Belonging and the Definition of Self 归属和自体的定义 The complex interplay of assumptions about oneself and others and the expectations of oneself and others takes place in families and forms a critical aspect of their inner life. The perduring character or personality of any one of the family members is seen in terms of his or her typical style of participation in and support for family patterns of activity and family relationships—his acknowledgement and acceptance of his place in the family (Goffman, 1969). Any change in this pattern is identified as a change in character. Any change in the pattern of interaction and response changes the inner homeostasis within the family system. The quiet disorders—the depressions and withdrawals—disturb the inner functioning of the family, but the family can often effectively conceal these disorders and carry on its external functioning more or less conventionally. But the development of paranoid delusions and grandiosity can have severely disruptive effects on family functioning. Paranoia, along with mania, forms a radical disavowal of the patient's place within the family relationships. The efforts of others, so often seen in families of paranoids, to argue with the patient, to disprove his suspicions and paranoid convictions, to bring him back to reason and his behavior back to reasonable limits are ways in which the family responds to the estrangement from their expectations and tries to bring the patient back into his appropriate place. 对自己和他人的假设 以及对自己和他人的期望 的复杂相互作用发生在家庭中，并形成了他们内心生活的一个关键方面。任何一个家庭成员的持续的性格或个性 都可以从他参与和支持家庭活动模式和家庭关系的典型方式中看到——即从他对自己在家庭中的地位的承认和接受中看到(戈夫曼，1969)。此模式中的任何变化都被认为是性格的变化。互动和反应 模式的任何改变都会改变家庭系统的内稳态。平静的紊乱——抑郁和撤回——扰乱了家庭的内部功能，但家庭往往能有效地隐藏这些紊乱，并或多或少地按照传统方式继续其外部功能。但是，偏执妄想和夸大的发展会对家庭功能产生严重的破坏性影响。偏执和狂躁形成了一种对病人在家庭关系中地位的彻底否定。别人的努力,在偏执者的家庭中如此常见,与病人认为,反驳他的猜疑和偏执的信念,带他回原因和他的行为回合理限制方式家庭响应疏远他们的期望,并试图把病人带回他的合适的地方。正如偏执者的家庭中常见的那样，家里的其他人跟患者争辩，反驳他的猜疑和偏执信念，努力将他带回理智，把他的行为带回合理的范围，家庭就是用这种方式响应病人与他们期望的疏远，并试图将病人带回合适的位置。 These patterns and their mutual adjustment are of the utmost importance, since they are not only involved in responses to deviant behavior in one of the family members, but they are also involved in determining the preparanoid's place and position within the family. Goffman (1969) refers to the self as a code that makes sense out of almost all the individual's activities and provides a basis for giving them meaning. The code is read by interpreting his place in socially organized activity as expressed in his behavior. When the individual fails to express a workable definition of himself and his place, one that others in the same system can accord him, this becomes threatening to them. Their own selves are organized in part in response to him and the definitions and assumptions he gives them. He changes and becomes a stranger to them, and their own definitions of themselves are put in jeopardy. Collusive mechanisms come into play which only feed the paranoid's suspicions and reinforce his conviction of a secret plot against him. Subtle patterns of excollusion evolve which may end in the patient's separation from the family and his hospitalization. The family finds a new place for the deviant member and appoints him to the status of "patient" or the position of sickness. The family must achieve this clarification, and even to gain from the patient an admission of his sickness and patienthood, in order to reassure themselves that their assumptions and definition of the situation have been above reproach. 这些模式及其相互调整是至关重要的，因为它们不仅涉及到家庭成员对异常行为的反应，而且还涉及确定预偏执者[preparanoid翻译为预偏执合适么？]在家庭中的位置和地位。高夫曼(1969)认为自体是一种编码，它使个体几乎所有的活动都讲得通，并为 为这些活动赋予意义 提供了基础。通过解释他在其行为所表达的社会组织活动中的位置来解释这代码。当个体未能表达出对他本人和他的位置的可行定义时，即同一系统中的其他人给予他的那个定义，这对他们构成威胁。他们自己的自体，一定程度上被组织来回应他以及他给他们的定义和假设。他改变了，成为他们的陌生人，他们自己对自己的定义处于危险之中。共谋机制的出现只会增加偏执者的怀疑，并使他确信有针对他的秘密阴谋。这种微妙的共谋模式的演变，可能会以病人与家人分离并住院治疗而结束。家庭为异常成员找到一个新的位置，并任命他为“病人”或疾病的位置。家属一定要达到这种澄清，甚至一定要让病人承认他的病情和病人身份，以便使自己确信他们对情况的假设和定义是无可指责的。 