Freudian Dream Theory Vs Activation-Synthesis Essay
Gam 1
Chegita Siriphanporn
Aj. Steadman
EB 333
Email: chegita-gam@hotmail.com
16 March 2014
Freudian Dream Theory vs. Activation-Synthesis Dream Theory
Why do people dream? What causes dreaming? What is the purpose of dreaming?
These are still some of the behavioral sciences’ greatest unanswered questions. There are various theories of dreaming that attempt to explain why we have dreams. Today’s dreaming theories generally fall into two main varieties, based on psychological aspects and physiological aspects or scientific-based aspects. Psychological theories tend to believe that dreaming is related to people’s unconscious wishes. Physiological theories, on the other hand, tend to see the experience of dreams as the work of the brain’s mechanism. The primary …show more content…
psychological theories of dreams are those of Sigmund Freud while the physiological theories of dreams are those of J. Allan Hobson.
In “Understanding Sleep and Dreaming”, William H. Moorcroft, believes that
Freud’s psychological theory explains the formal process of dreaming, while in “Dreaming:
An introduction to the science of sleep”, J. Allan Hobson, attempts to replace dream mystique theories of Freud with modern dream science theory called the “Activation-Synthesis
Hypothesis” This paper will examine the arguments between Freudian Dreams Theories and the Activation-Synthesis Hypothesis.
The Famous Freud
To begin with, Moorcroft, an established author, presents his first arguments, following Freud’s famous psychological dream theories on dream instigation, by claiming that all behaviors, including dreaming, are motivated by powerful, inner, unconscious forces,
Gam 2
which are the instinctive media of sex, aggression and escape. These forces are sufficiently strong that they may be too disturbing to think about openly when awake.1 The pressure of these forces, however, needs to be released in order to keep an individual from losing control of him or herself. These unconscious forces are, unfortunately, restricted from releasing by a
“censor” that simply will prevent them from getting into the conscious mind.2 The mind, as a result, transforms the unconscious forces into a disguised version as a dream with regard to getting past the censor.3 Moorcroft highlights Freud’s statement on introducing the censorship. The study of dreams enable us to detect the operation in the mind of a play of forces which was concealed from our conscious perception. We find that there is a “censorship”, a testing agency, at work in us, which decides whether an idea cropping up in the mind shall be allowed to reach consciousness, and which, so far as lies within its power, ruthlessly exclude anything that might produce or revive unpleasure.4
Moorcroft marks that “Freud’s work on dream analysis undoubtedly links dreams to the psychology of waking life and allows us to understand more about dreams”5 He, additionally, mentions one of the famous quotes by Freud, that dreams are “…the royal road to knowledge of the unconscious activities of the mind”6
Moorcroft’s book shows important evidence that supports Freud’s theory of why unconscious force is the main goal of dreams. The result of his studies on Rapid Eyes
1
Freud,“The Interpretation Of Dreams”, in William H. Moorcroft, “Understanding Sleep
And Dreaming” (2ndEdition), NY: Springer, 2013, Page 201.
2
Freud, Interpretation, in Moorcroft, Page 201.
3
Freud, Interpretation, in Moorcroft, Page 201.
4
Freud, “The Claims Of Psycho-analysis To Scientific Interest”, Page 170-171, in Simon
Boag, “Freudian Dream Theory, Dream Bizarreness, And The Disguise-censor Controversy”,
Neuro-Psychoanalysis: an interdisciplinary journal for psychoanalysis and the neurosciences, Karnac Books, 1 Jan 2006: 5-16, PDF File. 5
Moorcroft, Page 200.
6
Moorcroft, Page 202.
