Lecture 15 - General Definitions

https://www.solgood.org - Check out our Streaming Service for our full collection of audiobooks, podcasts, short stories, & 10 hour sounds for sleep and relaxation at our website

psychology, psychoanalysis, psychiatry, mental health, gender studies, sexuality, medical history, case studies, hysteria, gender roles, human nature, psychotherapy, literary style, literary legacy, literary analysis, literary adaptation, literary criticism, feminist literature, 19th century literature, medical ethics, medical research, psychosexual development, mind-body connection, psychiatric diagnosis, cultural norms

Episode Transcript

(00:00):
Let fifteen General definitions. Review ofthe typical symptoms of hysteria, the positive
and negative phenomena in somnambulism with amnesia, in agitations, with paralysis and anesthesias,
The general idea of the contraction ofthe field of consciousness and of the
lowering of the mental level. Definitionsof hysteria, their congruency psychological definitions,

(00:25):
the need of precision in these definitions. Definitions of hysteria as a disease by
suggestion. Discussion of these definitions fixedideas without relation to the medical form of
the accident, The physiological and psychologicallaws unknown to the patient, the conditions
of suggestion. Hysteria as a formof mental depression, characterized by the contraction

(00:46):
of the field of personal consciousness anda tendency to the dissociation and emancipation of
the system of ideas and functions thatconstitute personality. The laws of localization,
the part played by the difficulty ofthe function by psychological automatism, by the
anterior weakening of the function by thelocalization of the emotion. In these lectures

(01:07):
on the Great Symptoms of hysteria,I have tried to present a rapid picture
not of all the symptoms of hysteria, but of the essential ones, in
order that you might form a justidea of a singular malady of which every
body speaks, and which but fewphysicians know well. I have only presented
to you the typical cases and formsaround which it is easy for you to
group, the degraded forms and confusedaspects which most diseases offer in practice.

(01:34):
We must try now to sum upthese descriptions, and to derive from them
some general conception of the whole disease. One, allow me first to remind
you, in a few words,of the essential pictures you should keep before
your eyes in order to form ageneral idea of the hysterical disease. We
have studied somnambulism together. I nolonger say hysterical somnambulism, for there is

(01:57):
no more any somnambulism for us outsideof hysteria. We have studied it under
its simple and typical form of monoeidaicsomnambulism, then in its more complete forms
of fugues, of polyedaic somnambulisms,of artificial somnambulisms. You remember that we
have always recognized in it the exaggerateddevelopment of an idea, of a feeling,

(02:19):
of a psychological state, in aword, of a system of thoughts
which takes place outside the memory andthe normal consciousness. This dissociation of a
psychological system is manifested not only bythe preceding development, but also by amnesia,
bearing not only on the somnambulic period, but even in remarkable cases,
on the whole of the idea andof the feeling. When later we studied

(02:44):
various accidents bearing on the movements ofthe limbs, we recognize that small systems
of movements, and sometimes great systems, rich and old, constituting real functions,
developed themselves without control to an exaggerateddegree and give rise to ticks and
careers of various kinds. This lackof control is manifested through negative phenomena closely

(03:04):
connected with the preceding ones, paralysiesand anaesthesias, which seem to play here
the same role as the amnesias ofsomnambulism. When we came to the censorial
functions, we saw the same agitationsunder the forms of ticks, of pains,
and of hallucinations, accompanied with certainlosses of control which constitute various anesthesias,
bearing on the special senses as wellas on the general sensibilities. In

(03:29):
connection with these anaesthesias, we remarkedmore clearly than we had done in connection
with the preceding phenomena, the realnature of these amnesias, of these paralysies,
in a word, of these disappearancesof functions. The function is far
from being destroyed. It continues toexist, and often even develops to an
exaggerated degree. It is only suppressedfrom one very special standpoint. It is

(03:52):
no longer at the disposal of thewill or the consciousness of the subject.
Surprising as it is, we recognizedthe same facts not only in the ext
function of speech, but even inthe visceral functions. The refusal to eat,
vomitings, hysterical dysnears are not diseasesof the stomach or lungs. They
consist in a kind of emancipation ofthe cerebral and psychological function. Relative to

