1  /  4  页   1234 跳转 查看:10577

制度分析基础专题

制度分析基础专题

制度分析基础是汪丁丁先生一篇文章的题目,现在它已经成为一本书了
这里存放相关资料(包括丁丁用于教学资料光盘中的部分内容),有关的讨论请关注本站为此专门开设的版面。        

[此贴子已经被北望于2002-10-1 14:39:08编辑过]

 

制度分析基础:一个反复思考的概论-汪丁丁

  汪丁丁



第一章. 导言
一. 引言

这是一部专著,意在创立‘制度分析’的基本框架。专著的最大危险在于使著者陷入自己构筑的著作体系当中不能自拔。为免除这一危险,多年以来我克制自己不去写专门性的著作。直到我最近终于发现有一种方法可以让我写专著而不为体系所累。

体系之累,起源于所谓‘宏大叙事(mata-narrative)’方式。学术体系的目的是要建构一套观念来解释世界,务求以最简明的观念架构获得最彻底的解释,才算达到了‘体系’的目的。因此在任何学术体系的目的里,也就包含了它自身的危险:试图把丰富的生活世界简约为抽象的‘单子(monas)’式的概念(康德所谓的‘monadology’)。这种‘简约主义’的世界观越是从特定的理论范围被推广出去,就越要剥夺被它所简约了的那个生活世界的意义,从而也就越要遮蔽它自身之为‘学术体系’的终极关怀。这在我们中国人看来,便是西方学术之“可信的不可爱,可爱的不可信。”

重建学术体系的终极关怀,昭显我们生活世界的丰富意义。我以为这是中国知识分子为学与为人的当然目的,也是‘社会科学’得以存在下去的人文与科学根据。任何一门社会科学都必须追求以某种‘体系’的方式来解释世界,否则便无以为‘科学的’。另一方面,任何一门社会科学必须对其研究的题目投以某种人文的关怀,否则便无以为‘社会的’。社会科学的这一特殊位置,或者叫做它的‘双重性’,正合了康德论证过的‘实践理性’的双重特性:一方面,实践着的理性服从自然律,它在行动的物质效果方面完全被现象形态的因果关系决定着;另一方面,实践着的理性具有自由意志,它在行动的精神追求方面完全超越了现象界,它作为‘物自体’而生存并且展现其生命的意义。

康德在<纯粹理性批判>里曾经(按照古代希腊哲学的方式)把理性的‘生活世界’划分为1)心理学的,(2)宇宙学的,(3)神学的,这三个宽广的领域。心理学世界表征个体理性的心灵生活;神学世界表征大写的理性之为‘理性一般’的生活根据;宇宙学世界则表征‘理性为自然立法’的过程。如我在下面要说明的,社会科学的方法论正应当是康德在此处所界定的宇宙学世界的方法论。这一方法论的核心命题便是康德在其“第一批判”中讨论宇宙学辩证法时提到的“范畴的连续性变化”假设。

但是仅仅满足于康德的宇宙学方法论,社会科学就仅仅还是西方的,它难以澄清人生的意义,难以体现学术的终极关怀。西方思想自康德开始,出现了叔本华和尼采对黑格尔和孔德的抗议,出现了‘现象’对‘本质’的批判,出现了“上帝之死”以及“神死之后,人的命运”的问题。任何严肃的学问探讨,若要理解西方学术的当代问题,便不得不首先返回到康德,以图澄清西方社会科学学术困境的‘问题意识’。

康德哲学的要旨尽在<纯粹理性批判>当中。在这个所谓“第一批判”的前半部分,他已经指出了<判断力批判>的核心内容,而在它的后半部分,他已经论证了<实践理性批判>的出发点。康德先验哲学以‘范畴(categoria)’为核心内容,直承柏拉图与亚里士多德哲学,时刻不忘理性(logos)的任务是为‘内容’赋形(form; be in-formed; in-formation)。

然而亚里士多德在“范畴篇”里提及‘逻各斯(logos)’时,不仅在‘理性’的含义上使用这个词,更多地是在‘语言’的含义上使用这个词的。因为如他在“解释篇”所言:“口语是内心经验的符号,文字是口语的符号。”按照前苏格拉底哲学家,例如赫拉克立特(或者巴门尼德)对逻各斯的解释,对作为展开过程的逻各斯而言,说与思是一回事。

因此,当逻各斯展开自身时,当它,如赫拉克利特所说,通过人们的“干燥的灵魂”向它自身昭显自己时,它首先是用‘说’的方式为它的内容赋形的,而‘说’恰恰(同时也就)包含着说者对生活内容的思考。所以当海德格尔宣告“哲学的终结”时,他指出,在作为形而上学的哲学死去的地方,思考继续存在,并且思与说同在。所以,在中国当代思想界的对话中,我主张回到‘作为对话的逻各斯’。

叙事的目的是为了说,叙事者先有说的冲动,才有叙事。人类已有的叙事方式可分为三类1)历史叙事。这类叙事的说服力包括神话,传说,禁忌,原始宗教,以及对任何过去的事件的信仰。历史叙事的说服力建立在叙事者的权威身分的认证以及叙事内容的真实性认证上;(2)科学叙事。这类叙事的说服力建立在对理性传统的信仰上,凡是不符合科学原则的其它一切信仰,都必须加以理性审查。同时,这类叙事的说服力还要求对叙事者的理性能力的确认,这取决于理性传统内部的专家们的权威意见;(3)美感叙事。这类叙事的特征是私人话语,它的目的不在说服,故不需要建立其说服力的基础。美感叙事的内在冲动来源于叙事者的审美冲动,例如诗歌,散文,片语,残句。美感叙事不要求说服任何他者,虽然它可以引发他者的共鸣并且由此而具有某种感召力。

历史叙事与科学叙事(当基督教统治科学时,它的主流仍具有科学理性的叙事方式),它们是两种最伟大的宏大叙事方式,它们在数千年里分别是东方思想传统与西方思想传统的主流叙事方式,并且分别承担了延续东方文化与西方文化的功能。不论在东方还是在西方的文化传统里,始终存在着处于非主流的美感叙事方式,作为对主流叙事的反抗和微小叙事者们人文诉求的承当。美感叙事以‘间接沟通’的方式参与对话,通过‘迂回’进入主流文化传统。

‘作为对话的逻各斯’首先是一种理性方式,是科学叙事。但是它反对亚里士多德-康德式的形而上学,反对以理性为自然‘赋形’的方式立法。它主张对话(dialogue)的辩证法(dialectics),并且通过对话将无论何种叙事话语反映到逻各斯展开自身的过程里来。在这一意义上,作为对话的逻各斯是广义理性,是足以融合各种叙事方式的社会交往过程,是我做了广义理解的哈贝玛斯的‘交往理性(communicative rationality)’。

对话的逻各斯,如赫拉克立特之后最伟大的辩证法哲学家黑格尔所述,总是通过‘正题-反题-合题’的辩证循环方式昭示自己。而黑格尔的这种辩证方式恰恰来自康德的宇宙学辩证法(cosmological antimony)的讨论。关于正题(thesis)与反题(anti-thesis),康德说:这两个具有同等说服力的原则互相对峙,犹如两军接战,各自以同等力量否定对方。而批判哲学的任务便是去度量双方原则的适用范围,为双方的理性原则指出其界限所在。这样思想就进入了康德说的‘综合(synthesis)’命题。黑格尔的贡献在于,他第一个看到了包含在康德辩证法里面的古希腊朴素辩证法的‘火’一般燃烧着的生命力,他见到那生命力燃烧犹如法国大革命的火焰,不断创造着新的生命。逻各斯以辩证方式展开自身。

以辩证方式展开自身的逻各斯,绝不停顿于“这是什么(what it is)?”的肤浅问题上面,它永远只关注“这将要成为什么(what it shall become)?”这样经典的古希腊宇宙学问题。辩证法是一团活着的火,闪现着普罗米修斯和赫拉克立特的灵魂。

然而黑格尔的辩证方式是‘绝对精神’意识到它自身的方式,它必须被引入到今天我们的生活世界里来,成为我们特定的具体生活。这样,逻各斯对内容的赋形才符合“说与思的同一”,才在长青的“生命之树”上发生出‘理论’。这便是叔本华-托斯陀耶夫斯基-科尔凯廓尔-尼采-萨特,这一存在哲学思路对西方理性的贡献。‘绝对精神’必须被变换为‘生命的实存’,而后才有对话的逻各斯的展开过程。狄尔泰正是在这一意义上将黑格尔的‘绝对精神(Geist)’转变为他自己的‘人类科学(Geisteswissenschaften)’的。

为了尊重我对整个西方思想的上述的基本理解,我必须以下面的方式完成我的专著1)仅仅提供理论框架的基本原则;(2)这些基本原则的职能在于构成理论在现实生活中展开自身所必须具有的‘正题-反题’冲突关系;(3)任何附加的叙述仅仅在于说明基本原则是如何运用起来的;(4)心灵,仅当它被现实生活逼迫到正题与反题的死角里面时,才激发出超越这一冲突的生命力。理性,仅当它靠了心灵超越冲突的努力获得对正题与反题的足够深刻的批判时,才有可能找到相应的‘合题’,才可能实现自身的发展。

如此一来,我的专著,不论它的主题是“制度分析基础”还是其它任何社会科学领域里的课题,都将不得不首先是一篇“概论”。在概论的“导言”中它提出一些基本的原则,并且通过“概论”的其余部分展开这些原则。仅当这一‘体系’被运用于具体生活当中时,才可能产生有血有肉的‘专著’;而仅当这一‘体系’被另一叙事者运用于另一具体生活当中时,便产生出另一部有血有肉的‘专著’;...最后,当这一‘体系’被许多不同的叙事者运用于各自的生活世界并产生出不同的‘专著’时,或者当其他叙事者们创造出其它‘体系’的专著时,一部新的体系的“概论”便诞生了,它的生命力来自‘对话’,来自在对话过程中展开的它的意识自身。这是一项需要‘时间’的知识,我称为“知识过程”或者,“作为过程的知识”,或者,用黑格尔的话表示,就是“历史与逻辑的统一”。正是通过了这样的知识过程,我体悟我的人生;或者,通过我对人生的体悟,我展开我的知识过程。对于这一双重作用的过程,我称为“知识过程与人生体悟”。


二. 实践理性的基本原则:自由与必然

社会科学的本质特征是实践,是不仅如‘科学’那样解释世界,而且如‘人’那样改造世界,使之变得更好。与社会科学的这一本质特征相对并且为社会科学的实践提供了最终评价尺度的,是人文学的本质特征---审美。

解释世界,就其本意而言正是科学的精神,是由‘惊讶’而起的‘爱智’,是对现象界的不带功利兴趣的认知过程。但是源自希腊思想传统的‘科学’,只是由于‘分析的时代’的遮蔽而满足于研究“这是什么?”当它开始意识到它的古希腊根源时,它便要追索“这将变成什么?”这样一个发生学问题,而这一问题(what it shall become?)已经包含了“改造世界”的冲动。

实践中的理性所感受到的最突出的问题便是意志自由与外在必然之间的紧张。我们的意识由于我们的自由意志受到外在阻力而感受到‘不自由’所带来的痛苦。而我们的意志则由于要免除或缓解痛苦才表现为追求自由的意志。我们因为意识到自己具有自由意志而成为人,成为超拔于其它生物之上的人。

实践理性从关于现象界的必然性的科学获得追求主体自由的解放力量。这一过程被康德叫做‘启蒙’。因此启蒙意味着主体对现象界的必然性原则的尊重。理性从各种可能的科学体系中选择一组关于现象形态各个单纯现象之间的‘关系’,以此为实践的指导原则,并且经由实践过程,按照自由意志对实践效果的评价(而评价标准自身是更高层次的关系建构的一部分),修正或放弃这一‘关系’建构中不合理的部分。理性其实不可能确切地知道哪一种可能的科学体系会在未来的实践中被昭显为‘最合理的’科学体系。实践中的理性充其量可以做到的是沿着使主体意志感到更幸福的方向改进主体生存的世界。理性沿着时间维度展开的这一实践过程便形成为‘传统’。

自由意志如果仅仅停留在意志自由的层次上,它就永远无法获得任何真实的,即现象形态之内的自由。自由意志为实现可能的自由,必须从无穷可能的自由生活当中选择放弃哪些可能生活从而得以实现哪些可能生活。这是自由意志的第一次自由选择,它使人从‘神界’降落到现象界,成为现实的人,成为自我实现着的人,成为在传统中实践着的人。

被传统界定了的自由,是现实中的自由。理性从传统所获得的知识体系,是现实层面的自由所必须的知识体系。这一知识体系有关自然现象的部分构成自然科学诸领域,而它的有关人类社会现象的部分,构成诸如法律学,政治学,经济学,以及其它社会科学的知识领域。

由于自由意志对实践效果的评价标准本身是更高层次的关系建构的一部分,由于理性不可能预知哪一种关系建构是最合理的,所以理性必须不断对评价标准本身进行反思。理性,由于其理性能力的有限性,不得不对自身进行批判。理性对自身的批判叫做‘反思’。

实践理性从对于自身的批判中获得进一步追求主体自由的解放力量。这一过程是我所理解的哈贝玛斯意谓着的“作为展开过程的现代性”。同时,这一过程,由于理性保持着“对传统的永恒的批判态度”,而成为福柯解释过的康德意义上的‘启蒙’。任何反思都是对已有思想传统的反思,并且在这一意义上是对传统的批判。传统,由于曾经比较正确地预见外在必然从而为主体获得一定限度的自由,由此获得其权威性。而获得了权威性的传统,由于对反思形成的压制而包含了扼杀主体自由的危险。实践着的理性,因为永远处于意志自由与外在必然之间的冲突状态中,于是不得不永远承受维护传统与鼓励创新之间的紧张。


三. 理性认识的基本原则:共相与分殊

社会科学就其知识的性质而言可以如狄尔泰所论,分为三个相关的领域1)关于人类社会历史事实的陈述;(2)关于社会历史事实的形态一般的陈述;(3)关于社会历史事实及其一般形式的评价的陈述。所有关于个人经验和他人经验的记录都是上述第一个领域的事情,它们构成‘历史’;所有涉及经验的普遍特征和这些特征之间一般关系的叙述都是上述第二个领域的事情,它们构成‘理论’;所有对前两个领域之内的事情的评价都是上述第三个领域的事情,它们构成‘实践’。

共相(form),在柏拉图那里表现为‘观念(idea)’,在亚里士多德那里表现为‘范畴(categoria)’,在康德那里表现为‘一般性(genera)’,在狄尔泰那里表现为‘形态一般(uniformity)’,在普通逻辑学里表现为‘概念(concept)’,在基础数学那里则表现为‘集合(set)’。

分殊(species),康德说:‘分殊原则’呼唤着事物的多重性,事物之间的差异性,事物内在的特殊性。康德把分殊原则与一般性原则当做理性演进的对立统一,把连续性原则(continuum specierum)当做对这一对‘正题-反题’的超越的综合。

连续性(continuity of forms),假设变动着的世界可以被一系列接续过渡的共相与分殊所描述。在任何两个共相之间没有隔着不可认识的鸿沟;同样,在任何两个分殊之间也没有隔着不可认识的鸿沟。一组事物,假若从一特定角度观察,它们之间可以任意变换而不发生不可接受的差异,我们就认为它们构成(该特定角度下的)同一集合,或者是(该特定角度的)同一共相之内的元素。如果从另一特定角度观察,它们之间的某些变换足以引发不可忽视的差异,那么我们就认为在特定角度的这些特定变换下这些事物之间存在着分殊。当共相之内出现分殊时,根据分殊的性质便可以命名更细致层次上的共相。科学体系总是由这样一些接续过渡的概念构成的。当概念之间发生了难以弥补的断裂时,我们就说这群概念尚且没有形成‘科学’。

在科学叙事传统里,主体认识客体的基本方式是从具体经验抽象出共相,即对无数殊相赋形。每一类可以枚举的经验总是有限数目的经验,由休谟的因果性联想上升到康德的先验综合范畴,理性便完成了一次(从有限到无限的)飞跃。范畴通过把自己的经验内容抽象一空而揭示自己,使自己获得‘语言’。

被说出来的范畴,由于放弃了特定角度上被体验到的内容而获得‘说’的权利。作为语言符号的范畴(共相)故而能够被其它角度上的认识主体理解,作为他们体验到的内容的赋形被理解。于是产生黑格尔强调的‘这一个’与‘意谓’之间的差异,因为说者所意谓的那一特定经验无法被传达给听者,能够被语言传达的仅仅是被抽象掉具体内容之后的‘这一个’范畴在听者的具体经验中引发的对这同一个范畴的理解。但是这同一个范畴对说者和听者所意谓着的具体经验是不同的。

正是由于语言符号的空洞性,一旦范畴获得了显现自身的形式---‘说’,范畴也就成了空洞的,无血的,灰色的。于是保持逻各斯生命活力的唯一方式便是保持对话伦理:每一个参与对话的声音都得到尊重和倾听。因为每一个特定角度上发出的声音都包含了特定的生活经验,都对其它角度上发出的声音构成‘互补性’,并且在这一意义上参与了一切特定角度的认识主体的知识过程。


四. 制度评价的基本原则:正义与效率

制度分析始终面对着的基本问题是:社会究竟如何可能?首先,人们意识到存在着组成社会的种种好处,尤其是经由分工及专业化而来的规模经济效益。但是,其次,人们意识到对分工的任何形式的制度化都意味着外在制度对自由意志的压抑,意味着一些人可能从制度获得权力来奴役另一些人。

因此面对已经存在的社会,制度分析的基本任务便是指出理性的个人在何种条件下意识到参与一个特定社会所带来的好处超过了成本,或者,指出理性的个人在何种条件下不得不遵从所处特定社会为其规定的行为方式,以及寻求改进其处境的基本途径(政治的,经济的,意识形态的)。这构成制度分析的‘效率’原则。

自由意志选择放弃一些可能的生活,投入到它选择去实现的另一些可能生活中去。在自由意志选择了的诸可能生活当中,社会生活显然是最可能的一种。但是面对社会生活,自由意志必须进一步选择:不仅争取自身的自由,而且由于参与了社会生活所以必须争取社会成员的同等自由。

此在的自由意志对于其他自由意志的‘同等自由’的判断,构成康德意义上的‘实践理性(practical reason)’的部分任务,而‘同等自由’本身则构成‘正义’概念的理性内容,或者,构成制度分析的‘正义’原则。

每一个理性个人,处于特定社会制度内,都有理性能力按照制度规定的行为模式对个人而言的效率(以主体的意志自由的程度来衡量)和个体理性中的群体正义(以主体对其他主体自由程度的判断来衡量)加以评价。所谓‘伯累托改善’,是指那些既符合一切个体理性的正义原则又符合一切个体理性的效率原则的行为模式。任何伯累托改善都仅仅是经济学问题,而不造成道德哲学问题。但通常意义上的实践理性,总是涉及不存在伯累托改善时个人行为模式的选择问题。

行为模式,可以选择或不可选择的,个人的或社会的。‘模式’,是指认识论上可以被行为主体意识到与其它模式之间存在差异的经验范畴。

自由意志在理性所及的范围内,总可以有所选择。对个体而言,全部可供选择的行为模式构成理性选择的空间。在这一空间内,理性选择本身受到选择主体基于效率原则与正义原则作出的评价,或者,‘批判’,或者,‘反思’。并且,主体正是经由这一反思达到对效率与正义的辩证综合的。


五. 制度分析的基本原则之一:历史演进与静态均衡

制度分析最经常遇到的困难,是‘制度’的定义问题。任何理论的核心概念的定义都要求对全部理论的把握。

当我们说‘制度’的时候,进入我们的意识的是诸如‘家庭’,‘社区’,‘军队’,‘政府’,‘企业组织’,‘民间团体’,等等具体的制度经验。而当我们试图为这些经验赋形时,我们就必须寻找足以使这些具体经验构成‘共相’的那个特定角度。人群的行为模式的均衡状态,这一抽象提供了定义‘制度’共相的一个特定角度;以一定方式演进的社会历史,这一抽象提供了另一个特定角度。在诸多不同角度中,我认为这两个角度更经常和更有力地构成了一对‘正题-反题’辩证关系。

