用户名: 密码: 验证码:    注册 | 忘记密码?
首页|听力资源|每日听力|网络电台|在线词典|听力论坛|下载频道|部落家园|在线背单词|双语阅读|在线听写|普特网校

Willard Gaylin - What You See Is the Real You 汉译

2014-07-07    来源:网络    【      美国外教 在线口语培训

What You See Is the Real You

Willard Gaylin

It was, I believe, the distinguished Nebraska financier Father Edward J. Flanagan who professed to having “never met a bad boy.”  Having, myself, met a remarkable number of bad boys, it might seem that either our experiences were drastically different or we were using the word “bad” differently.  I suspect neither is true, but rather that the Father was appraising the “inner man,” while I, in fact, do not acknowledge the existence of inner people. 

Since we psychoanalysts have unwittingly contributed to this confusion, let one, at least, attempt a small rectifying effort.  Psychoanalytic data--which should be viewed as supplementary information--are, unfortunately, often viewed as alternative (and superior) explanation.  This has led to the prevalent tendency to think of the “inner” man as the real man and the outer man as an illusion or pretender.

While psychoanalysis supplies us with an incredibly useful tool for explaining the motive and purposes underlying human behavior, most of this has little bearing on the moral nature of that behavior.

Like roentgenology, psychoanalysis is a fascinating, but relatively new means of illuminating the person.  But few of us are prepared to substitute an X-ray of Grandfather’s head for the portrait that hangs in the parlor.  The inside of the man represents another view, not a truer one.  A man may not always be what he appears to be, but what he appears to be is always a significant part of what he is.  A man is the sum total of all his behavior.  To probe for unconscious determinants of behavior and then define him in their terms exclusively, ignoring his overt behavior altogether, is a greater distortion than ignoring the unconscious completely.
Kurt Vonnegut has said, “You are what you pretend to be,” which is simply another way of saying, you are what we (all of us) perceive you to be, not what you think you are.

Consider for a moment the case of the ninety-year-old man on his deathbed (surely the Talmud must deal with this?)  joyous and relieved over the success of his deception.  For ninety years, he has shielded his evil nature from public observation.  For ninety years he has affected courtesy, kindness, and generosity--suppressing all the malice he knew was within him while he calculatedly and artificially substituted grace and charity.  All his life he had been fooling the world into believing he was a good man.  This “evil” man will, I predict, be welcomed into the Kingdom of Heaven.

Similarly, I will not be told that the young man who earns his pocket money by mugging old ladies is “really” a good boy.  Even my generous and expansive definition of goodness will not accommodate that particular form of self-advancement.

It does not count that beneath the rough exterior he has a heart--or, for that matter, an entire innards--of purest gold, locked away from human perception.  You are for the most part what you seem to be, not what you would wish to be, nor, indeed, what you believe yourself to be.

Spare me, therefore, your good intentions, your inner sensitivities, your unarticulated and unexpressed love.  And spare me also those tedious psychohistories which--by exposing the goodness inside the bad man, and the evil in the good--invariably establish a vulgar and perverse egalitarianism, as if the arrangement of what is outside and what inside makes no moral difference.

Saint Francis may, in his unconscious, indeed have been compensating for, and denying, destructive, unconscious Oedipal impulses identical to those which Attila projected and acted on.   But the similarity of the unconscious constellations in the two men matters precious little, if it does not distinguish between them.
I do not care to learn that Hitler’s heart was in the right place.  A knowledge of the unconscious life of the man may be an adjunct to understanding his behavior.  It is not a substitute for his behavior in describing him.

The inner man is a fantasy.  If it helps you to identify with one, by all means, do so; preserve it, cherish it, embrace it, but do not present it to others for evaluation or consideration, for excuse or exculpation, or, for that matter, for punishment or disapproval.

Like any fantasy, it serves your purposes alone.  It has no standing in the real world which we share with each other.  Those character traits, those attitudes, that behavior--that strange and alien stuff sticking out all over you--that’s the real you!