(04:13):
these organs, there is now anexaggeration independent of the function, again,
and more often, a disappearance fromconsciousness of these organic wants and of the
acts that are connected with them.Finally, in our last lectures, we
sought in the very character of thesepatients, in the status of their minds,
for fundamental stigmata, allowing us torecognize and understand the malady. We

(04:34):
succeeded in bringing into evidence. Onthe one hand, stigmata proper to hysteria,
suggestion absent mindedness carried to unconsciousness alternationwhich we summarized in the general idea
of retraction of the field of consciousness, And on the other hand, general
stigmata the absence of attention, thelack of feeling and of will, which

(04:54):
are connected with depression, with thelowering of the mental level. This is
a nical picture that must suffice usin practice. If we remember these chief
facts by comparing with them the complexand less clear cases that practice presents to
us, we shall succeed in appreciatingthe hysterical disease fairly justly, while avoiding
many prejudices and errors that are stillvery common nowadays. Unfortunately, the human

(05:18):
mind is not so easily content.It is fond of dangers and quarrels,
and we feel the need of formulatingconcerning hysterical disease general conceptions, interpretations,
definitions, which are much more exposedto criticism and error. It seems to
me that it is in some waya medical fashion to give definitions on hysteria.

(05:39):
Already, in the old Book ofBrachet in eighteen forty seven, there
were at the beginning about fifty formulaspassed in review. Though la Segg said
that hysteria could never be defined,and that the attempt should not be made.
Since that declaration, everybody has triedto define it. I have discussed
in my little book on Hysteria aboutten definitions, and I have been foolish

(06:00):
enough to present a new one.Of course, physicians have continued to define
it, and since that time tenothers or so have been proposed. We
must obey the fashion by saying afew words about these definitions. Let us
try to derive from them without attachingtoo great importance to the terms, a
general idea that suffices us in practice. Two, I am wrong in laughing

(06:25):
at the definitions of hysteria and observingto you their abundance, which in these
matters is not a proof of truth. These definitions have evolved, they have
made visible progress, and though theyappear numerous nowadays, they come so close
to one another that they blend together. Do not forget that we are speaking
of medicine, and this is rathera special domain, less calm and serene

(06:46):
than high mathematics. You should notask too much of the virtue of a
physician, or hope that he willconfine himself to repeating the definition of a
predecessor. Even if he does notcite his name, What would be left
for him. He must needs changesomething in these definitions, were it but
a single word in order to appearto innovate, which in medicine is indispensable.
I do not exaggerate in telling youthat nowadays three fourths of the definitions

(07:11):
of hysteria are nearly identical. Thus, I shall perhaps surprise you by telling
you that there is no opposition betweenthe definitions that gloriously entitle themselves physiological and
those that modestly call themselves psychological.No doubt, there would be a great
difference if these authors had seen,really seen, a lesion characteristic of the
neurosis, and if they had connectedto the evolution of the disease with this

(07:33):
lesion. Never fear one can makenowadays a so called physiological definition at smaller
cost. It is enough to takethe most commonplace psychological definitions and replace their
terms with words vaguely borrowed from thelanguage of anatomy and the current physiological hypotheses.
Instead of saying the function of languageis separated from the personality, one

(07:55):
will proudly say the center of speechhas no longer any communication with the centers
of association. Instead of saying themental synthesis appears to be diminished, one
will say the higher center of associationis benumbed, and the feat will be
done. I recommend to you,in this connection to read the last book
of Monsieur Jose Ingenieros, published atBuenos Aires in nineteen o six. In

(08:18):
the first chapter, which I donot understand very well on account of my
imperfect knowledge of Spanish, he showsthat many of the definitions of modern physicians
are equivalent, and I am quiteof his opinion. So there is an
ensemble of points on which all theauthors agree, and it is those which
we shall have to bring into evidence. Charcot used to say that hysteria is

