Chapter Three
Personality Function
1. Reaction to Stimuli
Just as the various organs of the brain and of the body react dif- ferently to stimuli, so do the different systems of the personality. The exteropsyche is judgmental in an imitative way, and seeks to enforce sets of borrowed standards. The neopsyche is principally concerned with transforming stimuli into pieces of information, and processing and filing that information on the basis of previous experience. The archaeopsyche tends to react more abruptly, on the basis of pre-logical thinking and poorly differentiated or distorted perceptions. In fact, each of these aspects perceives the environment differently, in accord- ance with its function, and hence is reacting to a different set of stimuli. An over-simplified but illustrative example is the reaction to one of the ever-popular news stories about embezzlers. In a few people, this arouses a Parental, moralistic reaction. In more people it arouses a more matter-of-fact Adult interest as to how the embezzlement was managed. Possibly the most common reaction is the naive, child-like, though usually unexpressed, thought: "That would be interesting to do." In the language of transactional analysis, the fault-finding Parent plays Blemish, the Adult plays Accountant, and the Child wants to play Cops and Robbers.
The three aspects also react on each other. The Parent may become excited (i.e., distressed) by the Child's fantasies, and the Child is particularly sensitive to inhibitory stimuli from the Parent. This rela tionship is usually a replica of the original child-parent relationship which the individual experienced.
2 THE FLOW OF CATHEXIS
Mrs. Tettar, a 22-year-old housewife, was referred for treatment of a severe state of agitation following the birth of her second child. One of her most frequent operations during her therapeutic hours was coercive nagging. For example, she would ask the therapist again and again what to do about her maid leaving, or whether she should go to the hospital. It soon became possible to point out to her that, while on the surface her questions represented an Adult quest for information, at another level they constituted an attempt of her Child to manipulate the therapist in some way. The patient responded by expressing resent- nient against her mother for babying her. She gave examples of how she had begged her mother to do things for her that she could well do for herself. She felt that her mother should not have given in.
As this problem was worked over during the hour, the patient's demeanor gradually changed. She sat up, her face relaxed, her voice became more assured, and instead of whining and nagging, she was sociable, cheerful, and communicative: just like her old self, as she re- marked. But as she was escorted to the door at the end of the hour, she relapsed into her former state of mind and began to whine once more. Then abruptly she pulled herself together, smiled merrily, and said: "There I go again!"
Such shifts in ego state, which can be readily observed in healthy people as well as in patients, may be accounted for by using the con- cept of psychic energy, or cathexis, on the principle that at a given moment that ego state which is cathected in a certain way will have the executive power. In the first instance it will suffice to speak simply of "the flow of cathexis." The data given about Mrs. Tettar, for example, can be explained in this regard by saying that she came in with a highly cathected Child; that cathexis gradually flowed from the Child into the Adult until the Adult took over the executive; that as she de- parted, cathexis was drained back into the Child, and that when she "pulled herself together" cathexis abruptly flowed back into the Adult.
Mrs. Primus's cycles of behavior and attitude can be similarly ac- counted for.
3 EGO BOUNDARIES
When it was said above that cathexis flowed from the Child into the Adult, and vice versa, this concept or metaphor implies that there was some sort of boundary between the two ego states. While this im- plication can be thought of in neurological terms, a physiological veri- fication is not yet possible, so that here we shall confine ourselves to considering the psychological phenomena.
In her pre-psychotic state, and during the remissions which occurred in the course of her therapy, Mrs. Tettar was aware of certain obses- sions, phobias, and compulsions which were ego dystonic. At such times, her obsession with cleanliness, her fear of dirt, and her compul- sion to wash her hands a certain number of times in succession were usually perceived by her as not part of her "real self." In this kind of thinking, her mind was divided into two systems: "real Self" and "not real Self." "Real Self" was capable of reality-testing in regard to dirt and cleanliness; "not real Self" was incapable. "Real Self" knew things about sanitation (particularly since her husband was a public health worker) which an infant would be incapable of appreciating, while "not real Self" was guided by magical thinking in a way characteristic of an infant at a certain specific phase of development. Thus "real Self" was characteristically Adult, and "not real Self" was character- istically Child.
Mrs. Tettar's own view of these two different aspects of her per- sonality implied the existence of a boundary between them, since in her mind certain forms of behavior and feeling pertained to one system, which she perceived as her real self, and other forms pertained to a system which was outside of that. The multiplication of such reports justifies the assumption that each ego state is a kind of entity which is differentiated in some way from the rest of the psychic contents, including other ego states which existed many years ago or a few moments previously, or which are active simultaneously. The most convenient and probably the most accurate way to say this is to talk of each ego state as having a boundary which separates it from other ego states. Hence a set of circles, such as that in Figure 1B, may be taken as a fair way of representing the structure of personality.