历史的看法是反简约主义的看法,这一视角试图发掘经验的一切细节,一切微小声音,一切可能存在过的生活。在这一视界下,现存的任何制度都有多种可能的历史渊源,而这一复杂性是不可能被简约为任何‘规律’的。这使得历史的看法不同于历史演进的看法。后者毕竟是理性对历史的一种‘立法’(理性为历史‘赋形’)。

在历史演进的看法里,任何特定的制度分析必须从制度的各种可能的历史渊源中选择特定的一类,并经由此类历史渊源来解释和评价特定的制度。这一选择所包含的,不仅是对特定制度的特定原因的确认,而且是对历史演进的各种可能方式当中某一特定方式的确认。因此,研究者所确认的任何历史演进的思路,总会包含将此一思路扩张为关于人类社会普遍历史规律的宏大叙事的危险。

均衡的看法是一种简约主义的看法。均衡的观念首先需要把社会分解为一群个人,其次,把个人的实践过程简约为一系列行动。均衡的看法假定理性个人的实践是从可供选择的许多个行动系列当中选择特定的一个,往往进一步假定为是对个人而言‘最优’的行动系列,加以实现。这一视角也叫做‘局部均衡’,与‘一般均衡’相对而言。

在‘一般均衡’的视角下,个人选择的特定行动系列,由于与其他个人选择的行动系列之间存在冲突而未必能够实现。只有当群体内的一切个人都选择了与其他人选择的行动系列相容的行动系列时,这群人所选择的行动系列才达到了均衡,叫做‘一般均衡’。对一般均衡概念而言,关键在于定义行动系列的‘相容性’。例如纳什均衡定义这一相容性为“没有人愿意偏离”该均衡状态。

局部均衡概念依赖于‘价值极大化’的理性行为,一般均衡概念依赖于‘群体相容性’的理性行为。在逻辑上,这是理性为自己确立的两种不同的实践准则,尽管数理经济学还没有从这两种实践准则推导出足以造成实证差异的行为模式。

简约的看法与历史的看法,这是康德在宇宙学辩证法的讨论中提出的四对辩证关系当中的第二对。没有简约的看法,人们将不可能认识这个无限复杂世界。要知道河水的成分,就必须将河水简约为静止的一滴,尽管“人不能两次踏进同一条河流”。但是仅仅抱持简约主义的立场会导致理性的狂妄。尤其是在‘实践理性’的领域内,简约主义导致取消‘上帝’,取消人的一切神性,从而导致人自身的消亡。

在对历史演进与一般均衡的各种可能的综合当中,我选择了‘知识过程’这一综合范畴。在这一范畴中,均衡包含着人们对以前实现过的一切均衡状态的理解,这些理解作为个人知识进入下一次博弈并且决定了博弈的新的均衡状态。

‘制度’可以被定义为如此展开着的均衡的行动系列,一方面是实现了的群体行为模式,另一方面是行为主体对均衡行为的阐释,是行为的意义的不断更新。主体对社会历史的这两方面的观察就构成主体的知识过程。


六. 制度分析的基本原则之二:有限理性与完备理性

假如行为主体具有无限的理性能力,那么制度根本就不必存在,或者,任何制度分析就都是多余的。因此对‘制度’下定义的同时也就意味着要对人类理性能力加以界定。

有限理性假设与决策环境的高度不确定性是相容的两个基本假设。理论已经证明,从有限理性出发,当行为主体面对高度的不确定性时,最优的决策方式是遵循固定不变的规则,哪怕这些规则看上去‘很愚蠢’。有限理性所遵循的不变的规则,恰恰是一种‘制度’。而制度的基本功能就是应付不确定性。

制度的演进同时就意味着理性的演进。有限理性假设已经包含了理性在实践中自我演进的可能。

完备理性的假设是经济学的边际分析的前提之一。经济分析的彻底性要求对行为做边际分析,而行为主体仅当具备了完备理性能力时,才有能力将自己的行为调整到边际量相等的均衡状态。边际分析在理论上的好处在于其精确性,精确性在理性的实践中可以为行动提供更明白的方案及行动指南。就‘可计算性’而言,社会科学经由边际分析而更加接近自然科学。

与制度的演进和均衡一样,我仍然选择了‘知识过程’作为对有限理性与完备理性这一对辩证关系的超越。


七. 制度分析的基本原则之三:创新与规范

当我们试图揭示‘制度’这一范畴时,我们不得不处理的,预先包含在‘制度’范畴里面的第三对‘正题-反题’辩证关系是‘创新与规范’辩证关系。因为制度一方面是将成功经验规范化,另一方面又是对未来创新的压抑。因此制度的演进同时就意味着新的规范取代老的规范,意味着制度的创新。

对我来说,知识过程也是对创新与规范这一对辩证关系的超越。


八. 结语


第二章. 制度分析在人文与社会科学体系里的位置

第三章. 社会制度的基本问题

第四章. 制度问题的局部均衡分析

第五章. 制度问题的一般均衡分析

第六章. 制度与知识过程分析

第七章. 分工社会与知识分子困境

(注:这是一份真正的‘手稿’,没有完成,没有发表,但它的生命力或许就在这里。)
 

印度神话简介(一)-丁丁光盘选贴

The Ramayana: A "Telling" of the Ancient Indian Epic

(This "telling" of the Ramayana story was adapted by Larry Tominberg for classroom use. If a teacher is unable to provide fuller copies of the text for use with the lessons in Spotlight on Ramayana: An Enduring Tradition, this version should be used.)


The Boyhood Of Rama

On the banks of the Sarayu River stood the beautiful city of Ayodhya, the capital of Kosala. In the city there were magnificent palaces decorated with precious stones. Spires of great temples rose above the city as if to touch the sky. For protection, the city was surrounded by a great moat. The people of Ayodhya were peace-loving and happy. No one was ignorant or poor. Everyone had faith in God and read the s criptures daily.

Each person knew his or her role in society. The brahmins devoted their lives to studying the sacred texts. The rulers and warriors governed and protected the city. The farmers and merchants fed and clothed the citizens.

Yet, all was not well in Ayodhya. Dasaratha, the king was unhappy. Although he was very old, he had no son to inherit his throne.

One day the king called upon his priest Vasistha. "Vasistha," he said. "I am growing old. I long for a son, a son who will take my place on the throne."

The priest knew all too well that his king needed to have a son. He replied, "Dasaratha, you will have sons. I shall perform a sacred rite to please the gods."

Excited by this wonderful news, the king ran to tell his three wives Sumitra, Kaikeyi, and Kausalya, "I will have sons!"

At the same moment many of the gods were growing more and more angry with Ravana, the ruler of the rakshasas, or demons. Ravana was no ordinary looking demon. He had ten heads and twenty arms. He also had remarkable powers. But he was using his power to prevent the gods and holy men from performing sacred rituals. This was a terrible insult to all who were holy.

Learning of Ravana's actions, Vishnu, the protector of the universe, decided it was time to do something. But what? Years ago Ravana was granted a boon, or promise. This boon protected him from gods and demons. How then, Vishnu wondered, could Ravana be stopped?

Vishnu thought, "Ravana, in his arrogance, protected himself only from those beings whom he thought could hurt him. He failed to protect himself from humans and monkeys."

Vishnu decided to be born as a human who could kill Ravana. The gods and holy men were pleased with his decision.

Vishnu sent a messenger to king Dasaratha with payasam, a sweet made of milk and rice, laced with a special potion.

The messenger said, "Give each of the three wives this drink. It is a boon that will bring sons." Then the messenger disappeared.

The king gave each of his wives part of the drink. No sooner had his wives finished, than each shone with the glow of a divine being in their womb.

There was great rejoicing in the city when four sons were born to their king. Their names were Rama, Lakshmana, Bharata, and Satrughna.

Even as infants, everyone noticed that Rama and Lakshmana were inseparable. It was as if they were one life in two bodies.

All four sons grew to be intelligent men. They learned the holy s criptures well. They were devoted to the welfare of others. Dasaratha was finally happy.

He enjoyed watching his sons grow before his eyes. He did not say it in so many words, but he did have a special place in his heart for Rama.

One day the sage, or wise man, Vishvamitra came to Ayodhya to see the king. The king had great respect for him.

"Greetings, oh, wise one. What brings you to my kingdom?"

The sage said, "I have come to ask you a favor."

"How can I help? No wish is too great to ask," the king responded.

"It pleases me to hear those words from you, " said Vishwamitra.

I have been trying to perform an important sacred rite which is again and again being interrupted by Ravana's demons. My vows prevent me personally from fighting these demons."

The king listened intently.

"I pray, Dasaratha, that you allow me to take Rama with me to protect my sacred rite."

"But Rama is only a child. He is but sixteen years of age. I have a better idea. I shall send you my armies to battle these demons. I will even accompany you. I shall fight these demons with my own hands. But please do not take Rama. Without Rama I cannot live even a few minutes."

The king began to weep.

Vishwamitra understood the king's pain. But the sage also had no choice. He knew that Rama was an avatar, or incarnation of Vishnu on earth. He also knew that only Vishnu in human form could kill Ravana.

The king told Rama about Vishwamitra's request. Rama understood and willingly went with the sage.

"I shall go, too, father," declared Lakshmana. The king did not protest.

Rama and Lakshmana, weapons slung over their shoulders, and followed the sage along the Sarayu River bank.

The journey was a long one. Whenever the three stopped to rest, the sage took the time to teach the boys how to use the powerful weapons of the gods to fight the demons.

They journeyed until they reached the foot of a frightening forest. They paused. The sage said, "This was once a beautiful and prosperous country. Now the terrible she-demon, Tataka, lives here. She attacks and kills anyone who enters."

Neither Rama nor Lakshmana were afraid.

The sage turned to Rama and said, "Now it is up to you to rid this forest of these demons. By doing so, you will restore the land to the prosperity and the peace it once enjoyed."

Rama clutched his bow and removed arrows from his quiver. Rama and Lakshmana followed Vishwamitra into the forest. They heard many strange and frightening sounds. Each step they took brought them deeper into the forest.

Suddenly there was an unearthly roar. The three men stopped. From nowhere a huge rock came hurling out of the sky heading straight for Rama. He slipped an arrow in place and drew his bow. He fired just as the rock was about to hit him. The arrow split the rock in two. The pieces fell harmlessly to earth.

Then appearing out of between two trees, Rama saw a horrible sight. It was the hideous form of the demoness, Tataka. She was enormous. Around her neck was a human skull. She had sharp claws on her hands. She looked at Rama and made a growling noise. Lakshmana decided to wait no longer. He fired his arrow and gravely wounded the demoness. A strange look came over her face as she felt the arrow pierce her flesh. Placing her hand to the wound she moaned, "What mortals have wounded me?" Then taking careful aim, Rama fired his arrow into Tataka's heart killing her.

No sooner had the she-demon died, than the gods in heaven rained lotus blossoms down on Rama blessing him. The three continued on their journey deeper into the forest. Along the way, Rama and Lakshmana killed many demons.

The sage told Rama: "I am delighted with you. I shall give you even greater weapons to defeat any enemy."

He knew that Rama's work was far from complete. There was still the powerful Ravana to deal with. It was one thing to kill Ravana's demons; it was another to kill Ravana himself.

The three finally left the forest. They headed for Mithila to visit King Janaka.

Seeing the sage, Janaka greeted him saying, "Have I told you about my daughter?"

"Please tell me about her," responded the sage.

The king spoke: "A few years ago a portion of my land was being plowed and I found a divine child in a furrow. I called her Sita and adopted her as my own daughter. She has grown into a beautiful, young woman. Many princes have desired her hand in marriage.

"But I wanted the man who married my Sita to be a man of great strength and righteousness. To prove his strength, this man would have to lift and string the ancient bow of Shiva. No man has shown the strength to even lift this bow."

The sage turned to Rama and said, "There is a bow belonging to King Janaka that I would like you to string."

Rama entered a long room filled with thousands of people. The bow was so heavy it took no less than five thousand exceptionally strong men to bring the bow and its casing into the room. Several princes who had tried to lift the bow looked on as Rama approached the weapon. Rama looked at Shiva's bow. First he touched it. It was beautiful. Then with no effort whatsoever, he hoisted the bow from its casing and started to string it. As he did so, the bow snapped in two and fell to the palace floor. First there was disbelief, then everyone stood and chanted, "Rama. Rama."

The king rose to his feet and declared, "Sita has found her spouse! Send a messenger to Ayodhya informing them of the wedding of Rama to my daughter, Sita."

The wedding ceremony was held in the palace. As part of this ceremony, the worship of the sacred fire began. The holiest sages recited mantras, prayers.

After this, King Janaka led Sita to Rama. He placed her hand in his and said to Rama, "This is Sita, my daughter, O Rama, who is from today your partner in life. Accept her. Hold her hand in yours. She will always follow you as your shadow."

Rama looked at Sita. He had never seen a more beautiful woman. Sita looked at Rama. She had never seen a more handsome man.

Following the wedding everyone returned to Ayodhya. All in the city cheered their arrival. Rama and Sita continued to serve their parents and delight the holy ones and gods. Sita and Rama were the perfect husband and wife. They were exceedingly devoted to each other.

Rama's parents watched him mature into a young prince. Rama was a perfectly perfect young man. He had all the noble qualities. He was patient with others' wrongs, but would not do wrong himself. He enjoyed the company of elders and wise men. He was very intelligent and courageous. He was righteous and kind. He was the perfect warrior. He knew when to use violence and when not to. He was healthy, strong and handsome. He was highly learned in the s criptures. Rama was a sat-purusa, the ideal man.


Life In Ayodhya


Now the king was growing older. He noticed omens suggesting his end was near. "I have lived long enough," he thought. "I must be sure my throne goes to Rama, the most worthy of my sons. What a great blessing it would be to see him as king before I go to heaven.

"Then it will be done," Dasaratha concluded, "I shall step down and Rama shall be made king."

The king told everyone about his decision. He informed the priests to begin the sacred rites that would allow Rama to assume the throne of Ayodhya.

Kaikeyi, the last and youngest of the king's three wives, had heard of the decision to make Rama king while Dasaratha was still living. This decision pleased her.

But Manthara, a maid-servant, did not want Rama to be king. If she could somehow convince Kaikeyi to change the king's mind, her position at the palace would be secure.

That evening, she spoke to Kaikeyi in secret. "If Rama takes the throne, you would lose all your control over the king. If Rama is crowned, his mother will control of the kingdom Your rule will come to an end. Awake. Act now. You must convince Dasaratha that it is your son who should be king."

Kaikeyi believed Manthara. She decided to see Dasaratha.

She tried everything to convince Dasaratha to listen to her.

"Dasaratha," Kaikeyi began, "Do you remember that fateful day I saved your life in battle? Do you remember how I stopped your runaway

chariot. "

"Yes," replied the king.

"And do you remember what you said after I saved your life?"

Without waiting for an answer, she said, " Oh my powerful king and beloved husband you promised me two boons. Hear my boons now so that they may be granted."

The king reluctantly listened to his wife's requests.

"First," she began. "I wish to have my son, Bharata, placed upon the throne of Ayodhya. Second, I want Rama banished from the kingdom for a period of no less than fourteen years."

The king fell to his knees and begged his young wife not to hold him to these dreadful wishes.

As a righteous and honest man, he knew he could not go back on his word. Yet, he couldn't bear to ask Rama to forsake the throne and go away for fourteen years. He turned pale and speechless.

Kaikeyi told Rama the terrible news. Rather than argue, Rama comforted his father.

"Father, your word is law. I shall do whatever you bid. It is the sacred duty of a son to respect his father."

Then, he turned to his own mother Kausalya, and requested "Please be sure that father installs Bharata as crown prince."

Rama knelt and touched the feet of his parents respectfully. He stood, turned and left the palace.

Lakshmana declared, "I shall destroy anyone who opposes your right to the throne.."

Rama responded, "No, Lakshmana. You know it is my sacred duty, my dharma, to fulfill these wishes."

"My brother, if you must leave Ayodhya, then I shall follow you," Lakshmana said.

Rama tried to convince Sita to remain, but she said sobbing, "And, it is my duty, my dharma, as a wife to be at your side. How can I live without you? I must join you."

Rama tried hard to convince them to stay but they were insistent.

"Then, Sita, come with me," Rama said.

Rama also gave his brother permission to join them.

As the three left the palace, they cast away their royal robes and put on the clothes of hermits.

The people of Ayodhya wept as Rama, Sita and Lakshmana passed from the city. As the chariot went from sight, Dasaratha cried, "Rama! Rama! Do not leave me."

In time, Dasaratha lost the will to live. His heart simply gave out. Ayodhya mourned the loss of their king.

In a few days, Rama, Lakshmana and Sita crossed the river Ganges searching for a land undisturbed and isolated from everyone.

Soon they reached Chitrakoot, a beautiful place with many trees and streams. It was paradise. They built a small hut near a stream.

Several days had passed. Lakshmana, while hunting in the forest, heard the pounding of a thousand hooves. He climbed a tree to see whose army was approaching. To his amazement, he saw the lead horseman carrying the flag of Ayodhya. Bharata had found his brothers. Lakshmana was sure that his brother had come to kill them.

Lakshmana called to Rama: "A great army is approaching led by our brother, Bharata. I will kill him with my own hands."

"Don't be a fool," Rama said. "He is our brother and he is the king. We must welcome him."

Bharata embraced his brothers. He cried, "My heart is filled with grief and shame. Grief for the loss of our noble father. Shame for being offered the throne that you rightfully deserve. Come back to Ayodhya and be our king."

"That cannot be done," Rama said. "I gave my word and I shall stay here for fourteen years and no less. Then and only then will I return."

Nothing could sway Rama.

"Rama, my brother," Bharata declared, "as long as you are in exile, no one shall be king. To ensure this give me your sandals. I will place them on the throne. For the next fourteen years I will serve our land in your name. And, if after those fourteen years, you do not return, I shall walk into a fire and die."

Bharata took the sandals, mounted his horse and left the forest. In Kosala, Bharata put Rama's sandals on the red and gold Ayodhya throne.


The Forest Life


Several days passed. Rama, Lakshmana and Sita walked south until they came upon Dandaka forest. Once a beautiful place, Dandaka was now a barren wasteland. Shreds of bark from dead trees littered the ground. Stumps of trees were all that remained of a once lush forest. The sound of the wind seemed to warn anyone who approached. At night demons prowled the land in search of flesh.

Religious men who gave up all worldly comforts and became hermits also lived in the forest. They spoke of the horrors that Ravana's demons had done. Rama and Lakshmana promised they would kill all these demons.

After ten years, Rama, Lakshmana and Sita crossed the Godavari River and reached Panchavati. Here was a magnificent forest, untouched by demons. The air was fragrant with the smell of flowers. Fruit grew on every vine. Birds sang joyfully.

"Let us build a hut here." Rama said.

Nearby lived the ancient vulture king, Jatayu. Jatayu made friends with them and enjoyed guarding Sita while the brothers hunted.

Just beyond the clearing lived Shurpanakha, the she-demon. She was Ravana's sister. She had a pot belly, huge ears, claws on her fingers and toes, slits for eyes, and dirty hair.

One day she saw Rama in the forest. She put down the bone she was gnawing on and said, "I want him for my husband."

Using her magical powers, she turned herself into a beautiful maiden.


She asked Rama, "Why does such a strong, handsome man like you live in this forest? Who are you?"

Rama told her his story. Upon seeing Sita, the she-demon said, "That woman is not good enough for you."

Rama responded, "And who, might I ask, is?"

"I am. I can make you happy."

"Perhaps I should introduce you to my brother, Lakshmana,"

Rama said half-jokingly.

Sensing that Rama was not interested in her, the demon grew angry. She assumed her original form and jumped on Sita.

In an instant, Lakshmana took his gold-handled knife from his belt and cut off the she-demon's nose and ears. She howled in pain as she fled.

Shurpanaka ran until she met her brothers Khar and Dushan who lived on the edge of the forest. Seeing his sister's bloodied face, Khar cried, "Who has done this to you?"

