Abstract
Throughout medical history we find evidence that hysteria has predominated over all other psychological disorders in attracting the attention of philosophers and physicians, yet despite the leading part which the study of hysteria has played in building up our present-day knowledge of psychopathology, it is remarkable how little we have advanced in acquiring an understanding of the cause of the hysterical syndrome itself. Even the wisdom of Freud has failed to offer us a readily acceptable explanation of hysteria, and to this day medical literature contains many theses suggesting that hysteria is related to disorders of the diencephalon, or to glandular dysfunction, and other such organic approaches to the problem. Seemingly we have no yardstick by which we can measure to what extent the hysteric is born, predestined by some elusive factor to develop the malady, and to what extent hysteria is imposed on persons by environmental circumstances. Much significant information on hysteria may be neglected by those who study it as an isolated phenomenon or disease entity, whereas it may well be that the truth of the matter is that at least a little bit of the hysterical reaction goes to form most of the neurotic syndromes met with in practice, and that the pure hysterical reaction is only an academic concept.
Publisher
Royal College of Psychiatrists
Reference19 articles.
1. Miller Emmanuel (1945), “Psychiatric Casualties among Officers and Men from Normandy,” Lancet, 24 March, p. 364.
2. Eysenck H. J. (1947), Dimensions of Personality. London.
3. Young Kimball (1946), Handbook of Social Psychology.
4. Mental disease situations in certain cultures—a new field for research.
Cited by
16 articles.
订阅此论文施引文献
订阅此论文施引文献,注册后可以免费订阅5篇论文的施引文献,订阅后可以查看论文全部施引文献