Gam 3
Movement stage of sleep (REM) shows that during REM the muscles controlling body movements, including parts of a brain, are paralyzed.7 It consequently suggests that during sleep one’s mind is not influenced by the external environment and by the constraints it imposes on our behavior. The paralyzed body, in REM, stimulates the censor to let down its guard and allows the powerful unconscious forces to impinge upon consciousness. Dreams, as a result, are influenced by hidden unconscious forces in the individual’s minds. In
“Psychological: An International Perspective”, Michael Eysenck says, “We imagine acting in accordance with these motivational forces when we dream, and this defers our need to act on them in real life”8 This line of argument led Freud to conclude that dreams are the guardians of sleep.9
The second argument between Freud’s dreams theories and the Activation-Synthesis
Hypothesis is the bizarreness of dreams. Moorcroft, follows Freudian Dreams Theories, believes that the basis of dream bizarreness are disguise and censorship.10 The most important evidence supporting this is the study of Freud on a patient’s dream. The study shows that dreams are usually appear bizarre and nonsensical is a result of the transformation process from the unconscious desires into consciousness or disguised form, in order to allow these unconscious wishes to get through the censor. This transformation process is called the
“Dream work”11 In this process, the unconscious desire expressed in dreams, the actual dreams and its meaning, is called the “Latent content”, while the disguised form of dreams that is acceptable to one’s mind is called the “Manifest content” This process turns latent to
7
Moorcroft, Page 22.
Michael W. Eysenck, “Psychology: An International Perspective”, BN: Psychology Press
Ltd, 2004, Page 128.
9
Rosen, Dennis, “Why We Dream And What Happens When We Do”, Psychology Today: sleeping angels, Sussex Publishers, 31 May 2009,
10
Moorcroft, Page 159.
11
Moorcroft, Page 201.
8
Gam 4
manifest content by logically transforming unconscious wishes into symbolic forms.12 These symbolic versions of unconscious wishes are, as a result, what the individual experiences in his or her dreams. Moorcroft, moreover, says that the bizarreness in dreams is also a sequence of two or more unconscious thoughts that are merged together into a single image or event in dreams.13 The third argument between Freudian psychological theory of dreams and the
Activation-Synthesis Hypothesis is the interpretation of dreams. Moorcroft, following Freud’s footsteps, believes that dreams are derived from the individual’s unconscious desires that always related to sex, aggression and escape.14 Meanings of dreams, as a consequence, always heavily emphasize these three unconscious desires. Moorcroft gives an example to illustrate his point.
Freud saw many neutral objects and events in his own and his patients’ dreams as displaced sexual thoughts or desires. Hence to Freud, a dream of a box and a knife was actually about a vagina and a penis in a disguised form. Because dreams are protective disguises of unacceptable unconscious thoughts, dreamers themselves cannot understand their dreams fully without the help of an analyst.15
Moorcroft, furthermore, believes that aspects of an individual’s experiences are also used to precipitate some of the images of the dreams. These images are the combination of memories, including those of childhood.
The modern dream theory. A recent research in the neurobiology of dreaming provides new evidence for possible structural and functional data of formal aspects of the dream process. In the late 1970s, J. Allan Hobson of the Department of Psychiatry at Harvard
12
Moorcroft, Page 204.
Moorcroft, Page 202.
14
Moorcroft, Page 181. 15
Moorcroft, Page 201-2.
13
Gam 5
Medical School proposed the Activation-Synthesis Hypothesis, suggesting that dreaming is physiologically determined and shaped by the brain process.16 Hobson states clearly in his book that dreaming, and other states of consciousness, are related to changes in the level of brain activation, not the repressed unconscious wishes as Freud claimed.17 The writer takes the view that dreaming is what happens when the mind tries to make sense of brain activity that occurs during sleep.
Hobson brings up three points in rebuttal to Moorcroft’s argument. The first is that dreams are the result of changes in the level of brain activation. In the very famous study of
Hobson, the state of activation during REM sleep depends mainly on the pontine brain stem, which is also responsible for triggering dreaming.18Hobson supports his argument by reviewing four PET studies in which brain activity during REM sleep was assessed.19 The result from PET studies shows consistent evidence of activation in the pontine brain stem.