His wounded sister whimpered, "A human."

"A human!" Khar replied, "What human can do this?

Take us to them. We will kill them."

Khar gathered his army of demon warriors and marched into the forest.

Lakshmana noticed the sky growing darker. Day seemed to turn into night. Then he looked again. The sky was filled with flying demons. Upon seeing this, Rama told Sita to remain in the hut. With Lakshmana at his side, Rama would face Khar's forces. Rama fired his golden arrows skyward. With each shot, mortally wounded demons fell to earth.

The fierce battle continued. No magic or weapons could save the demons from Rama's divine weaponry. In the end, Khar and his 14,000 warriors were slain.

Shurpanakha watched in horror as her brothers and their army were destroyed. She hurried to Lanka to see her brother, Ravana.

"Oh, Ravana. Khar and Dushan have been killed by humans. All their warriors are dead, too," Shurpanakha cried.

Ravana rose from his throne. The crowns on his ten heads glistened. He raised his ten left arms pointing to his disfigured sister and said, "And how many thousands of humans fought so well?"

"There are but two, my lord." answered Shurpanakha weeping.

"Two!" roared Ravana, his voice echoing through the palace.

"The two banished princes from Ayodhya. They have done this alone," his sister said.

"What gods are on their side?" Ravana wondered.

"One more thing," Shurpanakha added. "Rama's wife, Sita, is the most beautiful woman I have ever seen. She would make a lovely queen."

"Sita," said Ravana.

"Whoever Sita embraces as her husband will outgain the gods in happiness," she added.

"Perhaps there is a way to revenge my sister's wounds and avenge the loss of my two brothers," Ravana thought. "Maybe I can punish Rama in a way he will never expect."

Ravana summoned his magic chariot and flew off. Over the vast ocean and great mountains he travelled until he landed at the den of Mareech, the magician. This magician was able to assume the form of any human or beast.

Ravana told Mareecha about Rama. He also spoke of his desire to take Sita from the forest, carry her back to Lanka and make her his queen.

I shall do whatever I can to help," said the magician.

He continued. "I will go to the Chilrakoot forest where I shall change into a golden deer and stand near their hut. I will lure Rama away. You will do the rest."

The next day, a beautiful deer appeared at the stream in Panchavati. Sita was enchanted by it.

"Please capture that deer for me," Sita asked Rama.

Lakshmana looked carefully at the creature. He told his brother, "This deer is too beautiful. It is too perfect. I have never seen a deer like that before. Brother, approach it with caution."

"Stay with Sita, " Rama told Lakshmana.

"I will, my lord," Lakshmana replied.

No sooner had Rama taken a step toward the deer than it darted into the woods. It was taking Rama farther and farther from the hut. Then deep in the forest, the deer paused. Rama moved closer to it. As he did so, the deer changed into the form of Mareech.

"Lakshmana was right," cried Rama. His heart was filled with fear. He ran as fast as he could.

Then he heard a voice that sounded exactly like his own cry out, "Lakshmana! Help me!"

Rama knew he had been tricked. He hoped his brother would ignore these cries.

"Lakshmana," sighed Sita. "That is your brother, my husband. He is crying for help. You must go to him."

"But Rama told me not to leave your side."

Sita insisted, "You must help him."

"I cannot," replied Lakshmana.

"You cannot? Are you not worried for my husband's safety? How can you just stand there? Do you not help him because he is only your half-brother? Or because he is my husband?"

"Then I shall find him," said Sita.

"No!" said Lakshmana.

"If you do not go after him, Lakshmana, I shall kill myself."

Finally Lakshmana made his decision. Before he left, he drew a circle around the entrance to the hut.

"Sita," he said, "do not step beyond this magical circle. Inside of it you will be safe."

Lakshmana grasped his quiver and ran in the direction of Rama's voice.

From behind a tree, Ravana watched his plan unfold perfectly.

In an instant, he changed himself into a sanyasi, an old wise man, clutching a begging bowl.

Seeing this common sight, and knowing it was her duty to feed the poor, Sita offered the man fruit. Then Ravana noticed the magical circle. He knew that as long she remained within the circle, he could not get her. He had to get Sita outside of it.

"Take this offering," said Sita.

"I am a sanyasi. I cannot enter your home. To accept your gracious offering you must leave your home."

Sita hesitated. She had always helped the poor. How could she ignore this man? Disregarding Lakshmana's warning, Sita stepped beyond the circle.

Then like a tiger springing from high grass, Ravana grabbed Sita and placed her in his chariot.

Sita screamed, but it was too late. The chariot rose into the sky and sped off to Lanka.

As Ravana headed south, Jatayu, the great eagle, saw Sita. Jatayu spread his huge wings and flew up to the chariot. "Free Sita," Jatayu declared "or I shall kill you."

Ravana ignored the threat. Jatayu tore off one of the chariot's railings. He gently removed Sita from the chariot and set her on the earth.

In blind fury, Jatayu attacked tearing off Ravana's arms and heads. Blood spurted from Ravana's mutilated body. As fast as Ravana lost an arm or head, it grew back. Jatayu was growing tired from the fight. Sensing this, Ravana drew his sword and cut off both of Jatayu's wings. The brave bird fell to the ground dying. Sita caressed Jatayu.

She thanked him for trying to save her. In an instant, Ravana pulled Sita back into the chariot and staggered back to Lanka.

Once in the city, Ravana tried to convince Sita to stay in Lanka and be his queen. But Sita would not listen. She loved only Rama. Hearing this Ravana led Sita out of the palace and into a garden. He guarded her with a hundred demons.

Back in the forest, Lakshmana found Rama unharmed. Terror filled Lakshmana's heart. He, too, had been tricked.

Upon returning to the hut, Rama cried out,"Sita is gone. What will I do?"

Rama knelt down and cried uncontrollably. "What must she be suffering?" he wondered.

Rama gathered his strength. He said, "This act shall not go unpunished. I will slay Ravana and his entire family."


Rama's Stay in Kiskindha


Rama and Lakshmana began their search for Sita. They entered Kiskindha, the kingdom of the monkeys. Kiskindha was located south of Kosala. Soon they came to a mountain where Sugriva lived. He was the ruler of the monkey kingdom. Hanuman, a devoted follower of Sugriva, guarded the entrance to the kingdom. Seeing the brothers approach, he ordered them to halt.

"Who are you?" Hanuman asked.

"I am Rama, the exiled prince of Ayodhya. This is my brother, Lakshmana. We wish to see your king. I am hoping he can help us find my wife, Sita. She was taken by Ravana."

Rama and Lakshmana met Sugriva. They told their story.

Sugriva said, "I, too, am in exile. My brother seized my kingdom and my queen."

Sugriva paused. He thought about Rama's story. Then said. "Help me regain my throne and I will help you find your wife.

One of my people saw Sita being carried off to Lanka. As she passed overhead, she dropped this."

Rama reached out his hand. It was one of Sita's ornaments.

Tears filled Rama's eyes.

Rama and Lakshmana did as they were asked. They defeated Sugriva's brother and won back the throne.

It was now the rainy season. Rama and Lakshmana returned to the forest. They could not begin their search for Sita until the rains stopped in autumn. Rama grew more depressed. The rain seemed to Rama like tears from the gods.

Then when the sun shone upon the land again, Hanuman arrived. Sugriva had fulfilled his promise. The monkey warrior was accompanied by a great monkey army. Hanuman divided his troops into four divisions. Each division would go in search of Sita for one month.

At the end of the month, three of the four divisions returned with no word of Sita's whereabouts. Only Hanuman's division had yet to return.


Hanuman's Prank


One day as Hanuman and his men searched for Sita, they saw a great bird on a mountainside. This bird was the brother of Jatayu. Hanuman told the bird about his search. Then he asked, "Do you know where Sita is?"

"Yes," the bird said, "She is in the Asoka garden near Ravana's palace."

"How do I get to her?" asked Hanuman.

"You must cross a great ocean," the bird said.

Hanuman's army marched to the mighty ocean. There was no way they could cross this great body of water.

"We must return," said one of the monkey warriors. "How can we get to the other side?"

In a loud voice, Hanuman declared, "I will cross this ocean and rescue Sita."

Hanuman prayed for strength. He saw the unhappy image of Rama. Hanuman prayed to Rama. Then incredibly, he began to grow. He grew so huge that the ground began to shake.

With a great cry, "Victory to Rama," Hanuman leapt into the sky.

The monkey army cheered as their leader flew across the great ocean. The gods smiled down on Hanuman as they admired his courage and devotion.

Nothing could stop Hanuman. On the horizon, he could see Lanka. As he approached the city, he changed back to his normal size. Once in Lanka, he set out to find Sita.

Soon he came upon Ravana's palace. He looked in each of the palace gardens, but he could not find Sita. How could he return without Sita or some word of her whereabouts. Then he saw a grove of trees. Beneath one of the trees was the most beautiful woman Hanuman had ever seen. She was crying and repeating, "Rama, Rama."

"I have found her," Hanuman declared. "Lord Rama will be so happy."

Hanuman looked around. He noticed that Sita was surrounded by many she-demons.

Just as Hanuman was about approach her, he saw Ravana coming. The king of Lanka was sat on the ground next to Sita. He was saying, "Sita, come with me. Come live in my palace. I will make you my queen. You can have anything you wish."

Hanuman hid from view.

Sita spoke: "How dare you speak to me this way. You have kidnapped me. I am Rama's wife, King Janaka's daughter. Rama will come for me. He will rescue me and kill you and all you demons. If you let me go, I will try to spare your life."

Ravana seemed hurt by Sita's words. Anger and sorrow filled Ravana's heart. He knew at that moment he would never have Sita.

"Then you shall remain here," he said as he turned away.

Hanuman did not move a muscle. He waited and waited. The she-demons guarding Sita were getting tired. One by one they fell asleep.

Here was his chance to speak to Sita. Hanuman approached her and knelt at her feet. "Do not fear. I am Hanuman, Rama's servant and messenger. He has sent me to find you. He cries for your return."

"How do I know you are telling me the truth? You may be just another demon in disguise." Sita said.

Hanuman reached into his pocket and removed Rama's ring. "Here," he said, "This should prove that Rama has sent me."

Sita pressed her hands to her face and cried. "I am sorry I doubted you. Go to Rama and tell him where I am. Tell him I will wait for him to save me." Sita gave Hanuman a jewel. "Here. Take this to my lord as proof of my love."

Suddenly the demons awoke. They attacked Hanuman. He killed them with ease.

Hanuman was finally taken to the palace. Ravana ordered him killed.

One of Ravana's wise men reminded the king, "It is not permitted to kill a messenger."

"Then we shall punish him. Set his tail on fire. Let him return home that way," Ravana declared.

As the king's men wrapped Hanuman's tail in cloth to set it on fire he grew it longer and longer. The more they wrapped, the longer Hanuman grew his tail. Finally, Ravana ordered, "Set it on fire!" cried Ravana.

With his long tail on fire, Hanuman flew into the sky. He decided to set the city of Lanka ablaze to punish Ravana. He flew low over the city and set each building, temple, palace and garden on fire. Flames shot high into the sky. As he flew over Asoka garden he made sure Sita was safe. Then before he headed home, he put his tail in the ocean to put out the fire.


The Great War


Hanuman received a great welcome from his warriors. They hurried back to tell Rama the good news. By now Rama had given up all hope of ever seeing Sita alive again. When Rama saw Hanuman returning, he ran to him.

"I pray you have word of Sita."

Without saying a word, Hanuman gave Rama Sita's jewel.

Rama praised Hanuman for his bravery and said, "You have given me reason to live again."

Meanwhile back at Lanka palace, Vibhishana, Ravana's brother, tried to save Sita's life. "Let her go," he said, "so we can save our kingdom from Rama's anger."

Ravana responded angrily, "If I return Sita, I will be ridiculed by all the gods and demons."

warned again, "Do not underestimate Rama's strength. It is said that Rama is an incarnation of Vishnu sent to earth to destroy all that is unholy. With his powers he will destroy Lanka. Why do you tempt such a fate?"

"I fear no one," Ravana roared.

"Then," Vibhishana said, "I can no longer remain in Lanka. Save yourself brother."

"Then go," shouted Ravana. "I have no place in my kingdom for the weak and timid."

Vibhishana left the palace and magically flew to Rama. Arriving at his camp, Vibhishana declared, "I am the brother of Ravana. I tried to convince my brother to return your wife. But he refused and I left Lanka.

I wish to join you and fight at your side."

Rama responded, "Vibhishana, you have rejected evil for good. You are welcomed here."

Now Rama had to make a battle plan. Vibhishana told him that Ravana and his evil son, Indrajit, had great magical powers. His army was made up of millions of demons.

For his honesty and bravery, Rama promised Vibhishana that he would become the new king of Lanka.

Rama stood on the shoreline of the great ocean and spoke to the ocean god. "Hear me," he called. "I am Rama. I have weapons that are beyond imagination. In an instant I can dry your ocean. If you wish to avoid this fate, show me how to reach Lanka."

The ocean said, "Rama, here is Nala, son of the great builder. He will build you a bridge across these waters. I shall support that bridge."

With the help of the monkey army, Nala put up a bridge made of wood, rocks, and stones. Every creature helped in its own way. It took five days to complete the bridge to Lanka.

Rama, Hanuman, and the monkey army crossed the bridge by nightfall. As they crossed into Lanka they shouted, "Victory to Rama!"

Hanuman's army surrounded the city. Rama knew that Sita would soon be safe.

Ravana called for two of his demons. "Change yourselves into monkeys. Move among the monkey army and find out what you can."

The demons entered The camp and Vibhishana recognized them. They were brought to Rama. He decided not to punish them. He said, "Send a message to your king. Tell him that I have come to save my wife and kill him."

Ravana was angered by his inability to learn about Rama's plans. Enraged he called upon one of his demons.

"Make me an exact copy of Rama's head. Then bring it to me," he said.

Ravana took the head to Sita. "O, Sita," he said, "Rama has failed in his attempt to rescue you. His army has been destroyed. That is the end of your hope. The time has come to change your mind and become my queen."

Sita looked at Ravana and said, "I do not believe any of this."

Ravana responded: "I thought you might say that. So I brought the head of your husband, soaked in blood and sand, to prove my words."

Sita collapsed wailing, "Alas, O Rama, you have followed your dharma. But I have been widowed. Widowhood is a terrible tragedy in the life of a woman devoted to dharma. You came to save me, but you gave your own life.

O Rama you are happy now. You have rejoined your beloved father in heaven. But what shall I do?

O Rama, I am the terrible woman who has brought all this upon you. I pray take me too. Take me with you, my love."

Angered by Sita's devotion to Rama, Ravana stormed from the garden.

When he returned to the palace, he ordered all his troops to march toward the city gates.

For four days both armies stood poised.

On the morning of the fifth day, the great battle began. Each side suffered terrible losses. Blood filled the streets of Lanka. Bodies of fallen warriors were everywhere.

Rama and Lakshmana fought gallantly.

Hanuman was injured in a duel. Vibhishana showed great valor.

Indrajit, Ravana's son, rained poison arrows upon Rama and Lakshmana. So overwhelming was this attack, that the two brothers suffered many wounds. "I shall send both of you to the house of death," cried Indrajit.

Rama and Lakshmana were bleeding heavily, but they fought on.

Indrajit hurled even more powerful weapons at them. Each weapon took a new toll. Rama and Lakshmana fell to the ground unconscious.

Vibhishana prayed to the gods for their safety. "Protect Rama and Lakshmana while they are hurt."

While the monkey warriors stood by grief-stricken, the battle raged on without Rama and Lakshmana. Ravana's demons made themselves invisible and attacked the heart of the monkey army. Ravana's forces were merciless. Thousands were killed by unseen attackers.

Seeing his forces in retreat, Hanuman charged on with a great cry. "Victory to Rama! Death to Ravana!"


With his remarkable strength, Hanuman smashed the skull of every visible enemy. He challenged any of Ravana's men to advance. Seeing Hanuman's great courage, the monkey-army rallied behind their leader and fought harder.

Ravana's army was losing its advantage. Angered by this news, he decided to join the battle. He climbed in his chariot and soared above Lanka in search of Rama.

By now Rama and Lakshmana, having regained consciousness but still dazed, returned to the fight. Ravana viewed the battle scene from the clouds. Then he spotted Lakshmana. He aimed his magic bow and fired. The arrow cut through the air and struck Rama's brother in the chest. He collapsed. Hanuman rushed to Lakshmana's side. He gently lifted the wounded prince and carried him to safety.

Just when things were starting to look up for Rama's warriors, Indrajit returned to the battle. He was now invisible. All the monkey soldiers could hear was the mocking laughter of Indrajit as he soared over them. Indrajit's weapons took an enormous toll on the monkeys. By the time he returned to the palace, every monkey was either wounded or killed. Only Rama, Hanuman, and Vibhishana remained standing.

Rama looked upon around and said, "The battle has been lost."

Then in a weakened voice, Jambuvan, one of the leaders of the army, said, "No, Rama. There is still a way we can regain the advantage and defeat Ravana. Tell Hanuman to go to Kailasa Mountain. There he will see a blazing hill of medicinal herbs. Have him bring these herbs back before sunrise and our army will be saved."

Hanuman rose above the earth and flew off with great speed.

When he reached the mountain, he saw the hill that Jambuvan described. But he could not find the herbs. Realizing time was short, he uprooted the entire hill and carried it back to Lanka. Hanuman flew off balancing the hill in one hand.

When he returned to Lanka, the monkey warriors began inhaling the healing air of the herbs. One-by-one, they rose to their feet and regained their strength. Even Lakshmana recovered from his near-mortal wound. Hanuman returned the hill to its original place.

Rama embraced Hanuman and said, "I know no one who shows your valor and devotion."

With that, Hanuman cried out, "Victory to Rama!"

Using all their weapons, Rama, Lakshmana, Vibhishana, and Hanuman finally overpowered Indrajit. Ravana's son had fought long and hard, but now he was dead.

Hearing of his son's death, Ravana decided now was the time to kill Rama and put an end to this bloodshed.

Arming himself with his most powerful weapons, Ravana left Lanka palace. He spotted Rama leading the monkey army toward the city gates. Ravana fired a magic arrow at Rama. Seeing the arrow, Rama split it with his own arrow.

Ravana tried everything to overpower his foe. But each time, Rama had an answer.

The fight lasted two days. Rama could feel his strength leaving him. He turned to one of his sages and said, "My spirit is nearly gone. My arms and legs ache. My heart wants to go on, but my body can no longer respond."

The sage said to Rama: "Listen carefully to this secret. It is the heart of the sun that will bring you victory and the auspiciousness to destroy Ravana. Worship the sun, O Rama. He alone protects all beings. Pray to him."

As Ravana was reloading his weapons, Rama knelt to pray to the sun.

Then the sage said, "Rama, you will this very moment conquer Ravana."

After looking at the sun, Rama felt his strength return. His heart was filled with joy.

Ravana attacked again. Both armies stood by and watched.

Rama reached for his most powerful weapon, the Brahma-missile, to be used only when all else had failed. He took it to his hands. As he did so, the earth shook. All the warriors covered their eyes and fell to the earth.

Rama stood poised. He aimed the weapon at the on-rushing Ravana. He fired. The missile struck Ravana's chest and exploded. Ravana fell dead.

"Victory to Rama!" shouted his men.

The gods praised Rama. The earth became steady once more. The wind blew softly. The sun shone brighter than ever. Vibhishana knelt at the body of his dead brother and burst into tears. "Why didn't you listen to my words? Why were you so overcome with Sita and power?"

Rama touched Vibhishana's shoulder and said, "Our ancients say that you should not mourn a mighty fallen warrior on the battlefield. Victory is the monopoly of none. Weep not for one who is no more. Rise, for we still have work to do."

Vibhishana prepared the funeral rites for his brother. "My brother was so evil, people will try to keep me from giving him an honorable funeral."

Rama replied, "No one will stop this rite. Hostility ends with death. He is your brother and he is mine too. You must honor him with this rite."

Following the funeral rite, Rama made Vibhishana the new king of Lanka.