4 THE PROBLEM OF THE SELF
When it was said that Mrs. Tettar's hand-washing was ego dys- tonic, this meant specifically Adult-ego dystonic. In her overt psychotic state, however, when her "real Self" was the Child, the hand-washing became ego syntonic: that is, at such times she accepted her own far- fetched rationalizations for this behavior, which was only to be ex- pected, since the rationalizations themselves came from the Child. In her neurotic state they were heard by the Adult, who disagreed, while in her psychotic state they were heard by the same personality who devised them. In other words, her hand-washing was Adult-ego dystonic and Child-ego syntonic, so whether at a given moment she perceived it as dystonic or syntonic depended upon which was her "real Self" at that moment.
The problem now revolves around what determines "real Self." Evidently this does not depend upon executive power, since when she was reluctantly washing her hands or hunting for specks, in her non- psychotic condition, her Child had the executive was still experienced as "real Self." power, but the Adult
Clinical understanding in this area can be obtained by postulating three states of cathexis; bound, unbound, and free. A physical analogy is offered by a monkey on a tree. If he remains inactive, his elevated position gives him only potential energy. If he falls off, this potential energy is transformed into kinetic energy. But because he is a living being, he can jump off, and then a third component, muscular energy, must be taken into account in order to understand how he lands where he does. When he is inactive, the physical energy is bound, so to speak, in his position. When he falls, this energy is unbound, and when he jumps he adds a third component by free choice. The kinetic and muscular energy together might be called the active energy. Bound cathexis then corresponds to potential energy, unbound cathexis to kinetic energy, and free cathexis to muscular energy; and unbound cathexis and free cathexis together may be called active cathexis.
Ego boundaries are conceived as semi-permeable under most con- ditions. They are relatively impermeable to bound and unbound cathexis, while free cathexis can pass with relative ease from one ego state to another.
The psychological situation may then be summarized as follows: (a) That ego state in which free cathexis predominates is perceived as the Self; or, as Federn' puts it, "It is the cathexis itself which is ex- perienced as ego feeling." (b) The executive power is taken over by that state in which the net sum of unbound plus free cathexis (active cathexis) is greatest at a given moment. These two principles can be illustrated by the case of Mrs. Tettar in her three different clinical states.
1. In her healthy state, her "old self," the Child contains only bound cathexis and is therefore latent, while the Adult is charged with free cathexis and is therefore experienced as her "real Self." The Adult also has the executive power, since it contains the greatest sum of active cathexis (unbound plus free).
2. In her neurotic hand-washing state the free cathexis still resides in the Adult, while the Child contains unbound cathexis. This un- bound cathexis predominates quantitatively over the active cathexis of the Adult. The Child therefore has the executive Adult is still experienced as her "real Self." power, while the
3. In her psychotic state, the Child contains unbound cathexis and also the free cathexis which has been drained from the Adult. This leaves the Adult relatively depleted of active cathexis. Therefore the Child both has the executive power and is experienced as the "real Self."
5 SHIFTS IN EGO STATE
Shifts in ego state in such a system depend on three factors: the forces acting on each state; the permeability of the boundaries between ego states; and the cathectic capacity of each ego state. It is the quanti- tative balance between these three which determines the clinical condi- tion of the patient, and also indicates the therapeutic procedures (or the corruptive procedures of exploiters). In Mrs. Tettar's case, the therapy was planned so as to deal with these factors one after the other.
First, the therapist attempted to activate the Adult, as in the case of Mrs. Primus, by emphasizing reality-testing. The neopsyche, as a system was assumed to exist intact; the problem was to increase its active (i.e., unbound plus free) cathexis. The transference and social aspects played their part in this mobilization. Secondly, he attempted to clarify and strengthen the boundary between the Adult and the Child so as to "capture" this increased cathexis of the Adult. Thirdly, he attempted to increase the cathectic capacity of the Child both ab solutely and relatively by the resolution of infantile conflicts, so that the Child would be less apt to become active at inopportune times in an unhealthy way. The actual techniques used are not pertinent to the present discussion, whose purpose is only to illustrate the im- portance of the factors which influence shifts in principles involved are often intuitively recognized by the patients ego state. The themselves: by which particular aspect will be discussed later.
At this point, two distinctions which often cause difficulty should be clarified. The Parent can function either as an active ego state, or as an influence. In Mr. Troy's case, the Parent was both the executive and the "real Self," and functioned as an active ego state. This meant that he behaved like father. On the other hand, when Mrs. Primus pulled down her skirt, her active ego state was that of a compliant Child, while her Parent, in the form of hallucinated voices, functioned only as an influence. She did not behave like father, but rather as father would have liked. Thus whenever the Parent is spoken of, it must be understood whether the active ego state or the Parental influ ence is meant.
It is the Parental influence which determines whether the adapted Child or the natural Child is active at a given moment. The adapted Child is an archaic ego state which is under the Parental influence, while the natural Child is an archaic ego state which is free from or is attempting to free itself from such influence. It is the difference, for example, between an obedient child and a child having a temper tantrum. Again, it should be understood which is meant when the Child is referred to.
