梦的解析pdf/txt下载_在线阅读全文

编辑推荐

牛津大学出版百年旗舰产品，权威英文版本原汁原味呈现，资深编辑专为阅读进阶定制，文学评论名家妙趣横生解读。

内容简介

《梦的解析》被誉为精神分析的第一名著。它通过对梦境的科学探索和解释，打破了几千年来人们对于梦的无知、迷信和神秘感，同时揭示了左右人们思想和行为的潜意识的奥秘。该书不但为人类潜决识的学说奠定了稳固的基础，而且也建立了人类认识自己的新里程碑。书中包含了许多对文学、神话、教育等领域有启示性的观点，一定程度上引导了20世纪的人类文明。

作者简介

西格蒙德·弗洛伊德（1856－1939），精神分析学派的创始人。他的理论不仅对心理学的发展起了巨大的推动作用，还对西方当代文学、艺术、宗教、伦理学、历史学产生了深远的影响。作为心理学领域的先驱者，他的学说、治疗技术以及对人类心理隐藏部分的揭示，为心理学研究开创了全新的领域。主要著作有：《梦的解析》《歇斯底里症研究》(与布洛伊尔合著)《性学三论》《爱情心理学》《精神分析学引论》《自我与本我》等。

目　　录

Introduction Note on the Text Note on the TranslationSelect BibliographyA Chronology of Sigmund FreudTHE INTERPRETAION OF DREAMSExplanatory NotesIndex of DreamsGeneral Index