It is important to realize that such mechanisms of social organization are at work in all families and that they define a place for each individual in which his own inner definition of self corresponds. The family, in a sense, provides the preparanoid with a place and definition of himself against which he is regarded as and feels himself to be inadequate, without rights or privilege, not counting in any meaningful or real sense, not being able to measure up to the expectations of those around him, not having a sense of his own valuedness in the eyes of others or of his own inner value. An integral part of this process of self-definition and promulgation of assumptions about others is a pattern of style of family interaction which influences the individual styles of response and reaction of family members. The family in that sense shapes the pattern of responsiveness by which individuals learn to adapt to a variety of pressures within the family and to respond to sources of stimuli and to moderate elicited anxiety. It has frequently been noted that paranoid patients show traits and attitudes that are shared by other supposedly nonparanoid members of their families. Will (1961a) had noted such peculiarities in his paranoid patient which seemed to reflect aspects of the patient's family culture. The entire family, including the parents and several siblings, seemed to share attitudes of suspiciousness, competitiveness, feelings of social inadequacy and estrangement, envy, jealousy, and a general expectation of mistreatment at the hands of others. 重要的是要认识到，这种社会组织机制在所有家庭中都起作用，它们为每个个体定义了一个地方，在那里他对自体的内在定义与之相对应。家庭，在某种意义上，为预偏执者提供了一个位置和对自己的定义，他被认为是，并感觉到自己是不胜任的，缺乏权利或特权，不算人，无法满足周围人的期望，没有感觉到他在别人眼里的价值，也没有感觉到在自己内部价值观里的价值。在这个 自体定义 和 对他人假设传播 的过程中，一个不可分割的部分是家庭互动方式的模式，它影响着家庭成员的 响应和反应 的风格。从这个意义上说，家庭形成了反应的模式，通过这种模式，个体学会适应家庭内部的各种压力，对刺激源作出反应，并减轻引起的焦虑。人们经常注意到，偏执患者表现出与他们家庭中其他非偏执成员所共的特征和态度有。威尔(1961a)在他的偏执病人身上发现了这样的怪癖，这似乎反映了病人家庭文化的某些方面。包括父母和几个兄弟姐妹在内的整个家庭，似乎都有着同样的态度:猜疑、争强好胜、社交不胜任感和疏远感、羡慕、嫉妒，以及普遍认为会受到他人亏待。 One of the important dimensions of the interaction within families are the patterns and strategies of control that members exercise on each other. These processes have been rather intensively studied by Mishler and Waxler (1968). They have found that normal families use a variety of person- and attention-control strategies and that these strategies are more likely to be used even by the low-status members, i.e., children, than they are in schizophrenic families. This is true even though the distribution of power and authority in normal families is relatively clear-cut. In schizophrenic families, however, the distribution of power deviates from normative role prescriptions (mother-father, parents-children), and the exercise of power through control strategies becomes impersonal and indirect. Moreover, the significant differences between the patterns of exercising control seem to show up most acutely in situations in which the patient is present. This suggests that the issues of power and control, who has it, who exercises it, and who submits to it, are particularly mobilized by the interaction which is set up around the patient. There is good evidence to suggest that such strategies have a growth-inhibiting potential which is related to schizophrenic development. But it may also be that the same strategies may set a pattern of influencing others which contributes to the development of a paranoid style in the family and, correlatively, in the preparanoid family member. One of the basic elements of the paranoid constellation is the dual conviction that others can exercise control over oneself and that oneself has no control or rights of control over the others. 家庭内部互动的一个重要方面是成员之间相互控制的模式和策略。Mishler和Waxler(1968)对这些过程进行了相当深入的研究。他们发现，正常家庭使用各种各样的人控制策略和注意力控制策略，相比精神分裂症家庭，这些策略甚至更有可能被低地位的家庭成员(比如孩子)使用。这是事实，即使权力和权威在正常家庭的分配是相对明确的。然而，在精神分裂症家庭中，权力的分配偏离了规范的角色规定(母亲-父亲、父母-子女)，通过控制策略来行使权力变得非个人和间接。此外，施加控制的模式之间的显著差异似乎在患者在场的情况下表现得最为明显。这表明，权力和控制的问题，谁拥有权力，谁行使权力，谁服从权力，都是由患者周围的互动所调动起来的。有充分的证据表明，这种策略具有抑制生长的潜力，这与精神分裂症的发展有关。但同样的策略也可能会形成一种影响他人的模式，这种模式有助于在家庭中形成偏执风格，并相应地在预偏执家庭成员身上形成偏执风格。偏执群体的基本要素之一是双重信念，即别人可以控制自己，而自己没有控制他人或控制他人的权利。