Vibhishana's wife and maidens took Sita from the garden. A beautiful sari was placed around her. Jewels made her sparkle. A scarlet spot adorned her forehead.

Sita could not wait to see her victorious husband.

Rama entered the palace and Sita bowed at his feet. He felt both love and sorrow for his wife. "We shall return to Ayodhya," he said.


Period After Coronation


Once back in Ayodhya, Rama seemed troubled. Many people in the city expressed doubt about Sita's faithfulness while in Lanka.

One day a messenger came to Rama and said, "I fear that the people of our kingdom have lost faith in your wife's virtue. Ravana, they say, made her unfit to be your queen. Even the lowest men whisper, 'How can Rama forget that Sita lived with another man?"

Rama stood at the window of his room and looked out upon Ayodhya. Sorrow filled his heart.

Lakshmana came to see his brother. Rama turned to him and asked, "What is a king? Kings cannot be blamed or ridiculed. They are above all other men. They are beyond doubt."

"I know of what you speak of, " his brother replied. "I have heard the ugly rumors and lies."

"I have tried to think of a way to deal with this problem. I cannot rule Ayodhya and not have my people respect my queen. Therefore, with great sorrow and resolve, I have made a decision. Before dawn tomorrow you and Sumantra will take Sita back to the forest. Leave her there and return."

"But she will die."

"This is the nature of the world," Rama said. "This is what I must do."

Lakshmana said sadly, "The dharma law is difficult to know and sometimes more difficult to follow. This act is wrong. There is no way that Sita would ever have disobeyed you or done what the people say. I know this in my heart."

"Do as I say, my brother."

Before sunrise, Ayodhya was shroudded in dense fog. It semed as if the sun refused to show itself this fateful day.

Sumantra, Lakshmana and Sita crossed the river in a small fishing boat. Lakshmana sat at Sita's side. Sita could see him crying.

"What is wrong?" she asked.

"My brother, your husband has listened too long and too well to the words of the people of Ayodhya. They say you were unfaithful to Rama. And to avoid any more disgrace, our king has ask me to escort you back to the forest."

Sita turned to Sumantra. "Do not look for reason here," he said. "This act is beyond men's knowing. Rama will live alone from this day forth."

"Why must this be so?" cried Sita.

Sumantra continued: "All the universe is a sign to be read rightly. War and peace, love and separation are hidden gateways we must pass to get to other worlds. Let us not grow old thinking that truth is what most people see or say it is.

Sita, you will get back to Rama only by entering this forest. This world is like a breath on a mirror. It does not last. Have patience."

Sumantra and Lakshmana returned Sita to the forest.

Sita smiled and said, "Good-bye, Sumantra. You have touched my heart with your wise words and given me new hope. Good-bye Lakshmana, my borther-in-law. Be well."

Sita stood on the river bank as Sumantra and Lakshmana's boat crossed the glistening river. Then she heard the soft voice of the river goddess say, "Let life go, Sita. Do not outlive life. Come home. Come home. Dive into me."

Sita was about to step into the river when she heard the voice of an old man.

"Do not enter the river," he said.

Sita looked at the shaggy old man and asked, "Who are you?"

"I am Valmiki, a poet and a hermit. I live in this forest. Make my home yours."

He led Sita to his home in the forest.

There Sita gave birth to Rama's twins sons, Kusa and Lava. For the next twelve years she and her sons lived with Valmiki.

During that time, Valmiki composed a poem called the Ramayana. When he finished it, he taught the poem to the boys line-by-line. He taught them how to sing the poem while playing the flute and drum.

The boys learned well.

In Ayodhya, King Rama decided to hold a great public festival. He invited everyone in the kngdom to take part. There would be music, story-telling and singing.

Kusa and Lava came to Ayodhya to recite what Valmiki called the earth's first poem.

On the first day of the festival, the boys began singing the story. Rama heard about this wonderful poem and came to see it performed. After hearing only a few lines, Rama asked, "What is this beautiful song called?"

"Ramayana," said Kusa.

Rama looked at the twins. His heart ached with emotion. "These are my sons!" he declared.

He sent a messenger to find Sita and convince her to return to Ayodhya.

The next day Sita returned. She was dressed in bright gold and scarlet. Rama was overjoyed.

Sita approached Rama and said, "Let me prove my innocence before you once and for all."

"I give you permission," Rama replied.

Then Sita took a step back and said, "Mother earth, if I have been faithful to my husband, take me home."

The earth rumbled. The ground rolled and moved beneath Sita. With a great noise the ground opened and took Sita back. The earth shook again and closed.

For that moment, everywhere in the whole universe, there was harmony.

"I will never see Sita again as long as I live on earth," Rama said.

"It is a brief life given to us."

Rama ruled Ayodhya for a thousand years.

One day Rama he thought, "Where is my life? And where am I?

I want to go home now. I was born of the god, Vishnu, and it is time for me to return to him."

Rama left the palace and entered the crowded street of Ayodhya. Everyone stood quietly as their king passed.

Rama continued walking until he reached the banks of the Sarayu.

He touched its water with his feet. All the gods looked down on him. Even Brahma, the creator, came in person to see Rama.

He spoke to Rama: "Come, O Vishnu, join your brothers, Lakshmana, Satrughna, and Bharata. Return to Vishnu. Return to heaven."

With Brahma's words, Rama smiled and stepped into the river. All of Rama's followers entered the river after him and all went to heaven. Rama was home.

The Ramayana was loved and praised by all. The gods were pleased.

Lava and Kusa traveled throughout India singing Valmiki's glorious poem about their father.

Wherever they went they said, "Men who listen to the Ramayana will live a long life. They will be free of sins and will have many sons. Women who listen to the Ramayana will be blessed with children like Rama and his brothers. All those who listen please Rama. Such is the glory of this story. May all who recite it or listen to it regularly find increased love, wisdom, and strength."
 

印度神话简介(二)Major Deities in the Hindu Pantheon




Agni
Agni is the god of fire who was prominent mostly during the Vedic period. Since fire was the means of sacrifice, Agni was regarded as the mediator between heaven and earth and hence between the gods and humans. He is closely linked with the Vedic god Soma who is a personification of the intoxicating soma plant that is sacrificed to become the drink of immortality. Agni appears in the epic Ramayana when Sita undergoes her trial by fire.

Brahma
Brahma is the first of the so-called Hindu "Trinity". He is the great four-headed god of creation. Although he still maintains a place in Hindu mythology, he no longer has any real importance in Hindu daily worship. His consort is Saraswari, the goddess of wisdom and his vehicle is a goose.

Ganesh
Ganesh is the elephant-headed son of the god Siva and his wife Parvati. He is the patron god of scribes and the remover of obstacles. Because of this latter aspect, invocations are made to Ganesh at the beginning of any undertaking in order to insure its success. In Hindu mythology, there are differing accounts of how Ganesh acquired the head of an elephant. In each of them, however, he is said to have come between Siva and Parvati in some way (usually with sexual overtones) and was rashly beheaded by his father who promptly replaced his head with that of an elephant's.

Indra
Indra is the example par excellence of a king and warrior-god. He is sometimes referred to as the Hercules of Vedic mythology. His importance reaches a high point near the end of the Vedic period and then begins to decline somewhat. He is well known from one famous battle in which he acquired the title "slayer of Vrtra" since he killed Vrtra, the demon of drought and thereby released the waters that were imprisoned by him. He also appears in several places in the Ramayana epic. In one story, he acquires a thousand eyes (vaginas in some versions) all over his body as a punishment for sleeping with the wife of the holy man Gautama.

Kali
Kali is one of four major Hindu goddesses that each have an association with the god Siva. Besides Kali, these include Parvati, Uma, and Durga. Kali is most frequently portrayed in her terrible blood-drenched form. Around her neck hangs a necklace of human skulls and her tongue hangs out dripping with blood. Around her waist are human hands while she holds a decapitated head. Despite her terrible form, she is adored still today by certain groups of Hindus, especially in the region of Bengal.

Kama
In Sanskrit, the word kama means "desire" and the proper name Kama is used for the Hindu god of love. Kama is often compared to the figure of Cupid from Greco-Roman mythology and in fact there are many interesting similarities between the two figures. The most obvious is his representation as a beautiful youth armed with a bow and arrows. His bow is made of sugar cane, his string from a line of honey bees, and his arrows are each tipped with a flower.

Siva
Siva's name literally means "auspicious" and it is an appropriate des cription of him. He is often portrayed as a king, yogi, or ascetic in Hindu mythology and art. His importance earns him a place as the third member of the Hindu "trinity" in which he is usually thought of as the god who destroys (recall, Brahma is the Creator and Vishnu the Preserver). Actually, he is one of the more complex images of deity in the Hindu pantheon. His destructive power leads ultimately to good for he removes impurity for the sake of liberation. Like in other places in Hindu religion, we find in Siva the union of opposite principles which make him a representation of the totality of life. He is at the same time creator and destroyer, ascetic and erotic, life-denying and life-affirming, spiritual and material. He combines the Hindu life-stages (asramas) of householder and ascetic. In at least one depiction, he exhibits both male and female qualities. In the West, he is best known in his form as Siva "Nataraj" -- Lord of the Dance -- who dances the world both into and out of existence. Several attributes or associations which are related to Siva are his bull (Nandi), cobra snake, phallus (lingum), trident, matted hair, and tiger-skin loincloth. His wives include Parvati and Sati and his sons are Ganesh (elephant-headed) and Skanda (many-headed).

Vishnu
As the second member of the Hindu "trinity", Vishnu is generally said to be the Preserver or Sustainer of life, especially in his associations with the principles of order, righteousness, and truth (dharma). Every now and then, when these are threatened, he come out of his transcendence in order to restore order. In each case, he takes on an earthly form and becomes incarnated. There are a total of ten incarnations (avatars) of Vishnu. These include a fish, tortoise, man-lion, boar, dwarf, Parasu-Rama, Rama (of Ramayana fame), Krisna, Buddha, and Kalki, who is yet to come. Vishnu is often depicted reclining on a coiled and many-headed cobra which rests on the cosmic waters. Out of his naval blossoms a lotus which hold Brahma, the god of creation whose responsibilities Vishnu has assumed. Beside him is his consort, Lakshmi. In his four hands he holds a conch shell, mace, lotus, and discus.
 

印度神话简介(三)Rise of Religions and Emergence of the State

Buddhism and Jainism

The sixth century BC was a time of social and intellectual ferment in India. It was then that Mahavira founded the Jain religion, and Gautam Buddha attained enlightenment. The two great religions, Jainism and Buddhism, preached non-violence to all living creatures, tolerance and self-discipline, values that have become the cornerstones of the Indian ethos. The teachings of these faiths won immediate popular acceptance owing to their simplicity and practicality; the sermons of both were preached in commonly spoken languages. Later, Buddhist monks were to spread their religion south to Sri Lanka and north-east to China, Japan, Korea and the whole of South-east Asia, where it is practised till today.

Rise of the State

With land becoming property and the society being divided on the basis of occupations and castes, conflicts and disorders were bound to arise. Organised power to resolve these issues therefore emerged, gradually leading to formation of full-fledged state systems, including vast empires.

The Mauryan Empire

By the end of the third century BC, most of North India was knit together in the first great Indian empire by Chandragupta Maurya. His son Bindusara extended the Mauryan empire over virtually the entire subcontinent, giving rise to an imperial vision that was to dominate successive centuries of political aspirations. The greatest Mauryan emperor was Ashoka the Great (286-231 BC) whose successful campaigns culminated in the annexation of Kalinga (modern Orissa). Overcome by the horrors of war, he was probably the first victorious ruler to renounce war on the battlefield. Ashoka converted to Buddhism, but did not impose his faith on his subjects. Instead, he tried to convert them through edicts inscribed on rock in the local dialects, using the earliest known post-Harappan s cript known as Brahmi.

The Mauryan economy was essentially agrarian. The State owned huge farms and these were cultivated by slaves and farm labourers. Taxes collected on land, trade and manufacture of handicrafts were the other major sources of income during this era.

In 327 BC, Alexander of Macedonia crossed into northwest India. He conquered a large part of the Indian territory before his generals, tired of war, forced him to return home. Alexander left behind Greek governors to rule over Indian territories won by him. But with time, these regions were lost out to Indian states through conflict and slow absorption. However, the contact between the two cultures left a more lasting impact on Indian art. Sculptures of the region bear a marked Greek influence.

Following Ashoka's death in 232 BC, the Mauryan empire started disintegrating. This was an open invitation to invaders from Central Asia to seek their fortunes in India. This period saw the rise of several smaller kingdoms which did not last very long.
 

格式塔理论(一)-丁丁光盘选贴

The Gestalt Archive, maintained by the Society for Gestalt Theory and its Applications (GTA) presents:


--------------------------------------------------------------------------------


GESTALT THEORY


by Max Wertheimer (1924)


(1st part)


--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Über Gestalttheorie [an address before the Kant Society, Berlin, '7th December, 1924], Erlangen, 1925.
In the translation by Willis D. Ellis published in his "Source Book of Gestalt Psychology,"
New York: Harcourt, Brace and Co, 1938.
Reprinted by the Gestalt Journal Press, New York 1997.
zur deutschen Originalfassung hier klicken!


--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

What is Gestalt theory and what does it intend? Gestalt theory was the outcome of concrete investigations in psychology, logic, and epistemology. The prevailing situation at the time of its origin may be briefly sketched as follows. We go from the world of everyday events to that of science, and not unnaturally assume that in making this transition we shall gain a deeper and more precise understanding of essentials. The transition should mark an advance. And yet, though one may have learned a great deal, one is poorer than before. It is the same in psychology. Here too we find science intent upon a systematic collection of data, yet often excluding through that very activity precisely that which is most vivid and real in the living phenomena it studies. Somehow the thing that matters has eluded us.


What happens when a problem is solved, when one suddenly "sees the point"? Common as this experience is, we seek in vain for it in the textbooks of psychology. Of things arid, poor, and inessential there is an abundance, but that which really matters is missing. Instead we are told of formation of concepts, of abstraction and generalization, of class concepts and judgments, perhaps of associations, creative phantasy, intuitions, talents - anything but an answer to our original problem. And what are these last words but names for the problem? Where are the penetrating answers? Psychology is replete with terms of great potentiality - personality, essence, intuition, and the rest. But when one seeks to grasp their concrete content, such terms fail.


This is the situation and it is characteristic of modern science that the same problem should appear everywhere. Several attempts have been made to remedy the matter. One was a frank defeatism preaching the severance of science and life: there are regions which are inaccessible to science. Other theories established a sharp distinction between the natural and moral sciences: the exactitude and precision of chemistry and physics are characteristic of natural science, but "scientific" accuracy has no place in a study of the mind and its ways. This must be renounced in favour of other categories.


Without pausing for further examples, let us consider rather a question naturally underlying the whole discussion: Is "science" really the kind of thing we have implied? The word science has often suggested a certain outlook, certain fundamental assumptions, certain procedures and attitudes - but do these imply that this is the only possibility of scientific method? Perhaps science already embodies methods leading in an entirely different direction, methods which have been continually stifled by the seemingly necessary, dominant ones. It is conceivable, for instance, that a host of facts and problems have been concealed rather than illuminated by the prevailing scientific tradition. Even though the traditional methods of science are undoubtedly adequate in many cases, there may be others where they lead us astray. Perhaps something in the very nature of the traditional outlook may have led its exponents at times to ignore precisely that which is truly essential.


Gestalt theory will not be satisfied with sham solutions suggested by a simple dichotomy of science and life. Instead, Gestalt theory is resolved to penetrate the problem itself by examining the fundamental assumptions of science. It has long seemed obvious - and is, in fact, the characteristic tone of European science - that "science" means breaking up complexes into their component elements. Isolate the elements, discover their laws, then reassemble them, and the problem is solved. All wholes are reduced to pieces and piecewise relations between pieces.


The fundamental "formula" of Gestalt theory might be expressed in this way [1]. There are wholes, the behaviour of which is not determined by that of their individual elements, but where the part-processes are themselves determined by the intrinsic nature of the whole. It is the hope of Gestalt theory to determine the nature of such wholes.


With a formula such as this one might close, for Gestalt theory is neither more nor less than this. It is not interested in puzzling out philosophic questions which such a formula might suggest.


Gestalt theory has to do with concrete research; it is not only an outcome but a device : not only a theory about results but a means toward further discoveries. This is not merely the proposal of one or more problems but an attempt to see what is really taking place in science. This problem cannot be solved by listing possibilities for systematization, classification, and arrangement. If it is to be attacked at all, we must be guided by the spirit of the new method and by the concrete nature of the things themselves which we are studying, and set ourselves to penetrate to that which is really given by nature.


There is another difficulty that may be illustrated by the following example. Suppose a mathematician shows you a proposition and you begin to "classify" it. This proposition, you say, is of such and such type, belongs in this or that historical category, and so on. Is that how the mathematician works?


"Why, you haven't grasped the thing at all," the mathematician will exclaim. "See here, this formula is not an independent, closed fact that can be dealt with for itself alone. You must see its dynamic functional relationship to the whole from which it was lifted or you will never understand it."


What holds for the mathematical formula applies also to the "formula" of Gestalt theory. The attempt of Gestalt theory to disclose the functional meaning of its own formula is no less strict than is the mathematician's. The attempt to explain Gestalt theory in a short essay is the more difficult because of the terms which are used: part, whole, intrinsic determination. All of them have in the past been the topic of endless discussions where each disputant has understood them differently. And even worse has been the cataloguing attitude adopted toward them. What they lacked has been actual research. Like many another "philosophic" problem they have been withheld from contact with reality and scientific work.


About all I can hope for in so short a discussion is to suggest a few of the problems which at present occupy the attention of Gestalt theory and something of the way they are being attacked.


To repeat: the problem has not merely to do with scientific work - it is a fundamental problem of our times. Gestalt theory is not something suddenly and unexpectedly dropped upon us from above; it is, rather, a palpable convergence of problems ranging throughout the sciences and the various philosophic standpoints of modern times.


Let us take, for example, an event in the history of psychology.


One turned from a living experience to science and asked what it had to say about this experience, and one found an assortment of elements, sensational images, feelings, acts of will and laws governing these elements - and was told, "Take your choice, reconstruct from them the experience you had." Such procedure led to difficulties in concrete psychological research and to the emergence of problems which defied solution by traditional analytic methods. Historically the most important impulse came from v. Ehrenfels who raised the following problem. Psychology had said that experience is a compound of elements: we hear a melody and then, upon hearing it again, memory enables us to recognize it. But what is it that enables us to recognize the melody when it is played in a new key? The sum of the elements is different, yet the melody is the same; indeed, one is often not even aware that a transposition has been made.


When in retrospect we consider the prevailing situation we are struck by two aspects of v. Ehrenfels's thesis; on the one hand one is surprised at the essentially summative character of his theory, on the other one admires his courage in propounding and defending his proposition. Strictlv interpreted, v. Ehrenfels's position was this: I play a familiar melody of six tones and employ six new tones, yet you recognize the melody despite the change. There must be a something more than the sum of six tones, viz. a seventh something, which is the form-quality, the Gestaltqualität, of the original six. It is this seventh factor or element which enabled you to recognize the melody despite its transposition.
However strange this view may seem, it shares with many another subsequently abandoned hypothesis the honour of having clearly seen and emphasized a fundamental problem.
But other explanations were also proposed. One maintained that in addition to the six tones there were intervals - relations - and that these were what remained constant. In other words we are asked to assume not only elements but "relations-between-elements" as additional components of the total complex. But this view failed to account for the phenomenon because in some cases the relations too may be altered without destroying the original melody.


Another type of explanation, also designed to bolster the elementaristic hypothesis, was that to this total of six or more tones there come certain "higher processes" which operate upon the given material to "produce" unity. [2]


This was the situation until Gestalt theory raised the radical question: Is it really true that when I hear a melody I have a sum of individual tones (pieces) which constitute the primary foundation of my experience? Is not perhaps the reverse of this true? What I really have, what I hear of each individual note, what I experience at each place in the melody is apart which is itself determined by the character of the whole. What is given me by the melody does not arise (through the agency of any auxiliary factor) as a secondary process from the sum of the pieces as such. Instead, what takes place in each single part already depends upon what the whole is. The flesh and blood of a tone depends from the start upon its role in the melody: a b as leading tone to c is something radically different from the b as tonic. It belongs to the flesh and blood of the things given in experience [Gegebenheiten], how, in what role, in what function they are in their whole.