(08:39):
an entirely psychic malady. This opinionwas discussed at his time. There were
still some remainders of the old uterineand genital theories. There were still some
attempts to connect hysteria with various nervouslesions. Doctor Baston's book in England,
a very interesting book, is verycourageous. He had the pretension to localize
different hysterical accident in different corners ofthe madalla, of the bulb, or

(09:03):
of the lower centers of the encephalon. That there is no truth in those
old conceptions, that hysteria will notbe recognized later as resulting from some unknown
disturbance of the secretion of a vasculargland, or from some lesion of a
Nowaday's badly defined nervous system, Ishould not dare assert, but one thing
is certain, namely that for twentyyears everybody has departed from this view of

(09:24):
the matter, and that the psychologicalconception has the mastery. I again observed
to you that I consider the pretendedphysiological definitions as mere translations of the psychological
ideas. This point is almost agreedon by everyone. But now difficulties begin
of what kind of psychological disturbance?Is it? A question we should not,

(09:45):
under pretense of psychology confusedly link hysteriawith the vague group of mental diseases
and the old nervosismos. On thispoint, the work of a distinguished physician,
doctor Dubois of Byrne, interesting fromother standpoints, is in my opinion,
absolutely pernicious. The psychological interpretation shouldnot suppress what is good, what
is excellent in our ancestors works.Now, the last century produced a monumental

(10:09):
work, namely clinical work with infinitepatience and penetration. All those great clinicians
introduced order into a real chaos.They ranged the diseases in groups. They
enabled us to recognize these groups.Improvements should consist in consolidating this edifice and
not in throwing it down. Tosay, under pretense of psychology that a

(10:30):
somnambulism is identical with any delirium,that hysterical vomiting is a mere derangement,
to be confounded with manias of doubt, or with melancholias, or even perhaps
with the ticks of idiots, isto go two hundred years back, and
it would be much better to suppressthe psychological interpretation and to be content with
the clinical description. Consequently, inmaking hysteria or a psychological affection, we

(10:52):
do not intend at all, asMonsieur Glracais seemed to believe to confound it
with some sort of other or mentalmalady. We even say that it is
nowadays the most characteristic disturbance of all, and that it is important to distinguish
it well. The first psychological notionthat appears to meet a result with the
greatest clearness from all the contemporary worksis a notion relative to the importance of

(11:16):
ideas in certain hysterical accidents. Chalcot, studying the paralysies, had shown that
the disease is not produced by areal accident, but by the idea of
this accident. It is not necessarythat the carriage wheel should really have passed
over the patient. It is enoughif he has the idea that the wheel
passed over his legs. This remarkis easy to generalize. There are such

(11:37):
kinds of fixed ideas in somnambulisms andfugues, the idea of one's mother's death,
the idea of visiting tropical countries,et cetera. There are such ideas
in systematic contractors, for instance,when a patient seems to hold her feet
stretched because she thinks herself on thecross. There are such ideas in visceral
disturbances. And I have shown youthe observation of a patient who died of

(12:00):
hunger because she had the fixed ideaof the turnips she had eaten when at
school. These remarks have been wellmade on every side. It has also
been established that with hystericals, ideashave a greater importance and above all a
greater bodily action than with the normalman. They seem to penetrate more deeply
into the organism and to bring aboutmotor and visceral modifications. It is a

(12:22):
point which was again emphasized by MonsieurRomathieu and Roue in a recent paper they
devoted to hysterical vomiting. What characterizeshystericals, they said, is less the
fact of accepting some idea or otherthan the action exercised by this idea on
their stomach or intestines. At thesame time, the studies on suggestion,
which have been very numerous, haveallowed clinicians to realize experimentally through the action

(12:46):
of ideas, many phenomena analogous tohysterical accidents. So it may be said
that the most common conceptions of hysteriaturn on this character. Mebus in eighteen
eighty eight, after Chalcot said,we may consider as hysterical all morbid modifications
of the body that are caused byrepresentations. Strompel in eighteen ninety two,

