Belief Systems 信念系统 It is at this point in our analysis of Fred's pathology that we begin to run into trouble. One important aspect of the paranoid construction is that it derives from and is generated by inner subjective needs. Inner subjective needs are by and large idiosyncratic, and are relatively immune to consensual validation. There is a continuum that stretches from the completely idiosyncratic and subjective, which we feel comfortable in labeling as "crazy," to the completely consensual or objective which we generally regard as "realistic." This gradation can be easily seen in belief systems of various kinds. A completely subjective and idiosyncratic religious belief system will be regarded as delusional, while a highly consensually validated religious belief system such as is found in any organized religion is accepted as normal. 在这一点上，我们对弗雷德（Fred）的病理分析开始遇到了麻烦。偏执建构的一个重要方面是它源于并产生于内部主观需求。内部主观需求在很大程度上是特殊的，并且对共识验证具有相对的免疫力。从完全特殊和主观的东西（我们将其标记为“疯狂”）到完全共识或客观的东西（我们通常认为“现实”）之间存在一个连续的过程。在各种信仰体系中，这种渐变很容易看到。一个完全主观和特殊的宗教信仰体系将被视为妄想，而像在任何有组织的宗教中所发现的那样，高度共识验证的宗教信仰体系被认为是正常的。 The problem that Fred's paranoid construction raises is twofold: on one hand his construction is shared by large numbers of individuals in our society to varying degrees, and on the other hand there is a considerable amount of verification in reality for elements of the construction. The rhetoric and rationale that form a part of Fred's paranoid construction are standard stuff for large numbers of revolutionary-minded youth in our society—student radicals, SDS, the Weathermen, Negro militants, Black Panthers, etc. Consequently there is a considerable amount of consensual validation for Fred's construction. It forms a sort of paranoid construction of the left, and I do not intend to ignore the equally paranoid construction of the right that also contributes so significantly to current social problems and unrest. 弗雷德（Fred）的偏执建构引发的问题是双重的：一方面，他的建构在不同程度上被我们社会中的大量个体所共有；另一方面，建构中的元素在现实中有大量的验证。构成弗雷德偏执建构一部分的修辞和理论，对于社会中许多有革命思想的年轻人来说是标准的，比如激进的学生，SDS[学生争取民主社会组织]，Weathermen[美国的一个激进左派组织]，黑人激进分子，黑豹党等。因此，弗雷德的建构得到了大量的共识验证。它形成了一种左翼的偏执建构，我并不打算忽视右翼的偏执建构，它也对当前的社会问题和动荡做出了重大贡献。 Moreover, Fred's construction was not without verifying elements. Government policies have a tremendous impact on human lives, and they are made in a relative vacuum of influence from private citizens. Moreover, they are made in relation to large social units, never in terms of the subjective needs and hopes and desires of individuals. Young men are drafted against their wishes; they are sent to Vietnam and get killed. Society and its institutions do set rules and regulations that at times violate the individual, and in bureaucratic style fail to make reasonable exceptions to the rule. There was a burst of fire at Kent State and at Jackson State, and people were killed. The police are brutal at times, and they do beat and even sometimes kill individuals. There is racial injustice and prejudice, and underprivileged groups are in fact often caught in the grip of circumstances—economic and social—over which they have little or no control—helpless victims. 此外，弗雷德的建构并非没有验证元素。政府政策对人们的生活产生了巨大影响，而且这些政策是在不受普通公民影响的相对真空环境中制定的。此外，它们的制定与大型社会单位有关，从未考虑个人的主观需求、希望和愿望。年轻人违背自己的意愿被征兵；他们被派往越南并丧生。社会和其机构确实制定了规则和条例，有时会侵犯到个人，并以官僚的方式未能对规则作出合理的例外。肯特州立大学和杰克逊州立大学发生了枪击事件，造成人员死亡。警察有时是残忍的，他们确实殴打甚至有时杀死个人。存在种族不公和偏见，弱势群体实际上经常陷入他们几乎或根本无法控制的经济和社会环境中——成为无助的受害者。 All of these aspects of reality were taken by Fred as verifications and justifications of his paranoid view. And the problem, of course, was that he was right! Up to a point. The problem is where to fix that point—and what to do about it—both in understanding what is involved and in attempts at dealing with it therapeutically. This raises a problem that is implicit in the paranoid delusion itself: to what extent and in what way is the paranoid construction a distortion or corruption of reality, and to what extent is it verifiable in reality? Understanding and treating the paranoid process require that these elements be disentangled. 弗雷德将这些现实的各个方面都视为对他偏执观点的验证和证明。当然，问题是他是对的！在某种程度上。问题在于如何确定这一点——以及在理解和尝试治疗处理方面该做什么。这就提出了一个偏执妄想本身所隐含的问题：偏执建构在何种程度上以何种方式扭曲或破坏了现实，以及在何种程度上可以在现实中得到验证？理解和治疗偏执过程需要解开这些要素。 Theoretically this question raises the issue of how intrapsychic, subjectively generated cognitive organizations like the paranoid construction are given a context and a basis for verification in various forms of social pathology. We will have occasion to return to this question in a variety of contexts, but it remains a fundamental one, and one which must be met in dealing with the problem of paranoia. It is also one which has profound implications for the understanding of social processes and social patterns of interaction. In Fred's case, it was necessary to draw a line between what was derived from his own pathology and what was derived from the pathology of the society around him. It was necessary to draw a line between the aspects of his rage which were derived from infantile frustrations and resentments and those which reflected his sincere outrage at the injustice and inhuman callousness he saw around him. 从理论上讲，这个问题引发了这样一个问题：如何在各种形式的社会病理学中为主观上产生的认知组织（如偏执构造）提供一个背景和验证基础。我们将在各种情况下回到这个问题上来，但它仍然是一个基本问题，也是处理偏执问题时必须面对的问题。它对于理解社会过程和社会互动模式也具有深远的意义。在弗雷德的情况下，有必要在他自己的病理和他周围社会的病理之间划清界限。有必要在他的愤怒中划清界限，哪些方面源于幼稚的挫折和怨恨，哪些方面反映了他对周围看到的不公正和冷酷无情的真诚愤怒。