This is a question on the relation between Freud's structural theory and the Integration Theory of Psychoanalysis. As you know, Freud has two structural theories. One is formulated around id, ego, and super-ego, and the other around consciousness and unconsciousness. Setting my basic concepts against those, the displeasing factors, defensive factors, and regulatory factors correspond to id, ego, and super-ego. Regarding super-ego, there are marked differences between Freud's super-ego and my concept of regulatory factors. For example, the expression "severe super-ego" corresponds to the state that I conceptualize as the self-reproach cycle. Moreover, "ego-ideal" is similar to the regulatory factors in the narcissistic system, but this concept is a sort of extract. I never adopt such idea complex as his concept.

  Regarding consciousness and unconsciousness, also, there are differences between Freud's theory and mine. Freud sees consciousness as the operative state of the "reality principle," and unconsciousness as the state where the "pleasure principle" is active. In contrast, I distinguish consciousness from unconsciousness according to the "functional network of neural transmissions in the brain." In other words, I find the generation of consciousness and self-consciousness within the interlocking movements among "two grandiose selves" and the "awakening self" (what I call the marrow self). I find unconsciousness within the three-cornered relationship of the perception, thinking, and emotion (affect) systems.

  I should note that I do not separate the concepts of reality principle and pleasure principle. I distinguish between defense and regulation (and dissociation), and between abnormality and normality of mind, in accordance with the distinction between the pleasure-displeasure principle generated by the "animal brain" also found in humans and the pleasure-displeasure principle that has developed uniquely in the human brain.


                                                                    Revision of Freud's theory

   When I began to study Freud's work, I did not have any desire to revise Freud's theories. I treated severely disturbed patients (pathological states) steadily and with perseverance. As I began to successfully treat patients, I realised that formation of the mind in regard to forgiveness and help became key therapeutic components. However, I wondered if the formation of the mind in regard to forgiveness and help could also be effective for treating psychoses. This was my greatest concern and spurred my desire to develop the radical treatment of psychoses. By overcoming several obstacles, I concluded that the formation of the mind in regard to forgiveness and help was the most important theme for the treatment of psychoses. I wrote The Emotion Control Theory based on this conclusion. I did not think of Freud while absorbed in this work, because I was full of an idea that I had to frame a truth which I had gained first of all. I thought that old theories would begin to dissipate over time (I still hold this same thought). From there, I completed The Integration Theory of Psychoanalysis.

   My excitement has been tempered as time has passed. Now, it seems possible to compare my theory with that of Freud. I have introduced several arguments against Freud's theories throughout this book. The point where we most diverge is shown by two structural theories. I want to create a new psychoanalytic framework for the 21st century by revising two of Freud's structural theories through applying transference into the treatment of psychoses. These revisions require first revising the "id, ego, and super-ego" into the "defensive factors⇔displeasing factors→regulatory factors."  Additionally, "consciousnessーpreconsciousnessーunconsciousness" should be revised into "preconsciousnessーconsciousnessーunconsciousness." Furthermore, these revised structural theories are closely connected with each other. The regulatory factors lie within the preconscious, the displeasing factors lie right on the conscious, and the defensive factors lie within the unconscious. (The displeasing factors lie within the preconscious as the displeasure-defense system in our ordinary, daily life.) In other words, The Emotion Control Theory id rigid and lies within the center of The Formation Theory of Psychic Phenomena. Through these revisions, all psychic phenomena should be explained through a unified theory. Specifically, it should be possible to formulate the radical treatment of psychoses.  Accoeding to this process, psychoanalysis is about to enter into a new field of science.

Revision of Freud's theory

  There is a different arrangement when comparing Freud's topography (the conscious the preconscious−the unconscious) with my "new" topography (the preconscious−the conscious−the unconscious). In Freud's topography, the preconscious is derived from the unconscious. In my new topography, the preconscious and the unconscious stand opposite each other with the conscious in between; the preconscious and unconscious are quite different from one another. In regards to Freud's topography, the contents of the preconscious are different from the contents of the unconscious, and he assumed that "censorship" of the unconscious functioned to differentiate the contents of the two. In contrast, with my new topography, the boundary between the preconscious and the unconscious is no more without the conscious. However, the contents of the preconscious (the displeasure-regulation system) are different from the contents of the unconscious (the displeasure-defense system). Een if they were mixed during sleep, they are expressed as differences within the contents of dreams.

  According to Freud, the contents of the preconscious are submitted for censorship by the unconscious, and the contents are limited in coming up into the conscious. Freud called this "repression." Freud's greatest concern was to structuralize the unconscious, and he thought that the unconscious was the organ that managed our mind. Regarding the disposition of the preconscious, I emphasize this superiority of the conscious. In other words, I think that the preconscious is generated by the conscious. How should Freud's censorship be understood from my viewpoint? First, the generation of the conscious, itself, fulfills the function of censorship. Second, the displeasure-regulation system in the preconscious prevents the displeasure-defense system in the unconscious from appearing in the conscious. These circumstances fulfill the function of censorship. Third, Freud's super-ego includes the unconscious nature of the mind, and he says the super-ego has the censorship function. Understanding the super-ego according to my Emotion Control Theory, the super-ego corresponds to the self-reproach cycle (punitive object → idea self). This self-reproach cycle belongs to the displeasure-defense system, and relates to the unconscious nature of the mind, similar to Freud. Therefore, if psycho-dynamics activating the self-reproach cycle are generated, the self-reproach cycle might fulfill the same function as censorship, as argued by Freud. However, the self-reproach cycle is only but one of many routes of neural transmissions, and the self-reproach cycle is not always activated. In this way, the censorship does not always function.