(13:07):
Bernheim, Oberenheim, and more recentlyBabinski have repeated each of them, of
course, with a slight change inthe words quite similar definitions. A phenomenon
is hysterical, said Babinski, whenit can be produced through suggestion and cured
through persuasion. Let us take noaccount of the end of the sentence.
The treatment and cure are delicate things. Much might be said on those cures

(13:31):
through persuasion. Let us only retainthe beginning. Hysteria is defined by a
suggestion. It is absolutely the conceptionof Charcot and mebeus hysteria through fixed ideas
and hysteria through representation. This wordsuggestion, which besides one takes care not
to define, is taken simply inthe sense attached to it by all the

(13:52):
preceding authors, namely that of atoo powerful idea acting on the body in
an abnormal manner. It is easyto remark here a unity of a great
number of contemporary conceptions. Three.I do not object very much to the
preceding definitions. If more precision weregiven to the meaning of the words suggestion.
These definitions would be agreed on byeverybody. Besides, these definitions bring

(14:16):
back all the accidents of the neurosisto a symptom. We have put in
the first rank among the stigmata tothe suggestibility. So they are very scientific
and useful. It is one ofthe first results of all the psychological work
that has been done on hysteria.However, I had already discussed them in
eighteen ninety four and still think theminsufficient. As my arguments have been very

(14:37):
little contradicted, I will try toformulate them more clearly. In the first
place, I believe that this conceptionof hysteria is more just in theory than
in practice. It rather summarizes asystematic interpretation than a clinical observation. It
is we who have repeated that theaccidents seem to be brought about by ideas.

(14:58):
It is not quite exact that wealways observe these ideas in a few
cases, and they are always theones that are repeated. The patient,
it is true, has the ideathat he has paralyzed. I thought he
says that my leg was crushed.I had the idea that my leg no
longer existed. The consecutive paralysis withanesthesia of the limb seems to be the
exact translation of his idea, Butit is a singular exaggeration to apply this

(15:22):
indifferently to all hysterical accidents, andto say unreservedly with Monsieur Bernheim, the
hysterical realizes his accident just as heconceives it. This is to come back
to a kind of contemptuous accusation againstthe patient. Formerly the physician said to
the patient, you are paralyzed,you have crises of sleep because you are

(15:43):
willing to have these accidents. Nowit is recognized that he is not willing
to have them, but it isstill maintained that he thinks of them.
You have such or such a crisis, with such or such an accident because
you think of it. I saythat this is not true. There are
many hystericals who do not think ofthe acts they have. First of all,
with some patients, the accidents developinsidiously unknown to them. They become

(16:07):
an esthetic paralytic, anorexic, amurotic, without in the least suspecting it.
Clinical practice shows you this every day. What shall we do, then,
With the observations already cited by LaSegg, in which it is the physician
who reveals to the subject an anesthesiaor the blindness of one eye which he
was not aware of. In othercases, it is incontestable that the accident

(16:29):
develops with details, with an evolutionthat the patient does not know. Whatever
Monsieur Bernheim may say about it,I do not admit at all that hystericals
have at will paralyses with or withoutanesthesias. I do not admit that these
patients know what happens in their somnambulisms, that they combine the disease beforehand.
If these patients have fixed ideas,and I acknowledge that this is very frequent,

(16:53):
it should be well remarked that thesefixed ideas have no relation to the
medical form of their accident. Onehas the fixed idea of her mother's death.
It is not at all the fixedidea of somnambulism and of its laws.
Another has a fixed idea relative tothe flight of his wife who robbed
him. It is not the fixedidea of dumbness. Much oftener than is

(17:15):
believed, The accident develops independently ofthe ideas of the subject. Whether the
subject does not think of it,or thinks of something else. I should
like to present in the second place, an argument which is still weak,
but the importance of which will growmore and more. It relates to the
physiological and psychological laws of hysterical accidents, laws of which we are ignorant and