Hobson points out that activity in the pontine brain stem produces high level of activation in several parts of the brain, including those involved in perception, action, and
emotional reactions. This activation is essentially random, causing the bizarreness in dreams.
The second major argument of Hobson against Moorcroft’s claim that dream bizarreness is a result of the transformation process from unconscious wishes into consciousness. Hobson anchors his claim against Moorcroft by believing that the bizarreness of dreams is caused by the activation of various components of the individual’s brain, which is random and varies in strength.20 Dreamers react to the high level of random brain activation by synthesizing or combining the information contained in the burst of neural activity into a
16
J. Allan Hobson, “Dreaming: an introduction to the science of sleep”, NY: Oxford
University Press, 2002, Page 36.
17
Hobson, Page 159.
18
Hobson, Page 108. 19
Hobson, Page 109.
20
Hobson, Page 148.
Gam 6
single entity.21 This synthesis occurs in the forebrain, which makes the best of a bad job in producing even partially coherent dream imaginary from the relative noisy signals sent up from the brain stem.22 The forebrain, in general, tries to impose meaning on the random activation from the brain stem to produce partially coherent dreams.23 Hobson says, “The brain is so inexorably bent upon the quest for meaning that it attributes and even creates meaning when there is little or none in the data it is asked to process.”24 The result is often the bizarreness the individual perceive in his or her dreams.
Finally, referring back to what Moorcroft said earlier that the interpretation of dreams always based on sex, aggression and escape. Hobson, regarding to Moorcroft’s statement on the interpretation of dreams says, “There is a lot less sex than Freud assumed”25 Hobson instead suggests that dreams are formed with the basis of the individual’s preexisting memories, typical emotional responses, and typical way of synthesizing information.
Hobson’s studies on the brain activity shows that parts of forebrain were activated during
REM sleep.26 The activated areas include parts of the limbic system involve with basic emotions and parts of stored memory. In this way, the aspects of the individual’s life and personality become parts of his or her dreams.
New Light On Freud
Reflecting over the above arguments between the two authors, Moorcroft’s claims on the famous Freudian dream theory are weaken by Hobson’s arguments on the ActivationSynthesis Hypothesis. Hobson weights his arguments with valid scientific evidence based on the study of brain’s activity that tells specifically which parts of the brain are activated during
21
Eysenck, Page 129.
Hobson, JA, and McCarley RW, “The Brain As A Dream State Generator: an activationsynthesis hypothesis of the dream process”, Am J Psychiatry 134.1211-21, 1997: 1347, PDF
File.
23
Eyesenck, Page 129.
24
Hobson, Page 144.
25
Hobson, Page 148. 26
Hobson, Page 65.
22
Gam 7
sleep. Moorcroft, on the other hand, reviews evidence from Freud’s own case studies on his patients who were required by Freud to record their dreams and report them back to him.
Freud, consequently, interpreted the reported dreams and came up with his theory that relies on his own personal opinions. The theory as a whole is difficult to test because it relies on ideas whose existence is difficult to prove.
Gam 8
Bibliography
Eysenck, Michael W. Psychology: An International Perspective. BN: Psychology Press, 2004
Hobson, J. Allan. Dreaming: an introduction to the science of sleep. NY: Oxford University
Press, 2002.
Hobson, JA, and McCarley RW. “The Brain As A Dream State Generator: an activationsynthesis hypothesis of the dream process”. Am J Psychiatry 134.1211-21, 1997: 1347.
PDF File.
Moorcroft, William H. Understanding Sleep and Dreaming (2nd Edition). NY: Springer,
2013.
Rosen, Dennis. “Why We Dream And What Happens When We Do”.Psychology Today: sleeping angels. Sussex Publishers. 31 May 2009.
Simon Boag. “Freudian Dream Theory, Dream Bizarreness, And The Disguise-censor
Controversy”. Neuro-Psychoanalysis: an interdisciplinary journal for psychoanalysis and the neurosciences. Karnac Books. 1 Jan 2006: 5-16. PDF File.