前　　言

Freud’s Work Before The InterpretationThe Interpretation of Dreams (Die Traumdeutung), a slimmer volume than the much-expanded version that has hitherto been available, was published in November 1899,though postdated by the publisher to 1900. Its muted but respectful reception by reviewers disappointed Freud’s hopes and let him to complain unjustly that it had been ignored. For Freud, it was and remained the central book of his prolific career. In 1932 he wrote, in the preface to the third English edition: ‘It contains, even according to my present-day judgement, the most valuable of all the discoveries it has been my good fortune to make. Insight such as this falls to one’s lot but once in a lifetime’ (SE iv. P. xxiii).   When the book came out, however, Freud was more somber. Writing to his medical colleague, confidant, and fellow-Jew Wilhelm Fliess (1858-1928), he compared the effort of writing it to the struggle with the angel which left the biblical Jacob permanently lame: ‘When it appeared that my breath would fail in the wrestling match, I asked the angel to desist; and that is what he has done since then. But I did not turn out to be stronger, although since then I have been limping noticeably. Yes, I really am forty-four now, an old, somewhat shabby Jew. . .’ Behind the wry self-disparagement lies a desperate need for professional success, understandable in a member of the upwardly mobile Jewish middle class of the Fabsburg Empire. Freud’s parents, Jacob Freud, a wool-merchant, and Amalia Nathansohn, twenty years his junior, both came from Galicia (now the Western Ukraine, then the north-easternmost Habsburg province). They settled first in Freiburg(now Príbor) in Moravia, where their eldest child Sigmund, was born in 1856, then moved in 1859 to Leipzig and in 1860 to Vienna, Where Sigmund was to live until his escape from National Socialism in 1938.  Freud’s medical training at Vienna University was stamped by the scientific, positivistic spirit of the later nineteenth century. The Romantic approach to natural science, which sought to disclose a harmonious universal order and saw in it the expression of an indwelling world-soul, was now outdated. Freud’s own belief in the unity of nature was based on Darwin, whose Origins of Species(1859) explained how one living species changes into another and thus made human beings continuous with all other organisms. Freud tells us in his Autobiography(1925) that ‘the theories of Darwin, which were then of topical interest, strangely attracted me ,for they held out hopes of an extraordinary advance in our understanding of the world’( SE xx. 8). In his first year at university he chose to attend Carl Claus’s lectures on ‘General Biology and Darwinism’. However, his principal mentor was Ernst von Brücke, who was in turn a follower of the great physiologist and physicist Hermann von Helmholtz, and, like him, was intent on explaining organisms entirely by physical and chemical forces. Occult forces like vital energy were to be excluded. Darwinian evolution, operating through conflict without any animating purpose, suited this hard-nosed approach. Freud adhered to the Helmholtz school’s tenets in his early neurological work. Beginning with publications on the nervous systems of fish, he moved on to the human system, exploring the an aesthetic properties of cocaine, speech disorders, and cerebral paralyses in children. He was thus a reputable neurologist before psychoanalysis was ever thought of, It is not surprising, therefore, that his first attempt at devising a psychological theory was thoroughly materialist,  This was the ‘Project for a Scientific Psychology’, which Freud wrote at great speed in September and October 1895 and never published. Its assumptions and method, however, are still visible in The Interpretation of Dreams and indeed underlie much of his later psychoanalytic thought , Briefly, Freud, like the Hehmholtz school, supposes that nervous or mental energy is analogous to physical energy. It works on particles, called neurons (posited by H. W. G. Walderyer in1891), which it fills like an electrical charge. This energy circulates within a closed system, occasionally inhibited by contact barriers. Within this system, wishes arise which seek satisfaction. Satisfaction takes the form of discharging energy. At the same time, the system is governed by a principle of constancy which seeks to keep the amount of energy constant. The system is in contact with the external world through the self or ego (Ich), imagined as an organization of neurons constantly charged with energy, and able to receive or inhibit stimuli from the outside world. When energy remains unconnected with the outside world, as in dreaming, it flows freely; when connected with the outside world via the ego, its flow is weakened and inhibited. This distinction between the free flowing energy of the primary process, where desire takes no account of reality, and the hesitant flow of the secondary process, where desire has to compromise with reality, will meet us again at the end of The interpretation of Dreams, and will reappear in Freud’s later writings as the contrast between the id and the ego; while the circulation of energy will also appear later as the movement of libido among objects of desire. And it is in the ‘Project’ that Freud first states that dreams ‘are wish-fulfilments—that is, primary processes following upon experiences of satisfaction’ (SE i. 340).   Also in 1895, Freud and his fellow-physician Joesef Breuer published a book, studies in Hysteria, which inaugurates the interactive thrapy soon to be known as psychoanalysis. Breuer had in 1880 met a young Viennese woman with a bizarre and varying range of symptoms: she could not drink water, she could speak only English, she had a squint, visual disturbances, partial paralyses. Under hypnosis she related the events that had initiated these afflictions: for example, she had been unable to drink water since seeing a dog drinking out of a glass. Freud applied Breuer’s ‘talking cure’ to other unfortunate women. A British governess, Miss Lucy R., suffered from adepression made worse by a continental smell of burnt pudding Freud traced this olfactory illusion back to an occasion when, as she was cooking pudding with her charges, a letter arrived from her mother and was seized by the children; during this tussle the pudding got burnt. Not satisfied with his explanation, Freud probed further and elicited from miss R. the admission that she was in love with her employer and distressed by a scene in which he reprimanded her. Having got this off her chest, she regained her good cheer and her sense of smell. Their case studies led Breuer and Freud to maintain, in their preface to Studies in Hysteria, that ‘Hysterics suffer mainly from reminiscences’(SE ii. 7). Hysterical symptoms, apparently bizzare, did have a meaning they were displayed recollections of experiences too painful to remember consciously. Freud makes the further, tacit, assumption that those experiences are always sexual; and he did not scruple to confirm his assumption by asking Miss R. leading questions.  On this basis, Freud theorized that the buried memory tormenting hysterics was of sexual abuse in childhood, He attached huge importance to this theory, equating it with discovering the source of the Nile. Slowly, however, it crumbled, till on 21 September 1897 he confided to his friend Wilhelm Fliess that he no longer believed his own theory. It did not help him cure his patient; it implied that child abuse must be implausibly widespread; and it ignored his patient’s tendency to confuse reality with fantasy (especially, perhaps, when Freud was prompting them). Freud was not denying that child abuse often really occurred, though he may have underestimated its frequency. He was accepting—with a cheerfulness that puzzled him—a major defeat to his ambitions.  While gradually abandoning this theory, Freud was also reacting to his father’s death on 23 October 1896. Grief, overwork, and worry brought on what has plausibly been called a creative illness. It was a painful spell of inner isolation, following his intense preoccupation with his ideas, and resulting in the exhilarating conviction that he had discovered a great new truth. Freud worked through his illness by probing his own past. He recollected his sexual arousal in infancy by his nurse; he remembered seeing his mother naked during a training journey when he was two and a half; and he acknowledged hostility towards his father. ‘Being totally honest with oneself is a good exercise,’ he told Fliess on 15 October 1897. ‘A single idea of general value dawned on me.