(17:36):
of which the subject are ignorant.Like us. When we see a crowd
of accidents evolve according to these laws, which we painfully describe, we cannot
say that they are due to autosuggestion. I remind you of the laws of
somnambulisms, which, in my opinion, a capital somnambulism is followed by an
amnesia which bears not only on theabnormal period, but often also on the

(17:57):
idea itself that it and on allthe feelings connected with it. This amnesia
disappears, and all the apparently lostremembrance as are restored when the subject comes
back into the same somnambulism. Inthe case of Irene, which I take
as a type, there is inthe waking state an amnesia not only of
the crisis, but also of hermother's death, of the three preceding months,

(18:19):
and of all that is connected withher affection for her mother and during
the fits. All these remembrances areperfect to the subjects who show us applications
of these laws, and in myopinion, they are very numerous. Do
these subjects know them? Have they? The idea of having such an oblivion
in connection with their somnambulism are veryunlikely. They would much rather have the

(18:41):
contrary idea, that of being obsessedby their remembrance, Like the psychosthenics.
The more hysterical paralysis are studied,the more laws of a similar kind will
be discovered. I have observed toyou that the accidents bear on functions.
It is true that these functions oftenestappear to be identical with those which the
vulgar have themselves recognized, the functionof alimentation, the function of walk,

(19:04):
the function of the movements of thehand. In this case, you will
tell me the paralysis might very wellbe brought about by an idea, since
the popular idea coincides with the verylimits of the paralysis. This is true
in general simply because the popular ideasare true. The great divisions of the
functions correspond to the great divisions ofthe organs, and the popular analysis has

(19:26):
been correct that is all. Butthere are some cases in which the popular
analysis proves ignorant, and in whichhysterical paralysis analyzes the functions much better than
good sense does. Why are thedisturbances of speech accompanied with right side at
hemiplegi? Why are there cases ofhemianopsia? How is it that there are
distinct paralysis of monocular vision and ofbinocular vision? Why are their disturbances of

(19:51):
accommodation? If you pass on tocontractures, do you really believe that the
patient has the idea of rigidity withoutfatigue, without increase of temperature, that
he has the idea of that modificationof the reactions of that slowness of the
muscular shake. I am convinced,for my part, that hysterical contracture has
its own laws, quite peculiar toit, presenting us, as I told
you, a degradation of the contractionof the striated muscles. All this is

(20:17):
outside of the thought of the subject. As I told you at the beginning.
It will be later a matter ofastonishment that physicians should have attributed to
the caprice of the subject all thepsychological and physiological laws that will be discovered
in these various accidents. Lastly,I insist on a third argument, these
definitions have a meaning only on conditionthat the words fixed, idea, and

(20:37):
suggestion are used in a particular sense. This sense should be that with hystericals,
ideas do not conduct themselves as witheverybody. It is of no use
for me to represent to myself thatI am asleep. I do not therefore
sleep. All these authors imply tacitlythat these ideas act in a special manner
on the mind and organism. Ianswer that it is this special action that

(21:00):
is the essential point. It isthis action that constitutes hysteria. And you
have not the right to make adefinition in which you tacitly imply what is
essential. Begin by defining what youcall suggestion, and afterwards you may say,
if you choose, and if itis true, that hysteria is a
disease due to suggestion. But todefine suggestion, you will be obliged to

(21:22):
introduce into your definition certain new notions, which are precisely those I asked for.
Four. You will be obliged torecognize that these ideas present themselves in
special conditions, that they develop outof measure, because they meet with no
counterpoise in the mind, because theyare isolated owing to a strange absent mindedness
of the subject. In a word, you will recognize the other stigmata,

(21:45):
absent mindedness and the retraction of thefield of consciousness. When you have once
admitted this retraction of the field ofconsciousness as one of the conditions of suggestion
itself, why should you maintain thatit can produce nothing but suggestion? I
should you not admit that this diseaseof the mind may be manifested by something
else. If this retraction has giventoo much power to certain ideas, does