Chegita Siriphanporn
Aj. Steadman
EB 333
Email: chegita-gam@hotmail.com
16 March 2014
Freudian Dream Theory vs. Activation-Synthesis Dream Theory
Why do people dream? What causes dreaming? What is the purpose of dreaming?
These are still some of the behavioral sciences’ greatest unanswered questions. There are various theories of dreaming that attempt to explain why we have dreams. Today’s dreaming theories generally fall into two main varieties, based on psychological aspects and physiological aspects or scientific-based aspects. Psychological theories tend to believe that dreaming is related to people’s unconscious wishes. Physiological theories, on the other hand, tend to see the experience of dreams as the work of the brain’s mechanism. The primary …show more content…
psychological theories of dreams are those of Sigmund Freud while the physiological theories of dreams are those of J. Allan Hobson.
In “Understanding Sleep and Dreaming”, William H. Moorcroft, believes that
Freud’s psychological theory explains the formal process of dreaming, while in “Dreaming:
An introduction to the science of sleep”, J. Allan Hobson, attempts to replace dream mystique theories of Freud with modern dream science theory called the “Activation-Synthesis
Hypothesis” This paper will examine the arguments between Freudian Dreams Theories and the Activation-Synthesis Hypothesis.
The Famous Freud
To begin with, Moorcroft, an established author, presents his first arguments, following Freud’s famous psychological dream theories on dream instigation, by claiming that all behaviors, including dreaming, are motivated by powerful, inner, unconscious forces,
Gam 2
which are the instinctive media of sex, aggression and escape. These forces are sufficiently strong that they may be too disturbing to think about openly when awake.1 The pressure of these forces, however, needs to be released in order to keep an individual from losing control of him or herself. These unconscious forces are, unfortunately, restricted from releasing by a
“censor” that simply will prevent them from getting into the conscious mind.2 The mind, as a result, transforms the unconscious forces into a disguised version as a dream with regard to getting past the censor.3 Moorcroft highlights Freud’s statement on introducing the censorship. The study of dreams enable us to detect the operation in the mind of a play of forces which was concealed from our conscious perception. We find that there is a “censorship”, a testing agency, at work in us, which decides whether an idea cropping up in the mind shall be allowed to reach consciousness, and which, so far as lies within its power, ruthlessly exclude anything that might produce or revive unpleasure.4
Moorcroft marks that “Freud’s work on dream analysis undoubtedly links dreams to the psychology of waking life and allows us to understand more about dreams”5 He, additionally, mentions one of the famous quotes by Freud, that dreams are “…the royal road to knowledge of the unconscious activities of the mind”6
Moorcroft’s book shows important evidence that supports Freud’s theory of why unconscious force is the main goal of dreams. The result of his studies on Rapid Eyes
1
Freud,“The Interpretation Of Dreams”, in William H. Moorcroft, “Understanding Sleep
And Dreaming” (2ndEdition), NY: Springer, 2013, Page 201.
2
Freud, Interpretation, in Moorcroft, Page 201.
3
Freud, Interpretation, in Moorcroft, Page 201.
4
Freud, “The Claims Of Psycho-analysis To Scientific Interest”, Page 170-171, in Simon
Boag, “Freudian Dream Theory, Dream Bizarreness, And The Disguise-censor Controversy”,
Neuro-Psychoanalysis: an interdisciplinary journal for psychoanalysis and the neurosciences, Karnac Books, 1 Jan 2006: 5-16, PDF File. 5
Moorcroft, Page 200.
6
Moorcroft, Page 202.