Let us leave the melody example and turn to another field. Take the case of threshold phenomena. It has long been held that a certain stimulus necessarily produces a certain sensation. Thus, when two stimuli are sufficiently different, the sensations also will be different. Psychology is filled with careful inquiries regarding threshold phenomena. To account for the difficulties constantly being encountered it was assumed that these phenomena must be influenced by higher mental functions, judgments, illusions, attention, etc. And this continued until the radical question was raised : Is it really true that a specific stimulus always gives rise to the same sensation? Perhaps the prevailing. whole-conditions will themselves determine the effect of stimulation? This kind of formulation leads to experimentation, and experiments show, for example, that when I see two colours the sensations I have are determined by the whole-conditions of the entire stimulus situation. Thus, also, the same local physical stimulus pattern can give rise to either a unitary and homogeneous figure, or to an articulated figure with different parts, all depending upon the whole-conditions which may favour either unity or articulation. Obviously the task, then, is to investigate these "whole-conditions" and discover what influences they exert upon experience.


Advancing another step we come to the question whether perhaps any part depends upon the particular whole in which it occurs. Experiments, largely on vision, have answered this question in the affirmative. Among other things they demand that the traditional theory of visual contrast be replaced by a theory which takes account of whole-part conditions. [3]


Our next point is that my field comprises also my Ego. There is not from the beginning an Ego over-against others, but the genesis of an Ego offers one of the most fascinating problems, the solution of which seems to lie in Gestalt principles. However, once constituted, the Ego is a functional part of the total field. Proceeding as before we may therefore ask: What happens to the Ego as a part of the field? Is the resulting behaviour the piecewise sort of thing associationism, experience theory, and the like, would have us believe? Experimental results contradict this interpretation and again we often find that the laws of whole-processes operative in such a field tend toward a "meaningful" behaviour of its parts.


This field is not a summation of sense data and no des cription of it which considers such separate pieces to be primary will be correct. If it were, then for children, primitive peoples and animals experience would be nothing but piece-sensations. The next most developed creatures would have, in addition to independent sensations, something higher, and so on. But this whole picture is the opposite of what actual inquiry has disclosed. We have learned to recognize the "sensations" of our textbooks as products of a late culture utterly different from the experiences of more primitive stages. Who experiences the sensation of a specific red in that sense? What the man of the streets, children, or primitive men normally react to is something coloured but at the same time exciting, gay, strong, or affecting - not "sensations".


The programme to treat the organism as a part in a larger field necessitates the reformulation of the problem as to the relation between organism and environment. The stimulus-sensation connection must be replaced by a connection between alteration in the field conditions, the vital situation, and the total reaction of the organism by a change in its attitude, striving, and feeling.


There is, however, another step to be considered. A man is not only a part of his field, he is also one among other men. When a group of people work together it rarely occurs, and then only under very special conditions, that they constitute a mere-sum of independent Egos. Instead the common enterprise often becomes their mutual concern and each works as a meaningfully functioning part of the whole. Consider a group of South Sea Islanders engaged in some community occupation, or a group of children playing together. Only under very special circumstances does an "I" stand out alone. Then the balance which obtained during harmonious and systematic occupation may be upset and give way to a surrogate (under certain conditions, pathological) new balance. [4]


2nd Part



--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

This is part of the Gestalt Archive, maintained by the Society for Gestalt Theory and its Applications (GTA). For other Gestalt psychological articles in full text please visit the index of the Archive.


--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Footnotes:
[1] "Man könnte das Grundproblem der Gestalttheorie etwa so zu formulieren suchen: Es gibt Zusammenhänge, bei denen nicht, was im Ganzen geschieht, sich daraus herleitet, wie die einzelnen Stücke sind und sich zusammensetzen, sondern umgekehrt, wo - im prägnanten Fall - sich das, was an einem Teil dieses Ganzen geschieht, bestimmt von inneren Strukturgesetzen dieses seines Ganzen." [-> back to text]

[2] Compare KOFFKA, K. (1938). Reply to v. Benussi. In: W. D. Ellis (Ed.), A Source Book of Gestalt Psychology, 371-378. Reprint (1997): New York: The Gestalt Journal Press. [-> back to text]

[3] See BENARY, W. (1938). The Influence of form on Brightness Contrast. In: W. D. Ellis (Ed.), A Source Book of Gestalt Psychology, 104-108. Reprint (1997): New York: The Gestalt Journal Press. [-> back to text]

[4] The suggestions given in this paragraph have been worked out in further detail by SCHULTE, H. (1938). An Approach to a Gestalt Theory of Paranoic Phenomena. In: W. D. Ellis (Ed.), A Source Book of Gestalt Psychology, 362-369. Reprint (1997): New York: The Gestalt Journal Press. [-> back to text]

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------


This paper was first published in German: Über Gestalttheorie
[an address before the Kant Society, Berlin, '7th December, 1924], Erlangen, 1925.
The English translation by Willis D. Ellis was first published in his
"Source Book of Gestalt Psychology,"
New York: Harcourt, Brace and Co, 1938.
The Source Book was reprinted in 1997 by the Gestalt Journal Press, New York.


--------------------------------------------------------------------------------


[ Top |


--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Main index of the Gestalt Archive


--------------------------------------------------------------------------------


HOME | SITE MAP
What is the GTA? | What is Gestalt theory? | What does the GTA do?
Who can become a member? | How to contact the GTA? |
Links to Gestalt Related Sources | THE GESTALT ARCHIVE | Journal GESTALT THEORY
Gestalt theory: Questions and Answers |News from the World of Gestalt |
GTA Roll of Honour | Gestalt Anniversaries | 12th Scientific GTA Convention 2001
Gestalt Theoretical Psychotherapy | Gestalt Therapy Institutes Worldwide
GTA Home page Deutsch |GTA Home page Italiano |GTA Home page Français
 

格式塔理论(二)-丁丁光盘选贴
GESTALT THEORY


by Max Wertheimer (1924)


(2nd part)


-> go to 1st part


--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Über Gestalttheorie [an address before the Kant Society, Berlin, '7th December, 1924], Erlangen, 1925.
In the translation by Willis D. Ellis published in his "Source Book of Gestalt Psychology,"
New York: Harcourt, Brace and Co, 1938.
Reprinted by the Gestalt Journal Press, New York 1997.


--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Further discussion of this point would carry us into the work of social and cultural science which cannot be followed here. Instead let us consider certain other illustrations. What was said above of stimulus and sensation is applicable to physiology and the biological sciences no less than to psychology. It has been tried, for example, by postulating sums of more and more special apparatus, to account for meaningful or, as it is often called, purposive behaviour. Once more we find meaninglessly combined reflexes taken for granted although it is probable that even with minute organisms it is not true that a piece-stimulus automatically bring about its corresponding piece-effect.


Opposing this view is vitalism which, however, as it appears to Gestalt theory, also errs in its efforts to solve the problem, for it, too, begins with the assumption that natural occurrences are themselves essentially blind and haphazard - and adds a mystical something over and above them which imposes order. Vitalism fails to inquire of physical events whether a genuine order might not already prevail amongst them. And yet nature does exhibit numerous instances of physical wholes in which part events are determined by the inner structure of the whole. [5]


These brief references to biology will suffice to remind us that whole-phenomena are not "merely" psychological, but appear in other sciences as well. Obviously, therefore, the problem is not solved by separating off various provinces of science and classifying whole-phenomena as something peculiar to psychology.


The fundamental question can be very simply stated: Are the parts of a given whole determined by the inner structure of that whole, or are the events such that, as independent, piecemeal, fortuitous and blind the total activity is a sum of the part-activities? Human beings can, of course, devise a kind of physics of their own - e.g. a sequence of machines - exemplifying the latter half of our question, but this does not signify that all natural phenomena are of this type. Here is a place where Gestalt theory is least easily understood and this because of the great number of prejudices about nature which have accumulated during the centuries. Nature is thought of as something essentially blind in its laws, where whatever takes place in the whole is purely a sum of individual occurrences. This view was the natural result of the struggle which physics has always had to purge itself of teleology. To-day it can be seen that we are obliged to traverse other routes than those suggested by this kind of purposivism.


Let us proceed another step and ask: How does all this stand with regard to the problem of body and mind? What does my knowledge of another's mental experiences amount to and how do I obtain it? There are, of course, old and established dogmas on these points: The mental and physical are wholly heterogeneous: There obtains between them an absolute dichotomy. (From this point of departure philosophers have drawn an array of metaphysical deductions so as to attribute all the good qualities to mind while reserving for nature the odious.) As regards the second question, my discerning mental phenomena in others is traditionally explained as inference by analogy. Strictly interpreted the principle here is that something mental is meaninglessly coupled with something physical. I observe the physical and infer the mental from it more or less according to the following scheme: I see someone press a button on the wall and infer that he wants the light to go on. There may be couplings of this sort. However, many scientists have been disturbed by this dualism.and have tried to save themselves by recourse to very curious hypotheses. Indeed, the ordinary person would violently refuse to believe that when he sees his companion startled, frightened, or angry he is seeing only certain physical occurrences which themselves have nothing to do (in their inner nature) with the mental, being only superficially coupled with it: you have frequently seen this and this combined ... etc. There have been many attempts to surmount this problem. One speaks, for example, of intuition and says there can be no other possibility, for I see my companion's fear. It is not true, argue the intuitionists, that I see only the bare bodily activities meaninglessly coupled with other and invisible activities. However inadmissible it may otherwise be, an intuition theory does have at least this in its favour, it shows a suspicion that the traditional procedure might be successfully reversed. But the word intuition is at best only a naming of that which we must strive to lay hold of.


This and other hypotheses, apprehended as they now are, will not advance scientific pursuit, for science demands fruitful penetration, not mere cataloguing and systematization. But the question is, How does the matter really stand? Looking more closely we find a I third assumption, namely that a process such as fear is a matter of consciousness. Is this true? Suppose you see a person who is kindly or benevolent. Does anyone suppose that this person is feeling mawkish? No one could possibly believe that. The characteristic feature of such behaviour has very little to do with consciousness. It has been one of the easiest contrivances of philosophy to identify a man's real behaviour and the direction of his mind with his consciousness. Parenthetically, in the opinion of many people the distinction between idealism and materialism implies that between the noble and the ignoble. Yet does one really mean by this to contrast consciousness with the blithesome budding of trees? Indeed, what is there so repugnant about the materialistic and mechanical? What is so attractive about the idealistic? Does it come from the material qualities of the connected pieces? Broadly speaking most psychological theories and textbooks, despite their continued emphasis upon consciousness, are far more "materialistic", arid, and spiritless than a living tree - which probably has no consciousness at all. The point is not what the material pieces are, but what kind of whole it is. Proceeding in terms of specific problems one soon realizes how many bodily activities there are which give no hint of a separation between body and mind. Imagine a dance, a dance full of grace and joy. What is the situation in such a dance? Do we have a summation of physical limb movements and a psychical consciousness? No. Obviously this answer does not solve the problem; we have to start anew - and it seems to me that a proper and fruitful point of attack has been discovered. [6] One finds many processes which, in their dynamical form, are identical regardless of variations in the material character of their elements. When a man is timid, afraid or energetic, happy or sad, it can often be shown that the course of his physical processes is Gestalt-identical with the course pursued by the mental processes.


Again In I can only indicate the direction of thought. I have touched on the question of body and mind merely to show that the problem we are discussing also has its philosophic aspects. To strengthen the import of the foregoing suggestions let us consider the fields of epistemology and logic. For centuries the assumption has prevailed that our world is essentially a summation of elements. For Hume and largely also for Kant the world is like a bundle of fragments, and the dogma of meaningless summations continues to play its part. As for logic, it supplies: concepts, which when rigorously viewed are but sums of properties; classes, which upon closer inspection prove to be mere catchalls ; syllogisms, devised by arbitrarily lumping together any two propositions having the character that ... etc. When one considers what a concept is in living thought, what it really means to grasp a conclusion; when one considers what the crucial thing is about a mathematical proof and the concrete interrelationships it involves, one sees that the categories of traditional logic have accomplished nothing in this direction. [7]


It is our task to inquire, whether a logic is possible which is not piecemeal. Indeed the same question arises in mathematics also. Is it necessary that all mathematics be established upon a piecewise basis? What sort of mathematical system would it be in which this were not the case? There have been attempts to answer the latter question but almost always they have fallen back in the end upon the old procedures. This fate has overtaken many, for the result of training in piecewise thinking is extraordinarily tenacious. It is not enough and certainly does not constitute a solution of the, principal problem if one shows that the atoms a of mathematics are both piecemeal and t the same time evince something of the opposite character. The problem has been scientifically grasped only when an attack specifically designed to yield positive results has been launched. Just how this attack is to be made seems to many mathematicians a colossal problem, but perhaps the quantum theory will force the mathematicians to attack it.


This brings us to the close of an attempt to present a view of the problem as illustrated by its specific appearances in various fields. In concluding I may suggest a certain unification of these illustrations somewhat as follows. I consider the situation from the point of view of a theory of aggregates and say: How should a world be where science, concepts, inquiry, investigation, and comprehension of inner unities were impossible? The answer is obvious. This world would be a manifold of disparate pieces. Secondly, what kind of world would there have to be in which a piecewise science would apply? The answer is again quite simple, for here one needs only a system of recurrent couplings that are blind and piecewise in character, whereupon everything is available for a pursuit of the traditional piecewise methods of logic, mathematics, and science generally in so far as these presuppose this kind of world. But there is a third kind of aggregate which has been but cursorily investigated. These are the aggregates in which a manifold is not compounded from adjacently situated pieces but rather such that a term at its place in that aggregate is determined by the whole-laws of the aggregate itself.


Pictorially: suppose the world were a vast plateau upon which were many musicians. I walk about listening and watching the players. First suppose that the world is a meaningless plurality. Everyone does as he will, each for himself. What happens together when I hear ten players might be the basis for my guessing as to what they all are doing, but this is merely a matter of chance and probability much as in the kinetics of gas molecules. - A second possibility would be that each time one musician played c, another played f so and so many seconds later. I work out a theory of blind couplings but the playing as a whole remains meaningless. This is what many people think physics does, but the real work of physics belies this. - The third possibility is, say, a Beethoven symphony where it would be possible for one to select one part of the whole and work from that towards an idea of the structural principle motivating and determining the whole. Here the fundamental laws are not those of fortuitous pieces, but concern the very character of the event.


1st Part



--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Footnotes:

[5] See KÖHLER, W. (1938). Physical Gestalten. In: W. D. Ellis (Ed.), A Source Book of Gestalt Psychology, 17-54. Reprint (1997): New York: The Gestalt Journal Press. [-> back to text]

[6] Compare HORNBOSTEL; E. M. v. (1938). The Unity of the Senses. In: W. D. Ellis (Ed.), A Source Book of Gestalt Psychology, 210-216. Reprint (1997): New York: The Gestalt Journal Press. [-> back to text]

[7] Compare in this connection WERTHEIMER, M. (1938). The Syllogism and Productive Thinking. In: W. D. Ellis (Ed.), A Source Book of Gestalt Psychology, 274-282. Reprint (1997): New York: The Gestalt Journal Press. [-> back to text]
 

格式塔理论(三)-丁丁光盘选贴
Overview of the Development of Lucid Dream
Research in Germany


by Paul Tholey


[Lecture at the VI. International Conference of the Association for the Study of Dreams in London 1989.
First published in: Lucidity Letter, 8(2) (1989), pp 1-30]


--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

(2nd part)


--------------------------------------------------------------------------------


Phenomenological Research on Non-ordinary Ego Experiences

For the des cription of non-ordinary ego-experiences we want to explain certain terms in more detail (including some already used), and also introduce some new ones. This is not easy given that many phenomenological distinctions which are made in the German language can only be expressed in English by employing metaphorical language. In addition, many terms are used ambiguously. We are thinking of such terms as "ego," "I," "me," "self," etc. Sometimes the term "ego" indicates a part or sub-system of the personality (e.g., in psychoanalysis). By contrast, we attach a phenomenological meaning to this term, as well as the others, in the fol-lowing discussion.


By the expression "total self" we mean the phenomenal "body-soul unity" of a subject which comprehends the subject's phenomenal body (in our terminology, the body-ego) as well as mental facts (in a narrow sense) - above all, the emotions and motivations of the subject. These mental facts frequently appear to be bound up with the body in a fuzzy way as a kind of vessel. They can also transcend the phenomenal body. One thinks, for example, of love or hate with their characteristic connections to other subjects.


There is a particular point within the total-self, however, which is sometimes referred to as the "center of the self," "center of consciousness," or "center of the ego." "Ego in a narrower sense" or something similar is also used (for details see KÖHLER, 1938, p. 188) Due to the ambiguity of these terms, we prefer the expression "ego-core," in accordance with the German term Ichkern. The ego-core is less an extended part of the phenomenal field than it is a place or point in the phenomenal world determined by its position and functions. Let us first consider its position in the usual waking condition.


This point can be localized surprisingly well during normal observing or thinking. It is located within the phenomenal body, namely in the frontal area of the phenomenal head, a short distance behind the bridge of the nose. Many authors claim that the ego-core (or whatever term they prefer for this concept) is located behind the eyes. But in the phenomenological sense this is wrong because in the phenomenal world we only see by means of a single eye. (The physiologist HERING had described it as the "cyclopean eye" in the 19th century.) This eye includes the frontal area of the phenomenal head. Based on that, we can also say that the ego-core is located behind the center of this cyclopean eye. To avoid any misunder-standing, it should be emphasized that this localization of the ego-core only concerns the phenomenal head, not the physical head of the physical organism. Beyond that, the ego-core should not be confused with either a fictitious homunculus (which suggests information), or with an idealistic epistemological subject which creates or constructs the world. The terms "homunculus" and "epistemological ego" are metaphysical concepts which have no meaning from the standpoint of critical realism (see earlier discussion). The ego-core can experience phenomenal objects and participate in phenomenal events, above all through visual perception (in a phenomenological sense), imagination, memory and thought. As a rule, the ego-core is also the phenomenal origin of voluntary activities, including voluntarily focusing attention.


We would consider all experiences which deviate from the described phenomenal facts to be non-ordinary ego-experiences. In such situations, for example, the ego-core can change its position in the phenomenal body or leave the phenomenal body (as with so-called OBEs), slip into other phenomenal bodies, duplicate itself, or completely disappear. In addition, the described functions of the ego-core can distribute themselves in various places. There are so many non-usual ego-experiences that we can only consider a few of them.


During lucid dreaming, it is possible to experience one's own body or the body-ego in extremely diverse ways - especially OBEs. We consider OBEs to be experiences during which a second body or a disembodied ego (in our terminology: the ego-point) leaves the first (experienced as physical) phenomenal body (THOLEY, 1966c). The first body is frequently experienced as immobile or rigid; the second as mobile. As a rule, the ego-core is to be found in the latter. The second body can have the same distinct contours as the first, or it can be a "cloud-like body." The second body can also usually pass through solid objects, such as walls. In rarer cases, the second body is tied to the first body by a kind of cord. What we have described here is interpreted differently and described in other terms by occultist literature. Table 2 shows a rough outline of the differences between the anthroposophical concepts of Rudolf STEINER and our own.


Naturally, there is also a physical body or organism within the framework of critical realism. It is not, however, immediately experienced. In occultist literature, the cord between the first and second bodies is also called the silver cord; its destruction is supposed to lead to death (see e.g., FOX 1962).


Research on OBEs

Most investigations of non-ordinary ego-experiences refer to OBEs. We have already pointed out the hypnagogic techniques which were used most of the time in our OBE induction experiments. During lucid dreams we can also induce OBEs in various ways (for details see THOLEY, 1989c). Finally, we have also used various mirror techniques for the induction of OBEs which are more or less patterned after magical practices. The first successful investi-gation of a mirror technique in our research at Frankfurt University was by STICH (1983; 1989). A method I developed involving two mirrors has been described by NOSSACK (1989).


