ON THE BORDERS OF PATHOLOGY 在病理学的边缘 In our consideration of the paranoid process to this point, our focus has been primarily on the pathological aspects of the process. Even in the consideration of pathology, however, it becomes increasingly clear that we are dealing with a fundamental process in the human psyche that has ramifications and applications beyond the realm of mere pathological distortion. It becomes increasingly clear that what we are conceptualizing has definite lines of continuity and implication, which extend into the realm of relatively healthy and normal human psychological functioning. 到此刻，在我们对偏执过程的考虑中，我们主要关注的是这个过程的病理方面。然而，即使考虑到病理学，我们也越来越清楚地看到，我们正在处理的是人类心理中的一个基本过程，它的影响和应用超出了单纯的病理扭曲的范畴。越来越清楚的是，我们正在概念化的东西有明确的连续性和含义，延伸到相对健康和正常的人类心理功能领域。 We can begin at this point, then, to turn away from the clinical and the pathological and begin to focus on some of the broader implications of the paranoid process. The line that separates the normal from the abnormal cannot be clearly drawn. It is a fuzzy, wavering, broken line. In our consideration particularly of the paranoid mechanisms above, we have seen at a number of points that the line that separates the operation of such mechanisms from normal psychic processes, both emotional and cognitive, is not easily determined. If introjection can be delineated as a process by which pathology is instituted and maintained, it can also be regarded as an essential part of the normal psychic development through which every human being must pass. If projection can be seen to be a form of defense which saves the inner world from the torment of intolerable or destructive affects, it can also be seen to be not only an important element in psychic development, but a pattern of experience which is the common stuff of childhood and becomes an important component of human experience more generally. If the paranoid construction can be articulated in its pathological dimensions as an essential aspect of the cognitive formation of paranoid states, it likewise can be seen to operate with relative efficacy in a wide spectrum of human cognitive endeavors. 我们可以从这一点开始，然后，离开临床和病理学的角度，开始关注偏执过程的一些更广泛的含义。把正常和异常分开的那条线不能清楚地画出来。这是一条模糊的、动摇的、破碎的线。在我们考虑上面的偏执机制时，我们已经在许多点上看到，将这些机制的运作与正常的心理过程(包括情感和认知)分开的界线是不容易确定的。如果内摄可以被描述为一个过程，通过这个过程，病理被建立和保持，那么它也可以被视为一个正常的精神发展的重要组成部分，这个过程每个人都必须经历。如果投射可以被视为一种防御方式，它可以从无法忍受或破坏性情绪的折磨下拯救内部世界，那么它不仅可以被视为心理发展的一个重要元素,也可以被看作一种经验模式，这种经验对于童年来说是普通的东西，并且它会成为更广泛的人类经验的一个重要部分。如果偏执建构可以在其病理维度中作为偏执状态认知形成的一个基本方面来阐述，那么它同样可以被视为在人类认知活动的广泛范围内具有相对有效性。 Perhaps it is simply a problem of categorization. What the clinical psychiatrist classifies as pathological or abnormal, may in common human experience and the transactions of everyday life pass for normal and adaptive functioning. Perhaps we psychiatrists see too much pathology—or perhaps others see too little. Perhaps such thinking can only serve to confuse the normal and the abnormal. Some may see in this approach a form of psychiatric reductionism whereby the range of normal and higher human capacities are explained in terms of psychopathology. Some may object that there is an inherent danger in such an attitude of mind which studies the normal from the perspective of the abnormal, namely, that what is seen is only that aspect of the normal which reveals its parallels or continuities with the abnormal. 也许这只是一个简单的分类问题。临床精神病学家归类为病态或异常的，可能在人类的日常经验和日常生活的事务中，被认为是正常和适应功能。也许我们精神病医生看到的病理太多了，也许其他人看到的太少了。也许这样的想法只会混淆正常和不正常。有些人可能会从这种方法中看到一种精神还原论，通过这种方式，正常的和更高级的人类能力的范围可以用精神病理学来解释。有些人可能会反对说，从不正常的角度来研究正常的，这种心态存在着一种内在的危险，也就是说，所看到的只是正常中的那一面，即那些它揭示了它与不正常平行或连续的那一面。 I would assume these all to be justifiable questions. But I would also remind myself, as we enter this new phase of our study, that a continual question that I must present to myself—and I would hope the reader would present to himself—is why it is that of these processes, which are so similar and continuous in organization and function, we choose to regard some as normal and adaptive and we choose to regard others as pathological and maladaptive. 我认为这些都是合理的问题。但当我们进入这个新的研究阶段时，我也会提醒自己，这里有一个我必须不断问自己的问题(我希望读者也能问自己)，即，为什么我们要把这些过程看作正常和适应性的，而把另外一些过程看作是病态的和适应不良的，要知道，他们在组织和功能上是如此地相似和连续。