Gam 3
Movement stage of sleep (REM) shows that during REM the muscles controlling body movements, including parts of a brain, are paralyzed.7 It consequently suggests that during sleep one’s mind is not influenced by the external environment and by the constraints it imposes on our behavior. The paralyzed body, in REM, stimulates the censor to let down its guard and allows the powerful unconscious forces to impinge upon consciousness. Dreams, as a result, are influenced by hidden unconscious forces in the individual’s minds. In
“Psychological: An International Perspective”, Michael Eysenck says, “We imagine acting in accordance with these motivational forces when we dream, and this defers our need to act on them in real life”8 This line of argument led Freud to conclude that dreams are the guardians of sleep.9
The second argument between Freud’s dreams theories and the Activation-Synthesis
Hypothesis is the bizarreness of dreams. Moorcroft, follows Freudian Dreams Theories, believes that the basis of dream bizarreness are disguise and censorship.10 The most important evidence supporting this is the study of Freud on a patient’s dream. The study shows that dreams are usually appear bizarre and nonsensical is a result of the transformation process from the unconscious desires into consciousness or disguised form, in order to allow these unconscious wishes to get through the censor. This transformation process is called the
“Dream work”11 In this process, the unconscious desire expressed in dreams, the actual dreams and its meaning, is called the “Latent content”, while the disguised form of dreams that is acceptable to one’s mind is called the “Manifest content” This process turns latent to
7
Moorcroft, Page 22.
Michael W. Eysenck, “Psychology: An International Perspective”, BN: Psychology Press
Ltd, 2004, Page 128.
9
Rosen, Dennis, “Why We Dream And What Happens When We Do”, Psychology Today: sleeping angels, Sussex Publishers, 31 May 2009,
10
Moorcroft, Page 159.
11
Moorcroft, Page 201.
8
Gam 4
manifest content by logically transforming unconscious wishes into symbolic forms.12 These symbolic versions of unconscious wishes are, as a result, what the individual experiences in his or her dreams. Moorcroft, moreover, says that the bizarreness in dreams is also a sequence of two or more unconscious thoughts that are merged together into a single image or event in dreams.13 The third argument between Freudian psychological theory of dreams and the
Activation-Synthesis Hypothesis is the interpretation of dreams. Moorcroft, following Freud’s footsteps, believes that dreams are derived from the individual’s unconscious desires that always related to sex, aggression and escape.14 Meanings of dreams, as a consequence, always heavily emphasize these three unconscious desires. Moorcroft gives an example to illustrate his point.
Freud saw many neutral objects and events in his own and his patients’ dreams as displaced sexual thoughts or desires. Hence to Freud, a dream of a box and a knife was actually about a vagina and a penis in a disguised form. Because dreams are protective disguises of unacceptable unconscious thoughts, dreamers themselves cannot understand their dreams fully without the help of an analyst.15
Moorcroft, furthermore, believes that aspects of an individual’s experiences are also used to precipitate some of the images of the dreams. These images are the combination of memories, including those of childhood.
The modern dream theory. A recent research in the neurobiology of dreaming provides new evidence for possible structural and functional data of formal aspects of the dream process. In the late 1970s, J. Allan Hobson of the Department of Psychiatry at Harvard
12
Moorcroft, Page 204.
Moorcroft, Page 202.
14
Moorcroft, Page 181. 15
Moorcroft, Page 201-2.
13
Gam 5
Medical School proposed the Activation-Synthesis Hypothesis, suggesting that dreaming is physiologically determined and shaped by the brain process.16 Hobson states clearly in his book that dreaming, and other states of consciousness, are related to changes in the level of brain activation, not the repressed unconscious wishes as Freud claimed.17 The writer takes the view that dreaming is what happens when the mind tries to make sense of brain activity that occurs during sleep.
Hobson brings up three points in rebuttal to Moorcroft’s argument. The first is that dreams are the result of changes in the level of brain activation. In the very famous study of
Hobson, the state of activation during REM sleep depends mainly on the pontine brain stem, which is also responsible for triggering dreaming.18Hobson supports his argument by reviewing four PET studies in which brain activity during REM sleep was assessed.19 The result from PET studies shows consistent evidence of activation in the pontine brain stem.