An important goal of our phenomenal experiments was to determine whether the same functional dependencies between phenomenal facts are to be found in an OBE state and in a lucid dream state. Aside from the beginning phase directly following the induction of these states of consciousness, we found no substantial differences. In particular, we tried to find techniques for prolonging, manipulating and ending OBEs which were similar to those used during lucid dreams.


Interestingly enough, it was possible for a subject (as an ego-point) to end a dream by staring at his or her own (experienced as physical) phenomenal body still lying in bed (STICH, 1983). This body would begin to become blurred in the same way as a particular point in the dream scenery of a lucid dream. With regard to manipulation, it was possible for practiced subjects to arbitrarily give the second body (in occultist terminology: the astral body) first a solid quality and then a subtle quality. In this way, the subject could pass through walls at will. The so-called astral body could also be transformed into animals and plants, among other things. The so-called silver cord could be cut (without harmful results), although this was a fairly rare event (see THOLEY, 1989c). All of the findings of our phenomenological experiments (especially the blurring of the seemingly physical body and the arbitrary transformation processes of the second body) indicate that OBEs are merely a particular form of lucid dreams, with the possible exception of OBEs occurring during a waking state (e.g., during the practicing of certain sports - see THOLEY, 1989c).


And now a final important observation in this area, which was also described by SCHRIEVER (1935) vis-à-vis lucid dreaming. If the ego-core is actually a pure point of view from which one's own body can be observed, it is also true that particular exer-tions and pain in this body can be felt as neutral events without affecting the ego-core. Through practice, some people are able to transfer this ability to a waking state in which the ego-core is found in the phenomenal head, i.e., not outside the body. It might even be possible for these people to be operated on without anaesthesia.


Entering the Body of Other Dream Characters with the Ego-core

The previously mentioned mirror techniques can be used as a helpful prelim-inary exercise for entering the body of another dream character with the ego-core. In the hypnagogic state, however, one can use imagined mirrors in order to enter one's own imagine in the mirror (MULDOON & CARRINGTON, 1974; HILLMAN, 1985). In this state, the "image-ego-point technique" for inducing lucid dreams (THOLEY, 1983a, p. 85) can also be used for entering the body of a dream character.


When entering the body of a particular dream character with the ego-core, it is advantageous to look directly at the dream character. The ego-core is often very quickly transported along the line of sight towards and into the body of the dream character. Naturally there are still several phenomenological experiments to be carried out to clarify the effectiveness of particular techniques for this process.


We would like to illustrate this process with two examples. In the first, the subject (an artist) used the above mentioned "image-ego-point technique" for inducing a lucid dream in a hypnagogic state. Even though he had never exper-ienced a lucid dream before, he had the following experience the first night after being instructed in this technique:


I paid attention to visual phenomena while falling asleep. I got to the point where I could see a complete scene even though I was still lying in bed as a spectator, not as an actor. Several Indians were kind of hanging out on the beach. Among them was a friendly boy whom I selected in order to enter his body. I quickly succeeded in "riding on" my line of sight to him. Immediately afterwards I started to see the beach through the boy's eyes; I heard the ocean waves beating against the shore through his ears; I moved with the boy's body. Shortly afterwards, my ego left the boy's body, shot up and then floated above the beach. I thought to myself: "It did not quite work out yet." Then my ego slipped into the body lying in bed.


Another example is provided by a student who had already had many experiences with the mentioned mirror technique. His ego-core entered the bodies of several other dream characters, but he became lucid only at the end of the dream:


I am dreaming that I am married and have a daughter (neither of which was actually true). First, I see the kid playing around and I am very proud of her. Later on, I am lying in bed (person A = dreamer) with my wife (person B). She tells me that we have to sepa-rate. I am stunned by that. She leaves and my ego enters her (person B) at that moment. After some time has passed, I (still person B) conclude that I (person A) am not that bad a person after all and I (person B) decide to return to myself (person A). I find myself (person A) in bed with a stranger, a man (person C), and I (person B) get extremely mad and jealous. I (person B) accuse myself (person A) of being a "queer son-of-a-bitch." Then my ego slips out of person B and into person C, and now, being person C, I explain to person B why it is all right this way and succeed in convincing B of this. Finally, all three of us are lying in bed making love. I leave all three of them at the moment I am no longer sure which one of them I actually am and then discover that I am sleeping because everything seems so dreamlike. Seeing that, I explain to them (the three people) that I am dreaming and that they are all parts of myself. They turn around, looking at me sheepishly and unbelievingly. Wondering how I manage to talk even though my ego has no body at all, I wake up.


The dreamer interpreted the dream as a psychological conflict in which the ego-core took over the various sub-systems of his personality. While this dream obviously symbolized an internal psychological conflict, we also have examples of psychosocial conflicts being clarified and resolved by entering the body of another dream character (for a detailed example, see THOLEY, 1988b, pp. 283, 284). Indeed, it is not always possible to make a strict distinction between these two kinds of conflicts because of their closely interrelated nature.


Dream Ego Duplication

The following technique for duplicating the dream ego was developed by psychotherapist Norbert SATTLER. He discovered that it is possible to not only pass into another dream character over the line of sight, but that a person can be transported to a different place entirely. The following example from SATTLER explains how the dream ego can be duplicated at the same time as this transporting takes place.


Standing in front of a high tower during a lucid dream, I clearly experienced the tower's power. This gave rise to a desire to look down from it. I accomplished this by gliding in desultory fashion to the top of the tower along my line of sight. I then looked downwards and was overcome by a feeling of dizziness. In a similar way as before, I changed my perspective several times until I seemed to be standing on top of the tower and at its base at the same time, while simultaneously looking upwards and downwards. In this way, I experienced the power of the high tower and the dizziness caused by the long vertical drop in one conflicting moment.


A second method, which I developed, for dream ego duplication consisted in cutting one's body into right and left halves (see also the following discussion for the more general method of severing body parts). The two halves can then complete themselves into two dream bodies with differing points of view. As a rule, this method can only be applied successfully by experienced lucid dreamers and the phenomena are generally of an unstable nature. In this connection, it should be noted that the dream-ego, according to CHANG (1963), can be "multiplied into millions and billions to fill the entire cosmos" (our terminology: the total dream world).


Movement of the Ego-core Within the Dream Body

The above mentioned technique for dividing the dream body into two halves is patterned after a more general technique developed by Norbert SATTLER (see preceding section) for cutting through or cutting off various parts of the dream body with a knife. With this method, pain can be felt and resistance can be encountered if the subject has not learned to transform the solid dream body into a subtle body. The ego-core also becomes mobile by means of cuts made through the head and can be moved arbitrarily within the uninjured dream body with further practice. In this way, it can inspect the entire dream body and internal organs much like the Guided Affective Imagery (GAI) technique described by LEUNER (1978). This could ultimately be of great significance for the diagnosis and treatment of psychosomatic illness.


Destruction of the Dream Ego

If a subject not only severs various parts of the body, but also tries to completely cut it up into pieces, burn it up or destroy it by other means, then the dream body as well as the dream ego-core disappear. This is similar to the techniques used by shamans (e.g., see KALWEIT, 1984) who are considered by many researchers to be pioneers in consciousness research. The vanishing of the ego-core can lead to different states of consciousness. Relatedly, DITTRICH (1985) argues, on the basis of factor analysis of numerous experiments, that there are only three main dimensions (independently of pharmacological and psychological causes) within the various forms of altered states of consciousness:


1. Oceanic self boundlessness;


2. Anxious ego dissolution; and


3. Visionary restructuring.


As a rule, only hallucinatory events take place during a lucid dream. Whether the vanishing of the ego is accompanied by peak experiences of type 1, or unpleasant, fearful experiences of type 2 depends, above all, on the subject's epistemological point of view and the emotional attitude flowing from it. Otherwise, we see no decisive difference between these forms of experience. Those of the first type were the only ones encountered by our experienced lucid dreamers who carried out the experiments without any anxiety or fear. They can sometimes be described as cosmic experiences with a holographic structure in which the self and the (phenomenal) cosmos form a single unit.


The Evolution of Consciousness

A series of phenomenologically differentiated experiences can be distinguished in which the opposition of the ego (or self) to the world is eliminated. This is discussed in chapter 10, "The Evolving Soul," of GACKENBACH and BOSVELDs Control Your Dreams (1989).


We are of the opinion that such peak experiences, above all in the Indian culture and subsequently in many western cultures, are too dependent on meditation techniques and frequently lead to a passive condition marked by withdrawal from the world. But similar states can also be reached while physiologically awake. Numerous Japanese Zen Buddhists, whose outlook is close to German Gestalt theory, are able to reach such states of consciousness by means of the "outer way"; for example, through artistic or physical exercises. Zen Buddhist philosophers (see IZUTSU, 1986, p. 35) also speak of a "supra-consciousness." In both Zen Buddhism and Gestalt theory (which is itself supported by countless empirical investigations), the vanishing of the ego (or at least its receding into the background) is the most important prerequisite for unprejudiced perception, productive thinking, free and creative action. Given, however, that we adopt an egocentric attitude as part of growing up in our western culture, the road to creative freedom is not easy. By eliminating certain impediments in the form of psychological resistance or defense mechanisms, lucid dreaming can provide a key to the successful traversing of this road (for details see THOLEY, 1989c). It is not possible to describe this road in more detail within the context of this article; nor the many diverse applications which we have only been able to touch upon.


In conclusion we would like to point out that reaching creative freedom in perception, thinking, and artistic or scientific activity, shares a similarity to "enlightening" or "waking up" from the robot-like sleep of our day to day existence as described by TART (1986). But we are also of the opinion that there is a lot of investigative work remaining. We have merely made a single excursion from which it is only possible to point out new research perspectives, rather than report final conclusions.


--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

References:


ASERINSKY & KLEITMAN (1953). Regularly occurring periods of eye movements and concomitant phenomena during sleep. Science, 118, 273-274.


BLACKMORE, S. (1962). Beyond the bodies. London: Granada.


BOUCHET, C. & RIPERT, R. (1986). Contributions to a panel discussion on the problem of induction. Roger Price (Chair), Stephen LaBerge, Christian Bouchet, Roger Ripert and Joe Dane. Lucidity Letter, 5(1), 205û228.


CHANG, G. (1974). Teachings of Tibetan yoga. Secaucus, New York: Citadel Press.


DITTRICH, A. (1985). Ätiologie unabhängiger Strukturen veränderter Wachbewußtseins-Zustände. Stuttgart: Enke.


FALT-SCHRIEVER, C. (1981). Selbstheilung durch Traum. Unpublished diploma thesis. Universität Frankfurt am Main.


FOX, O. (1962) Astral projection. New York: University Books.


GACKENBACH, J. & BOSVELD, J. (1989). Control your dreams. New York: Harper & Row.


GACKENBACH, J. & LaBERGE, S. (Eds.) (1988). Conscious mind, sleeping brain: Perspectives on lucid dreaming. New York, London: Plenum Press.


GIBSON, J. (1979). The ecological approach to visual perception. Boston: Houghton Mifflin.


GREEN, C. (1968). Lucid dreams. London: Hamish Hamilton.


HILLMANN, D.J. (1985). Entering the mirror. A note on out-of-the-body experiences and lucidity. Dream Network Bulletin, 4(1), 5-6.


IZUTSU, T. (1986). Philosophie des Zen-Buddhismus. Reinbeck: Rowohlt.


KALWEIT, H. (1984). Traumzeit und innerer Raum. Die Welt der Schamanen. Bern, München, Wien: Scherz.


KERN, H. (1981). Theorie und Praxis des Klarträumens. Unpublished diploma thesis. Universität Frankfurt am Main.


KERN, H. (1983). Akustische Induktion von Klarträumen. Unpublished diploma thesis. Universität Frankfurt am Main.


KLIPPSTEIN, H. (1988). Hypnotherapy: A natural method of learning lucid dreaming. Lucidity Letter, 7(2), 79-88.


KÖHLER, W. (1938). The place of value in a world of facts. New York: Liveright.


KRIST, H. (1981). Empirische Studien über Klarträume. Unpublished diploma thesis. Universität Frankfurt am Main.


LaBERGE, S. (1985). Lucid dreaming. New York: Ballantine Books.


LEUNER, H.C. (1978). Principles and therapeutic efficacy of Guided Affective Imagery. In J.L. Singer & K.S. Pope (Eds.), The power of imagination: New methods in psychotherapy (pp. 125-166). New York, London: Plenum Press.


LEWIN, K. (1936). Principles of topological psychology. New York, London: McGraw-Hill.


LEVITAN, L. (1989). A comparison of three methods of lucid dream induction. NightLight, 1(3), 3, 9-12.


LIRZER, H. (1981). Empirische Klartraumstudien unter besonderer Berücksichtigung schöpferischer Prozesse. Unpublished diploma thesis. Universität Frankfurt am Main.


MALAMUD, J.R. (1979). The development of a training method for the cultivation of "lucid" awareness in fantasy, dreams, and waking life. Unpublished dissertation available from University Microfilms International, Ann Arbor, MI.


MOERS-MESSMER, H.V.(1939). Träume mit der gleichzeitigen Erkenntnis des Traumzustandes. Archiv für Psychologie 102, 291-318.


MULDOON, S. & CARRINGTON, H. (1974). The projection of the astral body. New York: Samuel Weiser.


NOSSACK, B. (1989). Klarträume - wirklicher als die Wirklichkeit. Das neue Zeitalter, 40(4), 4-8.


PRICE, R. & COHEN, D. (1988). Lucid dream induction. In J. Gackenbach & S. LaBerge (Eds.) Conscious mind, sleeping brain: Perspectives on lucid dreaming (pp. 105-134), New York, London: Plenum Press.


REIS, J. (1983). Biofeedback-Induktion des Klartraums. Unpublished diploma thesis. Universität Frankfurt am Main.


REIS, J. (1989a). Entwicklung einer Biofeedback-Technik zur Induktion von Klarträumen. Bewußt Sein, 1(1), 57-66.


REIS, J. (1989b). Affektive Verlaufsphänomene des Klartraums. Entwicklung einer inhaltsanalytischen Methode zur Erfassung affektiv-szenischer Verlaufsphänomene in Klar-traumprotokollen. Unpublished doctoral dissertation. Universität Frankfurt am Main.


ROOS, M. (1984). Vergleichsstudie zwischen Klartraumerfahrungen und Erlebnissen unter dem Einfluß psychedelischer Drogen. Unpublished diploma thesis. Universität Frankfurt am Main.


SCHLAG, C. (In preparation). Die unterschiedliche Bedeutung der kombinierten Klartrauminduktionstechnik von Tholey. Diploma thesis. Universität Saarbrücken.


SCHRIEVER, W.V. (1935). Einige Traumbeobachtungen. Zeitschrift für Psychologie, 134, 349-371.


STICH, K. (1981). Empirische Untersuchungen zur akustischen Induktion von Klarträumen. Unpublished diploma thesis. Universität Frankfurt am Main.


STICH, K. (1983) Empirische Untersuchungen über den Zusammenhang zwischen Klartraumtechniken und magischen Techniken. Unpublished diploma thesis. Universität Frankfurt am Main.


STICH, K. (1889). Hat die Wissenschaft noch von der Magie zu lernen? Ein theoretischer und empirischer Vergleich zwischen Wissenschaft und Magie. Bewusst Sein, 1(1), 67-80.


TART, C. (1986). Waking up. Folcano: Independent Service.


THOLEY, P. (1973). Die Überprüfung psychophysiologischer Traumtheorien mit Hilfe der Klartraumtechnik. Unpublished lecture manus cript. Universität Frankfurt am Main.


THOLEY, P. (1977). Der Klartraum: Seine Funktion in der experimentellen Traumforschung. In W. Tack (Ed.): Bericht über den 30. Kongreß der Deutschen Gesellschaft für Psychologie in Regensburg, 1976, 376-378. Göttingen: Hogrefe.


THOLEY, P. (1980a). Erkenntnistheoretische und systemtheoretische Grundlagen der Sensumotorik. Sportwissenschaft, 10, 7-35.


THOLEY, P. (1980b). Klarträume als Gegenstand empirischer Untersuchungen. Gestalt Theory, 2, 175-191.


THOLEY, P. (1981). Empirische Untersuchungen über Klarträume. Gestalt Theory, 3, 21-62.


THOLEY, P. (1982). Bewußtseinsveränderung im Schlaf. Wach' ich oder träum' ich? Psychologie heute, 9(12), 68-78.


THOLEY, P. (1983a). Techniques for inducing and manipulating lucid dreams. Perceptual and Motor Skills, 57, 79-90.


THOLEY, P. (1983b). Relation between dream content and eye movements tested by lucid dreams. Perceptual and Motor Skills, 56, 875-878.


THOLEY, P. (1984). Der Klartraum - Hohe Schule des Traums. In K. Schnelting (Ed.), Hilfe ich träume (pp. 100-118). München: Goldmann.


THOLEY, P. (1985). Haben Traumgestalten ein Bewußtsein? Eine experimentell-phänomenologische Klartraumstudie. Gestalt Theory, 7, 29-46.


THOLEY, P. (1986a). Deshalb Phänomenologie! Gestalt Theory, 8, 144-163.


THOLEY, P. (1986b). Letter to editor. Lucidity Letter, 5(2), 45-48.


THOLEY, P. (1986c). Lucid-OBE Comment. ASD Newsletter, 3(4), 15.


THOLEY, P. (1988a). Gestaltpsychologie. In R. Asanger und G. Wenninger (Eds.): Handwörterbuch der Psychologie, 4th Ed. (pp. 249-255). Weinheim, Basel: Beltz.


THOLEY, P. (1988b). A model for lucidity training as a means of self-healing and psychological growth. In J. Gackenbach & S. LaBerge (Eds.): Conscious mind, sleeping brain: Perspectives on lucid dreaming (pp. 263û287). New York, London: Plenum Press.


THOLEY, P. (1988c). Overview of the German research in the field of lucid dreaming. Lucidity Letter, 7(1), 26-29.


THOLEY, P. (1989a). Consciousness and abilities of dream characters observed during lucid dreaming. Perceptual and Motor Skills, 68, 567-578.


THOLEY, P. (1989b). Bewußtsein, Bewußtseinsforschung, Bewußt Sein. Bewußt Sein, 1(1), 9-24.


THOLEY, P. (1989c). Die Entfaltung des Bewußtseins als ein Weg zur Schöpferischen Freiheit. Vom Träumer zum Krieger. Bewußt Sein, 1(1), 25-56.


THOLEY, P. (In preparation). Heilendes Träumen. Selbstheilung und Selbstentfaltung durch Klarträumen. Freiburg: Herder.


THOLEY, P. & UTECHT, K. (1989). Schöpferisch Träumen: Der Klartraum als Lebenshilfe, 2nd Ed. Niedernhausen, Ts.: Falken-Verlag.


UTECHT, K. (1986). Einige Voraussetzungen zum Erlernen des Klarträumens. Unpublished diploma thesis. Universität Frankfurt am Main.
 

格式塔理论(四)
Overview of the Development of Lucid Dream
Research in Germany


by Paul Tholey


[Lecture at the VI. International Conference of the Association for the Study of Dreams in London 1989.
First published in: Lucidity Letter, 8(2) (1989), pp 1-30]


--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

(1st part)


--------------------------------------------------------------------------------


As in other countries there were various reports of lucid dreams recorded through the centuries by German philosophers, poets and occultists. But these, as well as the investigations carried out by serious researchers, were completely ignored by scientists because they were based on personal experiences (see SCHRIEVER, 1935; MOERS-MESSMER, 1939). It was not until 1959 at Johann Wolfgang Goethe University that an effective technique for inducing lucid dreams was developed and the first systematic investigations involving several subjects took place. In this article I will discuss the beginnings of this research as well as its further development. Aside from the purely chronological ordering of the individual steps of the development of the research, I would also like to provide a basic outline of the inner connections of the particular areas within the overall research program. This will require analyzing the development of individual branches of research abstracted from their actual chronological order.


