Burghölzli Zurich, 8. I. 1907.
I'm sorry to send now only to respond to your last letter, so friendly and detailed. In fact I am somewhat embarrassed, retrospectively, Game cache- seek with my dream. In its first version, Bleuler, to whom I showed the plan, the light was too. This was an incentive for me to welcome secondarily hide things in the interpretation, and has played the game of complex. Why I did not just put the interpretation tree trunk - penis, it has its special reasons, which relates mainly to the fact that I was not able to write impersonally my dream, which is why my wife wrote all description (!!).
No doubt you are right to advise me more "therapeutic" with opponents, but I'm still young, and occasionally it has its foibles for consideration and scientific reputation. When you are in a university clinic, we must play many respects, rather the neglect of privacy. But you can rest assured, I will never give up an essential part of your teaching, for that I am too committed.
I am now absolutely determined to come to Vienna for the next Spring Break (avril), to finally enjoy the happiness long desired a personal interview with you. I have a lot to abreact.
Regarding the issue of "toxins", it is true that you have to hit a new low. Originally I wanted to omit all the matters in my "psychology". But as, given the slow pace of public mind, I dreaded misunderstandings, I did at least refer to the "toxin". I know your opinion, namely that there also sexuality should have a say. The idea to me is also quite nice that there may be a secretion "internal" causes disorders, and it may be sexual glands producing toxins that are. But I know of no evidence that. This is why I omitted this assumption. It also seems to me for the moment that the latter hypothesis is rather to consider the’epilepsy, where the complex sexual-religious is widely foreground.
With respect to your idea of "paranoia", I can not see a difference in nomenclature. In the "dementia" praecox, must be careful not to think immediately to a stupor (it can aussi come!), but we must think of a complex delirium [Komplexdelir] with fasteners. Paranoia is built exactly like a dementia praecox, except that the setting is limited to a small number of associations, and clarity of concepts is generally, with some exceptions which, preserved. There is however everywhere fluctuating transitions to what denominates of. pr. (1). D. pr. designation is quite unfortunate! Your (2) point of view you could also refer my case to. pr. as paranoia, as was actually done before.
The case on which you kindly write me me extra- usually interested, as a parallel case to mine. Many early dementia feel the state’ "Brutalization". The delusions of grandeur and assignment are things synonymous (the last ingredient is usually female). Both indicate a component of the psyche that failed to grow in real life hitherto led, either in the erotic sphere, or in the social, perhaps in both. Sexual coldness in marriage seems to indicate that despite the love marriage something not appropriate in this man, that this one was not quite good. This is at least what we see generally in those of our cases whose history includes sexual anesthesia. Lack of love for children is the same. Generally women like the husband in children : if the husband is not suitable, children do not agree. Often, women hallu- cinent while children are killed. Often, only girls are killed, then it is sexual dissatisfaction in the mother, that the husband is too old or it is not appropriate in any other way. "Kill" means, in d. pr. aussi, simply deny or repress. In access to the. pr., all complexes are unresolved abréagis, a manner entirely consistent with the pattern of hysteria. Except that everything happens much more tumultuous and dangerous, and it leaves some irreparable problems in mental status and increased difficulties particularly to support and abreact affects. Later expresses blocking stronger and more general feelings, with characteristic stupidity of intelligence. Affective disorder, however, is still largely in the foreground and makes the definite diagnosis, as opposed to all other intellectual abrutissements.
I recently read with satisfaction how Löwenfeld just put definitely on your side, regarding anxiety neurosis at least. That voice in Germany has more audience than mine. Perhaps your triumph he begins earlier than we think.
I still owe you a short explanation of the term "hysteria addiction (3) », It is still an expedient. I was struck by the fact that there are hysterical living in a constant struggle with their complex, which manifest violent agitations, mood swings and a very strong alternating symptoms. From my little experience, these are cases where the prognosis is good. They have in them a component that opposes the enslavement by the pathogenic complex. However, there are other hysterical, living in peace with their symptoms, which are not only accustomed to symptom, but exploit it for various purposes of symptomatic acts and baffles, and that in inscrustent parasites in the mercy of their environment. Those are the cases with poor prognosis, who also defend with great fury against the analysis. It is the latter that I call "hysterical addiction". Perhaps you understand, From this description incomplete, what I mean. This is of course a very rough classification and superficial, but so far told me something. Maybe you can again open my eyes. An infinite hysterical uneducated (such as parasites of hospitals) are classified here.
Accept my warmest wishes for the new year and my warmest thank you! Your very devoted
1. Swiss psychiatrists then preferred the term "dementia praecox", introduit couple of Kraepelin; it is now widely replaced by "schizophrenia", due to Bleuler.
2. In the original : her (their) instead of Her (your).
3. See 6 J.