Hobson points out that activity in the pontine brain stem produces high level of activation in several parts of the brain, including those involved in perception, action, and
emotional reactions. This activation is essentially random, causing the bizarreness in dreams.
The second major argument of Hobson against Moorcroft’s claim that dream bizarreness is a result of the transformation process from unconscious wishes into consciousness. Hobson anchors his claim against Moorcroft by believing that the bizarreness of dreams is caused by the activation of various components of the individual’s brain, which is random and varies in strength.20 Dreamers react to the high level of random brain activation by synthesizing or combining the information contained in the burst of neural activity into a
16
J. Allan Hobson, “Dreaming: an introduction to the science of sleep”, NY: Oxford
University Press, 2002, Page 36.
17
Hobson, Page 159.
18
Hobson, Page 108. 19
Hobson, Page 109.
20
Hobson, Page 148.
Gam 6
single entity.21 This synthesis occurs in the forebrain, which makes the best of a bad job in producing even partially coherent dream imaginary from the relative noisy signals sent up from the brain stem.22 The forebrain, in general, tries to impose meaning on the random activation from the brain stem to produce partially coherent dreams.23 Hobson says, “The brain is so inexorably bent upon the quest for meaning that it attributes and even creates meaning when there is little or none in the data it is asked to process.”24 The result is often the bizarreness the individual perceive in his or her dreams.
Finally, referring back to what Moorcroft said earlier that the interpretation of dreams always based on sex, aggression and escape. Hobson, regarding to Moorcroft’s statement on the interpretation of dreams says, “There is a lot less sex than Freud assumed”25 Hobson instead suggests that dreams are formed with the basis of the individual’s preexisting memories, typical emotional responses, and typical way of synthesizing information.
Hobson’s studies on the brain activity shows that parts of forebrain were activated during
REM sleep.26 The activated areas include parts of the limbic system involve with basic emotions and parts of stored memory. In this way, the aspects of the individual’s life and personality become parts of his or her dreams.
New Light On Freud
Reflecting over the above arguments between the two authors, Moorcroft’s claims on the famous Freudian dream theory are weaken by Hobson’s arguments on the ActivationSynthesis Hypothesis. Hobson weights his arguments with valid scientific evidence based on the study of brain’s activity that tells specifically which parts of the brain are activated during
21
Eysenck, Page 129.
Hobson, JA, and McCarley RW, “The Brain As A Dream State Generator: an activationsynthesis hypothesis of the dream process”, Am J Psychiatry 134.1211-21, 1997: 1347, PDF
File.
23
Eyesenck, Page 129.
24
Hobson, Page 144.
25
Hobson, Page 148. 26
Hobson, Page 65.
22
Gam 7
sleep. Moorcroft, on the other hand, reviews evidence from Freud’s own case studies on his patients who were required by Freud to record their dreams and report them back to him.
Freud, consequently, interpreted the reported dreams and came up with his theory that relies on his own personal opinions. The theory as a whole is difficult to test because it relies on ideas whose existence is difficult to prove.
Gam 8
Bibliography
Eysenck, Michael W. Psychology: An International Perspective. BN: Psychology Press, 2004
Hobson, J. Allan. Dreaming: an introduction to the science of sleep. NY: Oxford University
Press, 2002.
Hobson, JA, and McCarley RW. “The Brain As A Dream State Generator: an activationsynthesis hypothesis of the dream process”. Am J Psychiatry 134.1211-21, 1997: 1347.
PDF File.
Moorcroft, William H. Understanding Sleep and Dreaming (2nd Edition). NY: Springer,
2013.
Rosen, Dennis. “Why We Dream And What Happens When We Do”.Psychology Today: sleeping angels. Sussex Publishers. 31 May 2009.
Simon Boag. “Freudian Dream Theory, Dream Bizarreness, And The Disguise-censor
Controversy”. Neuro-Psychoanalysis: an interdisciplinary journal for psychoanalysis and the neurosciences. Karnac Books. 1 Jan 2006: 5-16. PDF File.