In Figure 1 the important areas of lucid dream research in their chronological and logical contexts are summarized. Clearly not all individual branches can be listed and many spheres can only be sketched. Those points which I already pub-lished in English will receive only brief mention. In this connection, I would like to point out that a much briefer version of this overview appeared in Lucidity Letter in June, 1988 (THOLEY, 1988c). Unfortunately, only the first part of a more comprehensive abstract was translated and published at that time and more recent research was entirely omitted. Here I would like to speak to some of the research themes not mentioned at that time and especially to highlight two of the more current and somewhat related focal points of investigation: the different forms of lucidity and non-ordinary ego-experiences.


Epistemological Model of Critical Realism

First, I would like to treat in some detail the critical realistic model of the per-ceptual world, given its fundamental significance to the development of our lucid dream research program and the interpretation and application of our findings (see also THOLEY, 1986b). This model postulates a distinction between the physical world (physical body and physical environment) and the phenomenal world (phenomenal body ego and phenomenal environment). In the waking state, the physical world is representedùmore or less accuratelyùby sensory and memory processes in the brain. This was illustrated in a somewhat simplified way in the example of perception in my 1986(b) article (p. 45). It was a simplification because I did not make a strict distinction between the phenomenal facts and the brain correlates. In fact, we are inclined to adopt a view of psychophysical identity, isomorphism or parallelism. This is not a purely philosophical question, rather, it is a matter of working hypotheses which can be subjected to empirical testing and are not dependent on exact phenomenal/brain distinctions (for details see THOLEY, 1980a; 1989c).


We most emphatically distinguish ourselves, however, from naïve-realistic conceptions (e.g., GIBSON, 1979) and from the idealistic and similar radical constructivist conceptions. The radical constructivists confuse the critical-phenomenal conception of the physical world with the physical world itself. The former is constructed on the basis of perception and thought, and frequently changes; whereas the latter obeys unchanging natural laws. A naïve-realistic model has especially negative consequences with respect to research and practice in the field of lucid dreaming and the related field of out-of-body experiences (OBEs). It not only hampers research, but for people who misinterpret such experiences it can have very dangerous consequences, possibly leading to serious mental disorders.


Just as the perceived world can provide us with information about physical reality despite the many deceptions and illusions, the dream world can present us with information about our psychological reality (the psychological person and his or her psychological situation), despite symbolic distortions. In general, we take the term "reality" to mean simply anything that has an effect. Accordingly, we understand psychological reality to mean the totality of that which can have an effect on our experience and behavior (see LEWIN, 1936). This would especially include the so-called unconscious facts which we can conceptualize as psychological constructs and which can basically be replaced by physiological concepts at a later time.


Here we are in agreement with FREUD that dreams are the "royal road" to the unconscious. But this is of little help when, in the orthodox psychoanalytic sense, normal dreams are experienced with a hazy consciousness and the absence of an ability to act. Or after waking when we report to a biased psychotherapist about our even more hazy and distorted observations and the associations connected to them.


In order to gain insight into our psychological problems and resolve them, it is much more important to interact with the symbolic world in a way enabled by lucid consciousness and the consequent greater freedom of action. Just as we can interact with physical reality in a waking state by means of the sensory-motor feedback system, we are capable of taking action in the psychological reality of lucid dreams due to the reciprocal reactions between the symbolic events and the underlying psychological processes. These fundamental principles have provided the basic underpinnings guiding our investigations into lucid dreaming. The results of the research have shown them to be extremely sound in practice.


But now let us turn to the epistemological considerations described in the article written for Lucidity Letter in 1986, in which I focused exclusively on the process of perception. I also emphasized that it was an understanding of the critical realistic model which first brought me to the idea of developing a method for inducing lucid dreams, a method I will only briefly describe.


Techniques for Lucid Dream Induction

The Reflection Technique


When I recognized that the objective - and intersubjective -appearing perceptual world was merely a phenomenal world, it occurred to me to compare this phenomenal waking world with the dream world through systematic observation. The dream world is, in fact, a phenomenal world. But, being less dependent on sensory stimulation, it is possible for events to transpire which are not possible with normal perception in a waking state. Such unusual events made it possible for me to recognize the dreaming state.


On the basis of these ideas, I developed my first technique for inducing lucid dreams in 1959. I called it the "Reflection Technique." Using this technique, the subject asks him or herself several times during the course of the day: "Am I awake, or am I dreaming?" The purpose is to achieve a generally critical attitude towards one's state of consciousness. When confronted with unusual experiences, this facilitates recognition of the dreaming state.


After four weeks I had my first lucid dream. I recognized that I was dreaming because I saw an aunt whom I knew to have been dead for some time. Since I was not at all acquainted with such phenomena at that time, I was at first fascinated by this new experience. Later, however, I was seized by a kind of claustrophobic feeling because I did not know how or whether I would be able to get out of this dream world. I finally woke up after staring at a flower in the dream environment until the flower and the entire surroundings became blurred.


PRICE and COHEN (1988), who refer to only one of my articles translated into English, have referred to the reflection technique as the development of an active attitude. With respect to the early application of the technique this is correct. A process of active questioning, however, ultimately gives rise to a passively receptive focus on current experience which, in turn, makes the posing of critical questions a superfluous matter. In other words, increased practice helps develop the disposition making it possible to recognize the dreaming state when triggered by unusual events.


A first important goal in improving the effectiveness of the reflection technique was finding the appropriate criteria for recognizing the dreaming state. These criteria make it possible to spontaneously recognize that one is dreaming: particularities of dreamlike perception and/or the contradiction between knowledge of events in a waking state and momentarily experienced dream events. It is also possible to test whether one is awake or dreaming through a series of physical and mental activities. For example, the subject turns himself approximately 180 degrees and then attempts to stand still. In a dream state, as a rule, the body continues to turn in the same direction or the surroundings begin to revolve in the opposite direction. However, the subject may hesitate to conduct such a test in the presence of other people because of the possibility that he/she is awake. After all most of us shy away from carrying out such unusual activities in front of potential onlookers. Thus mental tests may be preferable.


One of the most effective tests is trying to remember what has happened during the immediately preceding period of time. Should one experience bizarre events or a lapse of memory, this may indicate that one is dreaming. However, this test is useless if the subject wakes up, since it could be a "false awakening." Therefore, turning a light on, for example, is recommended upon waking up. If the light does not go on, this may signify a dream state.


We have found countless examples that suggest the apparent existence of various forms of psychological resistance which appear to hinder or prematurely end dream lucidity (THOLEY, 1981; 1988b).


For instance during one of my own dreams I saw houses, trees and other objects all standing upside down. I immediately thought that I was dreaming. Shortly thereafter it seemed as if I had a pair of glasses on. It occurred to me that the glasses might have been equipped with reversing lenses such as those used in psychological experiments dealing with perception. When I proceeded to take off the glasses I saw my surroundings in a normal, upright position and I no longer believed I was dreaming. We have collected hundreds of such examples suggesting that various forms of psychological resistance apparently seek to hinder lucidity during dreaming.


The Expansion of the Lucid Dream Induction Technique


The expansion of the original reflection technique, resulting in the combined technique, was accomplished by incorporating elements of intention and auto-suggestion (THOLEY, 1982; 1983b). Several researchers outside of our group have shown the effectiveness of our methods (BOUCHET & RIPERT, 1986; LEVITAN, 1989). Relatedly, a new combined technique developed by KLIPPSTEIN (1988) should also be mentioned. We have recently attempted to isolate and investigate the effec-tiveness of certain factors within the overall technique (UTECHT, 1987; SCHLAG, in preparation).


To understand the further development of our induction technique, it is important to point out that the actual clarity about one's state of consciousness is not by itself a sufficient criterion for defining a lucid dream. Additional factors also have to be distinguished. To illustrate this we have listed six different criteria in Table 1 which are not only relevant to the dream state, but (all other conditions being equal) also to the waking state and various intermediate states as wellùabove all, the "state of imagery." Consequently, during the further development of our induction technique, we have placed a high value on practicing as many aspects of lucidity as possible during the waking state so that they will be ready for application in the dream state.


Next we want to bring to the readers attention the second criterion of lucidity, "lucidity about individual freedom in decision and action." We consider this aspect to be especially important because it is indispensable for experimentation in lucid dreaming and because the fulfillment of this criterion completely changes the quality of the dream. That is with the second aspect the other aspects of lucidity simultaneously appear, with the exception of the sixth aspect. The sixth aspect of lucidity can be practiced more easily in a "state of imagery" or in a state of waking fantasy (see also MALAMUD, 1979) than in a waking state, which is usually characterized by a lack of symbolic facts.


Our techniques are somewhat aimed at the same goal as Charles TART in his book Waking Up (1986). TART's book is based on the teachings of GURDJIEFF and assumes the validity of the hypothesis found in many older spiritual teachings that we are in a kind of psychological sleep or dream state, even during our waking hours. In metaphorical terms, TART says that we have to pull up the weeds (transform unconsciousness into consciousness) in order to be able to enjoy the flowers. The techniques described by him are in reference to the waking state and include some which are similar to our methods (e.g., "self-observation" and "self-remembering").


Our method, however, is more involved. As noted, we also begin with waking techniques. But, we want to arrive at lucidity in a dream state as quickly as possible because it is there that we can come face to face with TART's "weeds" in unadulterated forms. In this way we can directly confront the unconscious and thus free our-selves from it by a continuous feedback processes. Eventually, we hope to reach ever higher levels of lucidity in various states of consciousness.


Phenomenological Research on Lucid Dreams

Since, according to the critical realistic model, the phenomenal (waking or dream) world is the only immediately accessible world, empirical phenomenology (in the sense of the observation and des cription of phenomena) is indispensable for all sciences. The criteria of objectivity and intersubjectivity, which are often used to characterize a science, cannot be maintained, in a strict sense, by the critical realists because they can ultimately be established only through subjective means and thus one can be fundamentally in error. This can be confirmed by anyone who has considered himself to be in a waking state, while, in fact, he was dreaming. This is because the world in a dream state can have the same objective and intersubjective appearance as in a waking state. The possibility of making such a fundamental error, however, does not mean that we have to adopt a completely skeptical position. Conviction does not always lead to objectively and intersubjectively valid observations, but it does so as a rule. Given that empirical phenomenology, by definition, does not seek to investigate objective facts, we demand only intersubjectivity as a criterion for something's scientific character. Indeed, no single particular fact can be tested (e.g., that someone has dreamed in color at a particular time). But more general facts, such as the actual occurrence of dreaming in color, for example, can be subjected to testing (for details see THOLEY, 1980b).


Experimental phenomenology was the basic and most often used method in our lucid dream research (for details see THOLEY, 1986a). With this method, the researcher instructs the subjects or groups of subjects to carry out various specific activities during lucid dreaming, to observe their effects and record their observations independently of each other immediately upon awakening. For judging the subjects' memory capabilities, it is important that they remember not only immediate phenomenal facts, but also the conclusions and judgements made about these facts (see THOLEY, 1981). An interview technique developed by REIS (1989b), which is based on a detailed recording of dream experiences, allows for even more reliable and valid information on dream content than one normally finds with the usual analyti-cal methods. With the help of phenomenological experiments, it is possible to test psychological hypotheses about functional dependencies on phenomenal facts, as well as psychophysiological hypotheses about the relationships between phenomenal and physiological facts.


Objections to the control of dreams have recently emerged in the lucid dream literature. To these objections we can only reply that in our research and clinical work, we have obtained numerous results through the control of dreams making it possible for us to help many people. The subjects of pilot studies always participate voluntarily in our investigations and were always made aware of potential dangers. It is also understandable that the content of our subjects' lucid dreams would differ extensively from the reports of spontaneous lucid dreamers. Above all, our experimental-phenomenological findings are distinguished from the results obtained by an analysis of spontaneous lucid dreams by a significantly greater diver-sity of experiential possibilities.


Phenomenological Research in Dream Perception and Cognition

In these experiments we tested a vast number of hypotheses in the area of per-ception and cognition during lucid dreaming which I have lectured on in detail since 1973 and which, in part, are only to be found in the unpublished reports and dissertations of my students. From among my German publications, I would highlight my review article of 1981.


The phenomenological experiments on perception were first modeled on the usual perceptual experiments in the waking state. We determined if double images, after images and reversible phenomena appeared during lucid dreams under appro-priate conditions. These experiments also helped in identifying criterion for distin-guishing between a waking and a dream state (see above). We found that all of these phenomena were sometimes, if not always, observed. Although we can frequently recognize the fact that we are dreaming, thirty years of research has still not given us an absolutely reliable test for determining this. This applies especially to the most effective dream criteria discussed earlier.


During lucid dreaming we can sometimes consciously produce perceptual phenomena which differ completely from perception in a waking state - for example, a panoramic field of vision extending 360 degrees in both horizontal and vertical directions. In general, this has occurred only when the dream-ego was in an asomatic or disembodied state (see below). We also succeeded in deliberately defying gravity and slowing down or speeding up time through the use of various techniques (see THOLEY & UTECHT, 1989).


In the area of memory, we discovered that subjects in a lucid dream state could not only remember their waking state but also their previous dreams. We were able to establish this by comparing the notes recorded after their earlier dreams. The latter is most assuredly connected to the problem of state-specific memory. Long-term memory appears to function somewhat better than short-term memory during lucid dreaming.


In the sphere of logical thinking, we found that the dream-ego was capable of solving double-digit multiplication tasks. In addition, some subjects were able to solve problems of logic which they had unsuccessfully attempted prior to going to sleep. Artistic creative ability was also shown in varying areas, especially during hypnagogic dream phases (LIRZER, 1981).


The abilities of other dream characters were also examined in a way similar to the abilities of the dream-ego. We saw that the cognitive and artistic performance of other dream figures equaled or surpassed that of the dream-ego, but were less capable of solving arithmetic problems (KRIST, 1981; THOLEY, 1985; 1989a).


Phenomenological Research on Dream Figure Interactions

We devoted a great deal of attention to the "internal" (emotional and motivational) and "external" (verbal and behavioral) activities of the dream-ego during interaction with other dream figures (THOLEY, 1981; 1982; 1984; 1988b). We found that in general, positive effects on both the dream and waking life of the dreamer accompanied interactions of a peaceful nature. With regard to this, we mainly want to make some comments which supplement already published material (see especially the English article, THOLEY, 1988b).


We have indicated that some of the dream characters form sub-systems of the personality. Even though exact distinctions are not necessarily possible, these sub-systems can be of a more inner-personal or psycho-social nature, on the one hand, or of a more habitual or immediate nature, on the other. We have previously pointed out that dream characters can be altered through changes in our emotional attitude and that we can even create other dream characters.


For example, when I am angry or afraid in a dream, I can blow out the anger or fear through my mouth and thereby create a dream character which takes on an appearance corresponding to the emotion. An indirect way of creating dream charac-ters consists in taking certain actions which trigger strong emotions, such as a guilty conscience. Aggressive actions in dreams are frequently met with punishment meted out by avenging figures. One of my own dreams illustrates this:


I knocked down a dream figure in an enclosed room in order to see if I would be punished. I was seized by the feeling that I would be confronted with something unpleasant, as had happened in previous cases. Tense, but calm, I waited a moment. But nothing happened. Inwardly triumphant, I then wanted to leave the room. There, before the door, stood a huge person with a hood over his head who immediately lunged at me causing [me] great fear.


Whether such figures appear or not (above all, in response to socially taboo actions of an aggressive or sexual nature), varies from subject to subject. This seems to offer proof that the appearance and possible changes of the other dream characters is dependent on the dreamer's current emotional state, while this emotional state, however, is dependent on the habitual attitudes or sub-systems of the personality.


Learning processes probably play a large role in communication with other dream characters. Inexperienced lucid dreamers frequently have difficulty conducting a rational dialogue with other dream figures. This is because most of these figures play word games involving hidden or multiple meanings which the dream-ego can not initially understand. Thus, it is not surprising that the dream-ego considers the other dream figures speech to be pure nonsense - although it can later often be shown to have a logical meaning.


Phenomenological Research on the Lucidity of Dream Characters

In addition to the lucidity of the dream-ego, the "lucidity" of the other dream characters also plays an important role in their communication. In order to avoid misunderstanding, we can never empirically prove whether or not other dream characters are lucid, only that they speak and behave as if they were. Elsewhere I have argued that many dream figures seem to perform with a "consciousness" of what they are doing (THOLEY, 1985; 1989a). Some of our unpublished work on the lucidity of other dream figures (in the sense just described) includes examples which seem to indicate that the dream-ego becomes lucid first. This is followed by the other dream figures attaining lucidity. On the other hand, we have many examples of reverse order. We can illustrate this by means of an example in which another dream character not only becomes lucid before the dream-ego, he also possesses a higher degree of lucidity than the dream-ego later achieves. This abbreviated form of the dream was reported by a woman and can be found in REIS (1989b):


I dreamed that I had forced myself through a grey and slimy mass. I didn't know then and I still don't know what it was. It was unpleasant, but for some reason I had to force myself through it in order to advance further. Then, in the midst of this grey slime, I came to a brightly lit place with a person standing in the center. I could see that it was Mr. Spock, the scientist of the Enterprise (the spaceship of the television series Star Trek). He told me, "There is no reason to worry because you are dreaming!" I did not believe him and I asked him what it was that I had just passed through. He answered that I had just passed through my own brain, or my own mind. I did not believe him, but he knew so much more than I did and he told me he would jump up and then remain in mid-air, just so that I would be able to see that we were part of a dream. Only after this actually took place was I convinced that I was in a dream. Then I said that I would never have found out by myself that I was dreaming. He replied that he knew that and that was why he was there. He also said that he knew much more than me anyway and that was the way it should be right then. He explained the meaning of my path in a very plausible manner. . . . He also explained why it was not necessary to know all this right from the start and that he only explained it later on so that I wouldn't be afraid anymore. Anyway, he told me all kinds of things and showed me things that I did not believe right away. I think it was great to have someone acting in a dream who knew much more than I did.


The dream character of Mr. Spock may be characterized as standing for the so-called internal self-helper (ISH) who gives important advice to the dreamer for her dream and daily lives. Our previous findings suggest that one can arrange a meeting with an ISH by means of a suitable pre-sleep suggestion. While lucid dreaming, one can also arrange meetings with the ISH for a dream in the future.


One often finds an ISH at a place which is difficult to reach and which can be brightly lit (as in the example with Mr. Spock), or which is situated high up. There are examples in which one has to climb to the top of a mountain where one meets an ISH who calls himself a monk, a guru, or possibly a psychotherapist. Others pass themselves off as guardian angels or helpful ghosts (for an example, see THOLEY 1984). We also have examples of cases where an ISH knows certain things from the dreamers past - things which the dreamer himself is not aware of even after waking up, but which further investigation has shown to be true. Suitable phenomenological experiments are necessary to achieve further clarification concerning this important component of lucid dreaming.


In view of the fact that literature in the field of lucid dreaming almost exclusively refers to the lucidity of the dream ego, we have, in fact, consciously chosen an example in which the other dream character becomes lucid earlier than the dream-ego and is superior to it. Naturally, there are many other examples in which the reverse is true. In such cases it is helpful if the dream-ego tries to convince the other dream characters that they are in a dream. The quality of the dream can then change completely and communication between the dream characters can take place which may lead to much greater insight than is found in the typical lucid dream. For this reason we consider the "lucidity" of all dream characters (see item II.7 in Table 1) to be a higher form of lucidity. The verbal, or possibly even "telepathic," communica-tion no longer takes place on a symbolic, but rather on a direct level. It has already been possible to confirm this in preliminary phenomenological experiments. I have recently (THOLEY, 1989a) indicated that it was possible to enter the body of another dream character with the ego-core and, in this way, gain more information than was possible with normal verbal communication.


Techniques for Ending, Prolonging and Manipulating Lucid Dreams

We can draw a whole series of practical conclusions about the ending, prolong-ing and manipulation of lucid dreams from the results of our phenomenological experiments. Just as a dream can be ended by fixing a gaze, a lucid dream can be prolonged when it threatens to end by rapid eye or body movements. As we have already dealt extensively with the possibilities and limits of manipulating lucid dreams (THOLEY, 1988), we will only briefly comment.