你所见到的即是那真正的你

威拉德•盖林

如果我没记错,下面的话正是那有名的财政家爱德华•J•弗拉耐根神甫讲的,即他公开表示过他“从没有遇到过一个坏青年。”既然我自己却曾遇到过相当不少的坏青年,那么情形便可能是,或者我们两人的经历截然不同,或者我们对“坏”这个字各自的用法不同。不过我疑心这两种情形都不是,而只不过是这位神甫所评价的是那“内在的人”,而我自己则实际上并不承认所谓内在的人这么回事。

既然我们的精神分析家们早已于无意之中将此问题搅乱,那么这事总得至少有一个人出来纠正。精神分析数据——按说这原只应被视作某种补充性的信息——如今却不幸常常被视作[这件事的]另一种(更高级的)解释。这一来便助长了目前这种流行的看法,即认为那“内在的”人才是那真正的人,而那外在的人却只不过是种假象或假冒者。

就在精神分析在对人的行为背后的种种动机与目的解释方面提供着令人难以相信的有利手段的同时,它的这一套说法对上述行为的道德性质却很少有什么相干。

正像X光线学那样,精神分析在对人的阐释上确是一种十分诱人但也相对地时间还不久的新手段。不过到底我们很少有人愿意将客厅里的老祖父肖像换上一张他老人家的头颅的X光照片挂在那里。一个人的内在部分往往呈现的是另一副面貌,但却未必是那更真实的面貌。一个人不一定时时都是他表现在外面的,但那表现在外面的却无疑是他真正情况的一个重要部分。一个人即是他全部行为的总和。只去探索人的行为的无意识决定因素,然后再全部使用这类的词语来勾画出他这个人,丝毫也不考虑他的外部行为,这一做法的谬误程度实在要比完全忽略了那无意识的部分要严重得多。

库特•冯涅古曾说过,“你就是你的假冒造作,”这实际即等于在说,你正是我们(我们全体)所见到的你,而不是你自己心目当中的你。

且请你费点时间思索一下这个情形吧,思索一下一个九旬老人在他临终前的病榻上(想来泰尔摩书里准会记叙过这类情形?)对于他自己的欺骗成功的一番喜悦欣慰的情景。整整九十年来他一直将他的恶毒天性掩盖得那么彻底,以致谁也不曾觉察出来。整整九十年来他一直假装得那么彬彬有礼,仁慈慷慨——一方面将他明知自己身上存在着的恶毒遮掩了去,一方面则费尽心机地给那东西换上了一副娴雅仁厚的假面。他的一生始终都在干着欺世盗名的勾当,使人相信他是个善人。这个“恶”人,我敢断言,天国那里也一定会对他热烈欢迎的。

同理,谁也无法使我相信,一个平日惯常靠扼杀老妇来挣取零用钱的青年会是个“真正的”好青年。即使我的善的观念再加宽容再加扩大,它对这种特殊形式的自我改善恐怕仍然适应不了。

说某个人粗野的外表背后的那颗心——或者在这方面,他那全部的内里,真是纯金一般,只不过深锁其中,人的肉眼察觉不到罢了。这话完全等于同说,你是如何,在多数情况下即是你表现出来的那个,并不是你想要造成的那个,更决不是你自以为是如何的那个。

因此,且请收回你的那些善良的意图,你的内在的感情,你的那不曾明言的和不曾表示出来的爱吧。另外也请收回你的那许多使人厌烦的精神分析吧——那东西,通过其专揭恶人内部之善与善人之恶的做法——往往只建成一种庸俗的、颠倒是非的无差别论,仿佛一切的外部与内部云云实质上并无什么不同。

圣弗朗西斯也有可能在他那无意识的,说实在他也一直在补偿和抵制,那带破坏性的无意识的哀底普斯式的冲动中与那真正图谋过并且遂行了那一冲动的阿提拉是相同的。但是这两个人在其无意识的领域里的这点类似其实绝不重要,如果据此并不足以构成他两人的区别的话。

我对希特勒的那颗心是否正常这点并不感兴趣。对他的无意识的生活的认知或许会有助于对他的行为的了解。但这决不能成为在说起此人时对他的行为的一种替换。

那内在的人只是一种幻觉。如果这种认识能帮助你辨出谁谁,那当然完全请便;你尽可以对其保存之,珍视之,爱护之,只是不应提到他人面前作为评价或考虑的根据,作为原谅或开脱的根据,或者仅为这点而决定其惩处。

正像一切其他幻觉那样,它的功用往往不出你个人范围。但在这个你与我共同分享的真实世界中,它却是没有地位的。那些性格特点,那些举止态度,那种行为——那种从你周身冒出的奇特和异样的东西——那才是那真正的你。

(高健 译)



顶一下
(2)
66.7%
踩一下
(1)
33.3%
手机上普特 m.putclub.com 手机上普特
[责任编辑:elly]
------分隔线----------------------------
发表评论 查看所有评论
请自觉遵守互联网政策法规,严禁发布色情、暴力、反动的言论。
评价:
表情:
用户名: 密码: 验证码:
  • 推荐文章
  • 资料下载
  • 讲座录音
普特英语手机网站
用手机浏览器输入m.putclub.com进入普特手机网站学习
查看更多手机学习APP>>