(22:07):
it not produce, on the otherhand, some blanks? Can it not
isolate and emancipate one function and suppressanother from consciousness? We then arrive at
another group of definitions in which Irange mine. There are definitions, in
my opinion, more profound, intowhich enter the phenomena of dissociation of consciousness,
such as is observed in all hystericaldisturbances. Suggestion itself is but a

(22:32):
case of this dissociation of consciousness.There are many others beside the one in
somnambulisms, in automatic words, inemotional attacks, in all the functional paralysies.
Many authors Gurney Myers Laurent Broyer andFreud, Benedict Oppenheim, Jolly Pick
Morton Prints have thought like me thata place should be made for the disposition

(22:53):
to somnambulism was not the somnambulic attackfor us the type of hysterical accidents in
eighteen eighteen nine. The disposition tothis dissociation, and at the same time
the formation of states of consciousness,which we propose to collect under the name
of hypnoid states, constitute the fundamentalphenomenon of this neurosis, said Monsieur Breyer
and Freud of Vienna in eighteen ninetythree. The point which seems to me

(23:18):
to be the most delicate in thisdefinition is to indicate to what depth this
dissociation reaches. In reality. Wemight say that the dementias themselves are dissociations
of thought and of the motor functions. We must remember that in hysteria the
functions do not dissolve entirely, thatthey continue to subsist, emancipated with their
systematization. What is dissolved is personality, the system of grouping of the different

(23:44):
functions around the same personality. Imaintain to this day that if Hysteria is
a mental malady. It is nota mental malady like any other, impairing
the social sentiments or destroying the constitutionof ideas. It is a malady of
the personal synthesis. And I willtake up again, very slightly modified the
formula I have already presented. Hysteriais a form of mental depression characterized by

(24:07):
the retraction of the field of personalconsciousness and a tendency to the dissociation and
emancipation of the systems of ideas andfunctions that constitute personality. Five. Let
us leave two general discussions and comeback to a more clinical conception of things.
The most important problem is not forme to understand what hysteria in general
is, but to account for thepractical evolution of the accidents with such or

(24:32):
such a person. The difficulty wemeet with, then is a difficulty of
localization. How is it that withone person the hysteria bears on the arm,
with another on the stomach, andthat with a third it only reaches
a system of ideas which it turnsinto a somnabulism. It is on this
search for an interpretation proper to eachsubject that one should dwell to my mind

(24:53):
much more than on general quarrels ofdefinition. The starting point of hysteria is
the same as that of most greatneuroses. It is a depression, an
exhaustion of the higher functions of theencevalon. All the psychological operations do not
present, as I repeat, thesame difficulty. There are some operations that
are easy for all kinds of reasons, first because they are simple and only

(25:15):
require the union of a small numberof elements. Second because they are old,
because their systematization was the work ofour ancestors and is inscribed in strongly
constituted organs. There are some otherfunctions that are difficult because on the one
hand, they are very complex,because they necessitate the systematization of an infinite
number of elements, and because onthe other hand, they are very new

(25:37):
and require a present synthesis not yetinscribed in the organism. Now, our
nervous strength, which we do notknow at all, presents oscillations. When
it is high, we easily accomplishthe operations of the second group. We
have an extended consciousness. We turnback from no new study or action.
But there are many circumstances in whichthis nervous tension is lowered, especially with

(26:00):
those hereditarily disposed. There are somephysiological periods puberty, for instance, at
which the vital forces seem to bebusy elsewhere and to leave no great resource
to the brain. There are diseasesthat, through a thousand mechanisms, through
local lesions, through intoxication, throughmicrobian infection, lower our nervous tension.