The control of a dream through the dream-ego's action in the dream world (similar to the waking-ego's actions in the waking world) is not what we mean by manipulation. Rather, we mean intervention in the dream world which would more likely be considered a supernatural occurrence in a waking state; e.g., journeys into the past, transformation of the dream-ego or dream scenery, etc. Just as lucid dream-ing has been associated with defense mechanisms, so too has dream manipulation been thought to be a kind of defense mechanism. Lucidity can, indeed, be used in the sense of a defense mechanism for escaping problems and conflicts. But, on the other hand, it also offers the unique opportunity (not possible in normal dreams) to face personal problems and conflicts, to confront threatening people and situations and even to seek them out, rather than fleeing from them (see THOLEY, 1988b).


Phenomenological Research on Hypnopompic Phenomena

The fact that lucid dreams can usually be ended by fixing one's vision on a stationary spot makes it possible to closely observe the phenomena which appear during the transition to a waking state. Given that we have already dealt with such phenomena in an earlier article (1981), we will limit our remarks here to a few observations connected with bodily experiences which provide some important background for the remainder of this article.


Only one body was experienced during the transition from the dreaming to the waking state. Of special interest to us here was how the transition took place from an upright, standing dream body to a horizontally lying waking body. This transition is never experienced as the dream body falling into a horizontal position. Instead, there is a sudden change of the spatial reference system. This is comparable, while awake, to when a person wants to go to the door of a completely dark room and suddenly discovers he is at the opposite side of the room. In this case, it is only the sudden change of the spatial reference system (constituted by the room) which is experienced, not the changing of the position of the body through turning and shifting. In further experiments, we tested to see what happens during the transition from a dream to a waking state when the dream body is consciously situated in a way not common during sleeping, e.g., the head and torso bent forward and almost touching the knees, or the arms and legs extended in a spread eagle fashion. Neither a straightening of the body in the first case, nor the drawing in of the limbs in the second case, is actually experienced during waking. Rather, before waking, the body loses its clear contours and sometimes its solid character. We have applied the metaphorical term "cloud-like ego" to such an occurrence. Upon fully awakening this "cloud-like ego" stabilizes into a solid body ego with definitely defined con-tours and is experienced as lying in bed.


A dream ego and a waking ego have also been experienced simultaneously. For example, the dream body gradually faded out (as in a film), while the waking body became more and more clear. The dream body slipping into the waking body was also experienced, particularly during flying dreams. When a cloud-like ego or a disembodied ego was experienced, it also frequently slipped into the waking body. Occasionally the body was not immediately mobile upon waking, a situation which was very unpleasant for inexperienced lucid dreamers. Practiced dreamers, on the other hand, use this condition to return to a lucid dream state (see THOLEY, 1989c).


Hypnagogic Techniques for Inducing Lucid Dreams and OBEs

The above mentioned hypnopompic experiences were used to develop hypna-gogic induction techniques which were then employed in an effort to reverse the above sequence. This sometimes occurs as quickly as with the reversing of a reversible figure. We have already outlined other hypnagogic techniques in some of our earlier articles (THOLEY, 1982; 1983a) and later described them in more detail and illustrated them with suitable examples (THOLEY, 1989c). In many respects, I personally consider the hypnagogic induction techniques to be more appropriate for advanced subjects than other techniques because they allow lucid dreams to be


1. Attained at a particular time;


2. Prolonged easily; and


3. Resumed after short interruptions.


Finally, only hypnagogic techniques made possible a 24-hour period of lucidity that included the total sleeping state (see item II.8 in Table 1). Indeed, only a few people have succeeded in accomplishing this in our experiments. I have personally twice experienced 24 hours of lucidity with approximately a five-hour period spent in a total sleeping state. EMG measurements showed that my muscular system was completely relaxed during this time. Upon awakening I showed no signs of either physical or mental fatigue. A feedback relationship seems to exist between sleeping state lucidity and waking state lucidity.


So-called OBEs of the most varied sort frequently arise with the application of hypnagogic techniques. In the following section we will deal with them in more detail from both the conceptual and phenomenological points of view.
 

格式塔理论(五)
Cognitive Behavior Therapy and Gestalt-Theoretical Psychotherapy


by Hans-Jürgen WALTER

Familiarity with cognitive behaviour therapy, particularly the social cognitive approach, is widely assumed here. My paper is a part of a more comprehensive treatment of this theme in which my sister, Irene PAULS, wrote large parts of the section dealing with cognitive behaviour therapy.

It is undeniable that even today there are behaviour therapists who pay homage to the atomistic and associational view which Gestalt theorists have opposed since the beginning of the century. But the social-cognitive approach, as it is known today, justifies the following question: Is there anything left for Gestalt Theory to criticize? Does the cognitive behaviour therapy, particularly the social cognitive approach as represented by MISCHEL, BANDURA and MAHONEY, still have anything in common with WATSONs behaviour therapy? I think at most only a little. It has become possible to speak of awareness, insight, setting aims, self-observation, anticipation, self-direction and self-control. Many of these concepts are in harmony with LEWINs concept of life-space. Anyway, the concept of conditioning has been radically demystified by the realization that conditioning does not happen automatically but is cognitively mediated (BANDURA, 1974). Analogously to the Gestalt laws (proximity, closure, etc.), "conditioning" merely describes certain possible connections (e.g. stimulus-response associations) which may be realized by an individual, depending on his/her subjective phenomenal world (life space). Rather, self-determination is regarded a basic condition of human existence which cannot be denied. In general, this can be agreed upon, the problems concerning self-determination can be simply illustrated by the following example: If a vicar speaks of politics in his church then he's being political - if he does not bring in politics then he's still being political.

WERTHEIMER, as a founder of Gestalt theory, would probably not feel misunderstood by BANDURAs statement: "The task ahead is to explore in greater detail how self-knowledge of efficacy is acquired and how it in turn shapes the course of personal development" (BANDURA, 1980, p. 171). BANDURAs and WERTHEIMERs ideas and concepts concerning self-determination must be carefully compared in order to be able to decide if they have a relatively similar understanding of this subject, thus enabling them to pursue similar lines of research.

WERTHEIMER analyses the problem of self-determinations particularly impressively in an essay on the subject of "freedom" published in 1940 (in ANSHEN, 1940, new published in HENLE, 1961). In "A Story of Three Days" he describes a "good man's" attempt to find out what freedom means. The "good man" is disappointed in his hope of finding a solution to his problem through conversations with a sociologist and a philosopher and by reading the works of a famous author and a psychoanalyst. Each time he ends up feeling that he has, in fact, learnt nothing about freedom in spite of the famous people's clever ideas. And then - alone with himself again - he bursts out. "First let me realize," he said passionately, "what I have seen with my own eyes. Have I not seen in my experience strong and indeed very characteristic cases of men, of children, who were free, who were unfree? What were the essentials? My experiences, of course, are no sufficient basis for statistical generalizations; nor do I wish to make any now. What I want is to grasp, to realize, what I have seen." He recalled a number of cases. Then he said, "Sometimes one sees a man, and by the way he goes through life, by his attitudes, by his behaviour in dealing with life situations one feels: this is a free man, he lives in an atmosphere of freedom. And so in observing children. On the other hand, one sees men or children, and feels strongly that in their behaviour there is no freedom - there is no air of freedom in their world."

"It is," he thought, "not easy to put into words what one faces so vividly in these extreme cases. Let me think - what were these cases concretely? The free man," he recalled, "- frank, open-minded, sincerely going ahead, facing the situation freely, looking for the right thing to do and so finding where to go. The opposite - he first thought of children he had often seen - inhibited, pushed, or driven, acting by command or intimidation, one-track minded..."

The man concludes that everything that had been written and said to him concerning freedom by these clever people was a product of piecemeal thinking which sees it


"... in terms of a choice, of a wish, of an `instinctual impulsion , etc. One's whole attitude towards the world, towards the other fellow, towards one's group, towards one' s own momentary wishes was involved." ... "He recalled discussions. What differences! In the way a man faces a counterargument, faces new facts! There are men who face them freely, open-mindedly, frankly, dealing honestly with them, taking them duly into account. 0thers are noat able to do so at all: they somehow remain blind, rigid; they stick to their axioms, unable to face the arguments, the facts; or, if they do, it is to avoid or to get rid of them by some means - they are incapable of looking then squarely in the face. They cannot deal with them as free men; they are narrowed and enslaved by their position" (in HENLE, pp. 59-61).


In his work "Some Problems in the Theory of Ethics" (1935, new published in HENLE, 1961) WERTHEIMER points out that logical operations can be illogical in the context of a situation, simply because they do not fulfil the demands of the situation. In the previously described example, it could be a case of a fascinating firework display of logical and knowledgeable trains of thought which, as a whole, completely miss the point. The man sums it up thus:

"Freedom is (1) a condition in the social field, and a terribly important one. In viewing such, a condition we should not view it as a thing in itself and so define it, but we should view it in its role, in its function, in its interactions, in its consequences for men and for society. Freedom is logically (2) not just a condition; what matters is how men are and how they develop, how society is and how it develops. Freedom is a Gestalt quality of attitude, of behaviour, of a man's thinking, of his actions. (Think of the difference between the free and the unfree, the des cription of which was of course only a first approach to viewing the essentials.) Now logically freedom as condition (1) and freedom as Gestalt quality (2) must be viewed not as two pieces, but in their intimate interrelation. Freedom as condition is only one factor, but a very important one with regard to freedom as character quality" (in HENLE, p. 64).


It does not seem to be a coincidence that none of the words WERTHEIMER uses to describe freedom begin with "self". He would probably see the distinction between external determination and self-determination as an expression of a piecemeal view. He would, on the other hand, agree with the view that the free man is able to determine himself, because the feeling of freedom allows him to confront situations without reservations. I would really like to give up the concept of self-determination in Gestalt-theoretical psychotherapy and, together with METZGER (1962), and also based on WERTHEIMERs point of view, see the main concern of Gestalt-theoretical pedagogy and also of Gestalt-theoretical psychotherapy in the promotion of "creative freedom". We can only find out what promotes it, we can promote it, but we cannot find out how to create it - this character quality of "creative freedom" out of which the appropriate self-determination grows. To what extent could a person who is unfree in the sense of character quality benefit from his awareness of, his insight into and his anticipation of contingencies? Of what use is his logic? lt would be the logic of an unfree person, the activity of an unfree person. WERTHEIMER speaks of the atmosphere of freedom emitted by a free person which can be felt, the air of freedom which the unfree person lacks. Only the encounter with an air or an atmosphere of freedom can liberate him. To be brought into a social field where the air of freedom can be breathed in - as the "good man" in WERTHEIMERs story has already experienced - can seem to someone as though he had suddenly recovered after a long illness. The language of WERTHEIMERs "A Story of Three Days" is full of feeling, contains many images and is therefore very different from most texts of cognitive behaviour therapy; it seems to me that this is already an indication of a difference between the Gestalt-theoretical approach to self-determination and that of cognitive behaviour therapy. Let us assure ourselves again. In cognitive behaviour therapy we are concerned with knowledge of, awareness of and information about behaviour contingencies. Logical operations constitute self-determination. Clarification is what counts. What has been logically clarified is the basis of further clarification by means of logical operations. I think the tradition of an atomistic "summative" approach can be felt here. lt is, of course, pointed out that emotions also determine thinking, but it seems to me that the step of seeing a person's thinking, feeling, actions, perceptions, attitudes and logical operations as an indivisible unity, as a holistic phenomenon, as a Gestalt quality has not quite been taken. Where lies the logic when, on the one hand, cognition is seen as being influenced by emotions and, on the other hand such "emotional cognitions" are reduced to logical operations as a kind of intellectual strategy? If, (as WERTHEIMER let his "good man" express pointedly), empirical inquiry into the conditions for the development of freedom is only useful when conducted by a free man, then the rationalistic reduction of self-determination to a logical handling of knowledge of contingencies is unsuitable for this task, because this one-sidedness avoids the confrontation with the Gestalt character of the person as a whole. Furthermore, if in cognitive behaviour therapy the conscious mind, defined as knowledge of interconnections which can be verbally recalled, is the foundation of self-determination, then such a rationalistic view ignores the unconscious in consciousness. In this concept of self-determination man is reduced to a "logical doer". For Gestalt theory, however, the unconscious in consciousness is no less a source of self-determination than the conscious mind, the inaccessible no less than the accessible, the ground no less than the distinguishable figure, the functionally bound (which evades attention because only a particular problem or particular aim is centered on) no less than that which is seen, the visual constant (which I would not think of questioning) no less than the visual variable in whose transformation I anticipate success (RAUSCH, 1949; HOETH, 1979), and finally, to sum up, the properties of individual parts (perhaps also conditions for a person's freedom), their relationship to each other, their role in the whole no less than the Gestalt quality of the whole (perhaps also the free personality). All pieces of information which cannot be reproduced verbally are not "inevitably lost" as maintained by the client-centered therapist WEXLER in his "Cognitive Theory of Experiencing, Self-actualisation and Therapeutic Process" (1974).

But can Gestalt theory offer a way to make the inaccessible accessible? Surely it is only meaningful then to insist on its existence? A holistic view, one could say, is fine, but is it not just vague rubbish if this leads to the claim that the inaccessible is the source of free behaviour, the source of self-determination? I would like to answer this. The impatience expressed by a "doer mentality" such as WATSONs shows its persistency perhaps not only in the fact that Gestalt theorists are asked the wrong questions but also that Gestalt theorists may give the wrong answers. That which is inaccessible cannot be made accessible, it can however become accessible. The "good man" in WERTHEIMERs story named crucial conditions which enable this to take place: a free, open and unprejudiced acceptance of that which is. WERTHEIMER speaks of the "demands of the situation" and maintains that intelligence is the capacity to let oneself be led by the situation (1945, in German 1964). For WERTHEIMER truly creative achievements are unthinkable without this process of accepting and letting oneself be led by one's situation. This characterizes the scientific research method of Gestalt Theory no less than it does Gestalt-theoretical Psychotherapy. METZGER (1975) describes the method of inquiry used in Gestalt theory as "movement from top to bottom". In order for logical operations to take place within a meaningful framework, the researcher is not afraid to ascribe scientific worth to his first intuitions as he approaches the object of his inquiry. To go into these intuitions - however unclear their appearances in the object of inquiry - increases the chance that the matter at hand, the situation itself takes charge rather than preconceived assumptions. In research as in therapy, logical operations are only used with a specific purpose when the Gestalt relationship between researcher and the aim of his research, between therapist and client, between client and his aim has been clarified adequately. There is no guarantee that this is practised. What can be done is to set up adequate conditions (such as "the path from top to bottom") which increase the chances that old rigidities are not strengthened by illogical logic. In therapy, for example, we are concerned with allowing confusion and the lack of clarity. It is not a matter of supporting confusion and the lack of clarity as aims, but merely of allowing them. Acceptance of that which is, allowing the confusion which is present, is necessary in order to develop a clarity which is not entirely primitive ("primitiv-prägnant"). Creative freedom (cp. Metzger, 1962), creative self-determination takes shape in letting go of that which has been done long ago, that which is known or claimed to exist. Perls is, at least in this point, a real Gestalt theorist, to him awareness means directing his attention fully to the present experience, listening inside himself, remaining in the flow of consciousness, not investing activity in logical inquiries too early, but simply being there, following whatever happens, whatever pushes itself into the foreground; in this way, perhaps for the first time in ages becoming aware of elemental needs for peace, security, affection and pleasure, for making an effort and achieving something. Acceptance of the present situation (of which Lewin says that it is the only place where change can take place) is something, I am convinced, hardly anyone masters. lt is much more usual to juggle hypotheses, assumptions and suspicions about the past and future, to worship second-hand ideas, and thus to neglect our connection with the present most crassly. Experiences in Gestalt-theoretical Psychotherapy (which can include the use of Gestalt therapy exercises and procedures as well as those from psychodrama, client centered therapy and even behaviour therapy), has, in my opinion, demonstrated adequately that by creating adequate conditions which encourage a person to be concerned with himself, his current situation and encounters and confrontations with the other group members success is rendered possible such as Wertheimer understands it, and describes it in an example from "Some Problems in the Theory of Ethics":

"Further, there are experiences like the following. One knows a man who is an outstanding example of a certain caste, whose entire behaviour expresses very definitely the evaluations of his caste. And in a serious moment the outer shell falls away, and from behind this exterior there now comes out a simple, good, somewhat immature man, for whom the seemingly serious attitudes which he had exhibited are in fact like strange, superficial clothing. There seem to be layers in men, and it is a question of fact what the inner layers of men really are. Concerning our problem there are opposing theses. I would believe that the optimistic thesis is the right one, however difficult, indeed however impossible it may be at times to penetrate to this layer." (in Henle, p. 40).


Wertheimer's optimistic thesis is that people always have that layer which has preserved creative freedom in spite of the greatest external opposition and that it is a matter of penetrating to this layer. I see the danger that even the most progressive behaviour therapy, the social cognitive approach of the cognitive behaviour therapy in all its serious attempts, sometimes promotes a rigid "computing" (which PERLS also calls "mind-fucking") rather than freedom for creative self-determination. In his book "Schöpferische Freiheit" (Creative Freedom) METZGER quotes the swordmaster TAKUAN with the statement:

"There are two kinds of schooling; one in final understanding and the other in method. The first, as already mentioned, aims to understand the ultimate significance of things for which actions are not limited by prescribed rules. There is only one meaning which goes its own innate way. However, mastery of the individual method is equally necessary. If you have no knowledge of this, you don't know how to approach your task" (1962, p.77, Author's translation).


I think it is not too daring to compare this duality with WERTHEIMERs. Here it is a question of investigating the conditions which promote freedom with scientific methods while taking into account that freedom is a Gestalt quality of character which, as a holistic phenomenon, will never be entirely accessible to rational analysis. Freedom can be hidden behind experiences, behind knowledge of contingencies, which is inaccessible but can become accessible when one is prepared to use knowledge of meaningful conditions (yes, certainly this is also knowledge of contingencies). According to this view there is no reason for Gestalt theorists to distance themselves from cognitive behaviour therapy. It can play its part in making more precise the rational and reasonable strategies of Gestalt theoretical psychotherapy. And at the same time Gestalt theory can offer cognitive behaviour therapy a wider framework in the sense of a more comprehensive view of man freed of disastrous limitations.


--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
References:

BANDURA, A. (1974). Behaviour theory and the models of man. American Psychol. 29, 859-869.
BANDURA, A. (1977). Self-efficacy: Toward a unifying theory of behavioural change. Psych. Review, 84, 191-215.
BANDURA, A. (1980). Self-referent thought: A developmental analysis of self-efficacy. Gestalt Theory 2, 147-174.
HOETH, F. (1979). Variabilität und Konstanz als phänomenologische Kategorien. Gestalt Theory, 1, 19-25.
METZGER, W. (1962). Schöpferische Freiheit. Frankfurt: Kramer.
METZGER, W. (1975). Gestalttheorie und Gruppendynamik. Gruppendynamik 6, 311-331.
RAUSCH, E. (1949).Variabilität und Konstanz als phänomenologische Kategorien. Psychologische Forschung, 23, 69-114.
WERTHEIMER, M. (1935/1961). Some problems in the theory of ethics. In M. HENLE (ed.), Documents of Gestalt Psychology (pp. 29-41). Berkeley: University of California Press.
WERTHEIMER, M. (1940/1961). A story of three days. In M. HENLE (ed.), Documents of Gestalt Psychology (pp. 52-66). Berkeley: University of California Press.
WERTHEIMER, M. (1945, German: 1964). Produktives Denken. Frankfurt: Kramer.
 
1  /  4  页   1234 跳转

版权所有 北望经济学园  北望博客  Sitemap

Powered by Discuz!NT 2.1.202    Copyright © 2001-2012 Comsenz Inc.
Processed in 0.421875 second(s) , 3 queries. 京ICP备05006035号
返顶部