显示全部信息

媒体评论

　《梦的解析》堪称一部划时代的著作，而且很可能是迄今在经验主义基础上掌握无意识心灵之谜的最勇敢尝试。　　 ——瑞士心理学家C.G.荣格　　这位勇敢无畏的先知和救人疾者，一直是两代人的向导，带领我们进入人类灵魂中未曾有人涉足的领域。　　 ——德国文学家托马斯·曼

在线试读部分章节

In the following page I shall provide proof that there is a psychological technique which allows us to interpret dreams, and that when this procedure is applied, every dream turns out to be a meaningful psychical formation which can be given an identifiable places in what goes on within us in our waking life. I shall further try to explain the processes that make the dream so strange and incomprehensible and infer from the nature of the psychical forces in their combinations and conflicts, out of which the dream emerges. Having got so far, my account will break off, for it will have reached the point at which the problem of dreaming opens out into more comprehensive problems which will have to be resolved on the basis of different material.  I shall begin with a survey both of what earlier authorities have written on the subject and of the present state of scientific inquiry into the problems of dreams, as I shall not often have occasion to return to it in the course of dreams. In spite of being concerned with the subject over many thousands of years, scientific understanding of the dream has not got very far. This is admitted by the writers so generally that it seems superfluous to quote individual authors. In the writings I list at the end of my work many stimulating observations and a great deal of interesting material can be found relating to our subject, but little or nothing touching the essential nature of the dream or offering a definitive solution to any of its riddles. And of course, even less has passed into the knowledge of the educated layman.  The first work to treat the dreams as an object of psychology seems to be Aristotle’s* On Dreams and Dream Interpretation [1]. Aristotle concedes that the nature of the dream is indeed daemonic, but not divine—which might well reveal a profound meaning, if one could hit on the right translation. He recognizes some of the characteristics of the dream-life, for example, that the dream reinterprets slight stimuli intruding upon sleep as strong ones (‘we believe we are passing through a fire and growing hot when this or that limb is only being slightly warmed’), and he concludes from this that dreams could very well reveal to the physician the first signs of impending changes in the body not perceptible by day. Lacking the requisite and teaching and informed assistance, I have not been in a position to arrive at a deeper understanding of Aristotle’s treatise.  As we know, the ancients prior to Aristotle regarded the dream not as a product of the dreaming psyche, but as an inspiration from the realm of the divine, and they already recognized the two contrary trends which we shall find are always present in evaluations of the dream-life. Thy distinguished valuable, truth-telling dreams sent to the sleeper to warn him or announce the future to him, from vain, deceptive, and idle dreams intended to lead him astray or plunge him into ruin. This pre-scientific conception of the dream held by the ancients was certainly in full accord with their world-view as a whole, which habitually projected as reality into the outside world what had reality only within the life of the psyche. Their conception also took account of the main impression made on the waking life by the memory the dream remaining in the morning, for in this something alien, coming as it were from another world. It would be wrong, by the way, to think that the theory of the supernatural origin pietistic and mystical writers—who do right to occupy the remains of the once extensive realm of the supernatural, as long as it has not been conquered by scientific explanation—we also encounter clear-sighted men averse to the fantastic who use this very inexplicability of the phenomena of dreams in their endeavours to support their religious belief in the existence and intervention of superhuman powers. The high value accorded to the dream-life by many schools of philosophy, for example, by Schelling’s* followers, is a distinct echo of the undisputed divinity accorded to dreams in antiquity; and the divinatory, future-predicting power of dreams remains under discussion because the attempts at a psychological explanation are not adequate to cope with all the material gathered, however firmly the feelings of anyone devoted to the scientific mode of thought might be inclined to reject such a notion.  The reason why it is so difficult to write a history of our scientific knowledge of the problems of dreams is that, however valuable our knowledge may have become under single aspects, no progress along a particular line of thought is to be discerned.

显示全部信息

梦的解析下载

梦的解析

发布书评

相关图书推荐