(26:21):
Even in normal functioning, physical orintellectual fatigue is enough to produce momentarily the
same result. Lastly, the factis more difficult to understand, but incontestable
emotion is characterized by this lowering ofthe nervous strength. Very likely in emotion,
there is a great expense of nervousstrength necessitated by the new problem suddenly
set, and the emotional disturbance mustcome close to that of fatigue. However,

(26:45):
it may be our patients have beenexhausted through one of the preceding causes.
If hereditarily predisposed, they are enfeebledby puberty, or they succumb to
intoxication, fatigue, or emotion.The diminution the lowering of the nervous tension
may bring about a general lowering ofall the functions, and especially of the
highest This is what takes place inthe psychosthenic neurosis, in which the localization

(27:08):
on a special point exists in arather slight degree. With hystericals, in
consequence of particular dispositions, the loweringof the nervous strength produces, in some
manner a superficial retraction. There is, as it were, an autonomy consciousness,
which is no longer able to performtwo complex operations, gives up some
of them. There is, itis true, a general enfeeblement, which

(27:30):
manifests itself through the common stigmata.But there is above all a localization of
the mental insufficiency on such or suchparticular function. So we find again in
hysteria the problem of localization, whichis of great importance in this disease,
no doubt, in a certain numberof cases, the localization is effected through
suggestion. An idea suggested from withoutattracts the thinking in one direction or another,

(27:55):
and brings about Besides, according tolaws, the subject does not know
such such automatic functioning, and suchor such a loss of function. This
is only a particular case. Thelocalization may also be effected through a process
akin to suggestion, but which isnot identical with it. According to the
laws of psychological automatism. I haveoften drawn your attention to those individuals who,

(28:18):
having had an accident in certain circumstances, and having been cured, always
recommends the same accident each time theyexperience an emotion, though it has no
relation with the first. The manwho was wounded by a railroad engine has
a delirium in which he sees anengine coming towards him. This is quite
simple. Eleven years afterwards, hesees his wife die, and he recommences
the engine delirium. Another has thetick of blowing through one of his nostrils

(28:42):
because he had a scab in hisnose in consequence of a bleeding at the
nose. He recovers from his tick, but he recommences it now because he
loses his fortune, because his childis ill, etc. Third law,
the dissociation simply bears on a functionthat, for some reason or other,
has remained weak and disturbed. Manyof our patients become dumb after an emotion,

(29:04):
but they were formerly inclined to stammer. Their speech was quite insufficient.
A girl's right leg becomes paralyzed.The reason is that in her childhood her
right leg was affected with rachitis.In the case of another girl, the
paralysis of a leg is due tothe fact that in her childhood the leg
was affected with a white tumor andremained long in bandage. This remark relates

(29:26):
specially to the very numerous cases ofassociated hysteria. A disease of any kind
bearing on viscera, often an organiclesion of the medulla or of the brain
in feebles or disturbed some function,and it is on this function that the
hysteric emancipation is localized. So incertain cases, hysteria makes conspicuous some light
symptoms of organic diseases of the nervoussystem quite at their beginning, by exaggerating

(29:49):
them beyond all measure. The fact, for instance, was frequently observed in
the cases of tarbetic vomiting associated withhysteric vomiting. Fourth law, The function
that disappears is the most complicated andthe most difficult for the subject. This
law applies chiefly to professional and socialparalysis. Finally, fifth law, we

(30:12):
remark a very curious fact which werecognize without always being able to account for
it. The dissociation bears on thefunction that was in full activity at the
moment of a great emotion. Thereare here some physiological laws that cause the
chief disturbance to bear on this function, that make it, probably through an
association of ideas, through an evocationof the emotion, the most difficult for

(30:33):
the subject. It is the studyof these laws. It is the search
for these conditions that constitute the importantpart of the study of hysteria. Leave
the discussions of general definitions. Theyare premature discussions which bear on purely verbal
differences. Retain from these lessons theimportance that attaches to the study of the
psychological functions, the necessity of analyzing, in each particular case, the mental

(30:57):
state of the patient. If theselectures have inspired you with some interest for
this kind of studies, if theycan contribute to develop in your beautiful country
the researches of pathological psychology. Besidethe researches of experimental psychology so brilliantly represented,
I think you will not have losttoo much time in trying to understand
a barbarous language. For my part, I deeply feel your kind attention and

(31:22):
reception, and I am proud ofhaving had, for a few days the
honor of teaching you, and ofbeing the colleague of the Masters of Harvard
University. End of section fifteen,