Mechanism of Pojecion 投射的机制 Some of Anna Freud's comments about projection can serve as a useful jumping off point for some specific reflections about the mechanisms of projection, which Freud, as you remember, left us wondering about. Ms. Freud writes: 安娜弗洛伊德关于投射的一些评论可以作为一个有用的跳板，让我们对投射的机制进行一些具体的思考，你还记得，弗洛伊德让我们对投射的机制感到疑惑。弗洛伊德女士写道： The effect of the mechanism of projection is to break the connection between the ideational representatives of dangerous instinctual impulses and the ego. In this it resembles most closely the process of repression. Other defensive processes, such as displacement, reversal or turning around upon the self, affect the instinctual process itself; repression and projection merely prevent its being perceived. In repression the objectionable idea is thrust back into the id, while in projection it is displaced into the outside world. Another point at which projection resembles repression is that it is not associated with any particular anxiety situation, but may be motivated equally by objective anxiety, superego anxiety, and instinctual anxiety (1936, p. 122). 投射机制的效果是打破危险本能冲动的观念代表与自我之间的联系。在这一点上，它最类似于压抑的过程。其他的防御过程，如置换、反转或攻击除非，都会影响本能过程本身；压抑和投射只是阻止它被感知。在压抑中，令人厌恶的观念被推回到本我中，而在投射中，它被置换到外部世界。投射与压抑相似的另一点是，它并不与任何特定的焦虑情境相关联，而是同样可能由客观焦虑[比如路边冲出一条狗]、超我焦虑[比如你想作弊，但觉得这样不好]和本能焦虑[比如你想作弊，但怕被抓住]所激发（1936，第122页）。 The comparison with repression seems useful in the context of reflection on the defensive functions of projection. We can presume that both defensive maneuvers, repression and projection, serve to alleviate the ego from the threat of internal danger. The hysterical patient represses the instinctual content back into the unconscious; the paranoid displaces it to the outside world. 在反思投射的防御功能时，与压抑的比较似乎是有用的。我们可以推测，压抑和投射这两种防御性的手法，都是为了减轻内部危险对自我的威胁。癔症病人将本能的内容压抑回无意识中；偏执患者将其置换到外部世界。 The immediate question, which such an observation prompts is, "What is it that determines whether or not an ego's defensive response to threat should follow the path of repression or that of projection?" We find ourselves stumped for a reply. Although there does not seem to be any conclusive or decisive response to the query, certain pieces of an answer come to mind. We can think for a moment of the tiny infant who follows the primitive dictates of the pleasure principle and purifies his experience by "projecting" what is unpleasant or disagreeable to the outside. If there is any reality or validity to the principle, then at best we are dealing with primitive precursors of projection rather than with a developed mechanism. 这样的观察所引发的直接问题是："是什么决定了一个自我对威胁的防御性反应应该遵循压抑的道路还是投射的道路？" 我们发现自己陷入了回答的困境。虽然对这个疑问似乎没有任何结论性或决定性的回应，但我们脑海中浮现出某些答案的片段。我们可以想一想那个小小的婴儿，他遵循快乐原则的原始支配，通过把不好的或不愉快的东西 "投射 "到外部来净化自己的经验。如果这个原则有任何现实性或有效性的话，那么我们充其量只是在处理投射的原始前兆，而不是在处理一种发达的机制。 The basic principle that the infant avoids what is unpleasant and seeks to incorporate what is pleasant seems inviolable. The basic model for this may be primarily oral, in terms of spitting out or vomiting out what is unpleasant or repulsive, or it may be based on primarily anal components—the anal expulsion of powerful and poisonous fecal content. But the notion of attributing to objects what is internally sensed as painful or repugnant requires some further degree of development, at least to the point where some separation begins to take place between the inchoate self and the first glimmerings of objects. At this level, if we can begin to speak of precursors of projection, it would seem that we are dealing with the basic tendency of the organism to minimize pain by referring the pain to an outside source, rather than by holding it within. 婴儿避开不愉快的东西，设法纳入愉快的东西，这一基本原则似乎是不可侵犯的。这方面的基本模式可能主要是口欲期的，即把不愉快的或令人厌恶的东西吐出来或呕出来，也可能主要是基于肛欲期的元素--肛门排出有力的和有毒的粪便内容。但是，把内部感觉到的痛苦或厌恶的东西归于客体的概念，需要某种进一步的发展程度，至少要发展到在内隐的自体和客体的最初的一丝感觉之间开始发生某种分离的程度。在这个层面上，如果我们可以开始谈论投射的前兆，那么我们似乎是在处理有机体的基本倾向，即通过将痛苦引向外部来源，而不是将痛苦憋在体内，从而将痛苦降到最低。 I am reminded at this point of the first glimmerings of the reality principle, as Freud described it. With regard to the inner yield of pleasure, the infant ego learns gradually that the adequate satisfaction depends on an external source for the attainment of pleasure. But that gratification cannot be immediate and must tolerate a certain degree of frustration and pain in waiting on the response of the reality. Thus, in even its early stages of development, the infantile ego learns to delay gratification and to tolerate pain in the service of gaining a more satisfactory real gratification from the real object; it must also learn in the same developmental course that the external object is the source of the frustration and pain and denial of its wishes. Thus the external object becomes the focus and object for ambivalence. 在这一点上，我想起了弗洛伊德所描述的现实原则的第一缕曙光。关于快乐的内在屈服，婴儿的自我逐渐了解到，充分的满足取决于获得快乐的外部来源。但这种满足不可能是立即的，必须忍受一定程度的挫折和痛苦，以等待现实的反应。因此，即使在发展的早期阶段，婴儿的自我也学会了延迟满足和忍受痛苦，以服务于从现实客体那里获得更满意的现实满足；它还必须在同一发展过程中学会，外部客体是他的愿望的挫折和痛苦以及否定的来源。于是，外部客体就成了矛盾性的焦点和对象。