  According to Freud, the conscious has an awkward nature to be able to seize this theme of research. The conscious is intuition, itself. The moment that intuition is generated, it is no longer intuition but self-consciousness. However, the conscious has brought lots of mental contents in the preconscious into not-being, and still functions to bring them into not-being. The area of the preconscious that can be placed within the conscious is rather large. This area includes the emotion exclusion type of self-consciousness, the life style, the regulatory type of self-consciousness, and the displeasure-regulation system (to say nothing of the perception system). These contents are able to make it into consciousness any time. The conscious has power that is merely as small as a flashlight throwing light into the dark. The conscious cannot shed light on all mental contents within the preconscious at the same time. In other words, the conscious can only bring one thing into not-being at a time. In these situations, the contents of the unconscious sometimes work by interlocking with mental contents in the preconscious. For example, when the conscious participates in the life style, the punitive object in the displeasure-defense system, which is included in the unconscious, stimulates the emotion exclusion type of self-consciousness. Soon, the conscious notices this movement, and turns its interest from the life style to the emotion exclusion type of self-consciousness. At this moment, we experience fear. However, this fear does not become acquainted with other contents of the preconscious (i.e., the regulatory type of self-consciousness or the displeasure-regulation system). This time, these contents urge the conscious to address this other information. Accepting their demands, the conscious addresses an object through the will within the solitary type of the grandiose self. This leads to the disappearance of fear, and  we get back to an ordinary, healthy mental state.

  Our abnormal mental states, and pathological experiences appear within the conscious not because the unconscious censors each one and decides what information to bring to the conscious, but because certain contents of the unconscious stimulate certain contents of the preconscious. If the unconscious has the function of censorship, as Freud says, we cannot explain why hallucinations or delusions come up into consciousness. Even if a cruel, murderous intent rises within us, it is rejected by the displeasure-regulation system and the regulatory type of self-consciousness, and goes back to the world of the unconscious. If our daily life is impeded because of these displeasing feelings or associations, it is necessary that we strengthen the displeasure-regulation system. This is key work during psychoanalysis. When this goes well, mental symptoms disappear and the unconscious concerning the emotion system dwindles. It would be ideal if the displeasure-defense system could be eradicated, but this is not easy. If the displeasure defense system diminishes, transference disappears, and the therapist's counter- transference diminishes as if it shades from an illimitable ocean into a puddle. When comparing Freud's topography to my new topography, which do you support?


                                                               Revision of Freud's theory

  I have written Chapter 3, "New structue theory (New topography)" in A Sequel to the Integration Theory of Psychoanalysis: Radical psychoanalytic treatment, and completed the Integration Theory of Psychoanaysis. Here, I briefly introduce this Chapter.

  In my new topography, the mind is expressed by comparing it to a circle, which is divided into three parts representing the preconscious, conscious, and unconscious. According to this approach, each area can (freely) interact with the other, and each area gets larger or smaller. These aspects have been explained from Section 1 through Section 4.

  In Section 5, the dissociative and defensive cycles have been explained. In the dissociative cycle, the displeasing factor sets the following cycle in motion: ← preconsciousness ← consciousness ← unconsciousness ←. On the other hand, in the defensive cycle, the defensive factor sets the following cycle in motion: → preconsciousness → consciousness → unconsciousness →. In other words, the cyles initiated by the displeasing and defensive factors move in opposite directions. This corresponds to the characteristics of dissociation and defense, which have been mentioned in the literature so far. Moreover, the regulatory factors are formed within the preconscious, which sometimes appear in the conscious, but not in the unconscious.

  In Section 6, using the dissociative and defensive cycles, the dynamics of several psychic phenomema have been clarified. Here, I have first illustrated the psychodynamics of denial and projective identification, psychodynamics of the interlocking movements among the displeasing factors, psychodynamics of premonitory type of the closed cycle, etc. Subsequently, using these illustrations, I have described the dynamics of the six basic psychic phenomena: (1) conflict, (2) narcissistic type of the closed cycle, (3) malignant cycle, (4) transitional phenomena, (5) perversive thinking, and (6) multiple personality disorder and auditory hallucination. Freud's topography and structural theory have a static property; therefore, it only deals with the area of conflict. Nowadays, only a few psychoanalysts use Freud's theory. However, no methodology surpasses Freud's theory and clarifies all psychic phenomena. I am convinced that the new topography and structure theory that I have presented will be useful to fill this gap.


                                                          Revision of Freud's theory