Abstract
I have reviewed Hobson and McCarley's activation-synthesis hypothesis of dreaming which attempts to show that the instigation and certain formal aspects of dreaming are physiologically determined by a brainstem neuronal mechanism, their reasons for suggesting major revisions in psychoanalytic dream theory, and neurophysiological data that are inconsistent with their hypothesis. I then discussed the concept of mind-body isomorphism pointing out that they use this concept inconsistently, that despite their denials they regularly view physiology as primary and psychological processes as secondary, and that they frequently make the error of mixing the languages of physiology and psychology in their explanatory statements. Finally, in order to evaluate Hobson and McCarley's claim that their findings require revision of psychoanalytic dream theory, I examined their discussions of chase dreams, flying dreams, sexual dreams, the formal characteristics of dreams, the forgetting of dreams, and the instigation of dreams. I concluded that although their fascinating physiological findings may be central to understanding the neurobiology of REM sleep, they do not alter the meaning and interpretation of dreams gleaned through psychoanalytic study.
Talk to us
Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have
More From: Journal of the American Psychoanalytic Association
Disclaimer: All third-party content on this website/platform is and will remain the property of their respective owners and is provided on "as is" basis without any warranties, express or implied. Use of third-party content does not indicate any affiliation, sponsorship with or endorsement by them. Any references to third-party content is to identify the corresponding services and shall be considered fair use under The CopyrightLaw.