that is required to bring the input into congruence with the inner pattern, or to discredit or avoid its lack of congruence. There is a striving for coherency of experience, in which the criteria of meaning and receptivity derive from the subjectively apprehended pole of experience. The inner meanings, which are thus constructed and defended, are at once a derivative and an answer to inner emotional needs — consequently the process of testing and validation does not follow the usual accepted canons for scientific evaluation and interpretation of evidence. The distortion and divergence from reality that this process introduces is most apparent in psychotic delusions in which the processes of selection, distortion, and denial are most apparently operative. 通过“偏执的建构”这个术语，我特别指出了一种认知过程，通过这种认知过程，传入的印象被组织成一种意义模式，这种模式主要是通过参考主观需求而不是客观证据或共识来验证的。这种内在的意义模式接受了自恋力比多的主要精神投入，因此它的保存和强化与主体对自我和自尊的保存紧密相关。保持这种内在视角的压力迫使个人对所有新的输入采取怀疑的态度。新信息总是对系统构成威胁，因为它提供了矛盾或反驳的威胁。它必须以这样一种方式处理，即允许内部系统在没有挑战或冲突的情况下持续存在。因此，正如我们所指出的，输入可以通过选择、扭曲或否认的机制来处理，只要这是使输入与内在模式一致所必需的，或者是拒绝相信或回避内在模式缺乏一致性所必需的。有一种对经验一致性的追求，其中意义和接受性的标准来自于对经验的主观理解的一极。内在的意义，因此被构造和辩护，是对内在情感需求的派生和回答——因此检验和验证的过程不遵循通常被接受的科学评估和解释证据的准则。这一过程所带来的扭曲和与现实的背离在精神病性妄想中最为明显，在这种妄想中，选择、扭曲和否认的过程最为明显。