Chapter 1. Learning from Experience

1 To call an action by the name of the person of whom it is thought to be typical, to talk, for example, of a Spoonerism as if it were a function of the personality of an individual called Spooner, is quite usual in conversation. I take advantage of this usage to derive a theory of functions that will stand up to more rigorous use than that for which the conversational phrase is employed. I shall suppose that there are factors in the personality that combine to produce stable entities which I call functions of the personality. The meaning that I attach to the terms “factors” and “functions” and the use to which I put them will presently appear, but some preliminary explanation may not be amiss.

2 The statement, “A factor in X's personality of which we shall have to take account is his envy of his associates”, is one any layman might make and may mean little or much; its value depends on our estimate of the person who makes it and of the weight he attaches to his own words. The force of the statement is affected if I attach to the term “envy” the weight and meaning with which it has been invested by Mrs Klein.

3 Suppose now another statement: “X's relationship with his associates is typical of a personality in which envy is a factor.” This statement expresses the observation of a function, the factors in which are transference and envy. What is observed is not the transference or envy, but something that is a function of transference and envy. It is necessary, as a psychoanalysis proceeds, to deduce new factors from the changes observed in the function and to distinguish different functions.

4 “Function” is the name for the mental activity proper to a number of factors operating in consort. “Factor” is the name for

a mental activity operating in consort with other mental activities to constitute a function. Factors are deducible from observation of the functions of which they, in consort with each other, are a part. They can be theories or the realities the theories