Emotions as Adaptive Reactions: Implications for Therapy*

During the past century there have been three major traditions concerned with the psychology of emotion. The classical psychoanalytic view held that emotions might be considered “archaic discharge syndromes”1 that are biologically given and identifiable in infants as well as adults. In addition, emotions or affects (the two terms are usually used interchangeably) may be unconscious and not directly accessible to awareness. Psychoanalytic theory has much to say about the development of emotions and their viscissitudes but psychoanalysis has never developed a theory of affect-in-general; the closest it has come is the formulation of a theory of anxiety. Some recent steps toward a more general theory have been proposed by Kaywin5 and Novey.8

The second and third major traditions in the psychology of emotion are based upon the work of William James and of Charles Darwin. James emphasized the relation between visceral changes and subjective feelings, while Darwin was concerned primarily with overt emotional expression in animals and men. The importance of Darwin's work is that it provided a general biological, evolutionary framework within which research on animals and humans might be considered.

These three traditions stemming from Freud, James and Darwin have for the most part remained separate, although attempts have been made in recent years to integrate them. One such attempt was presented about two years ago in my book, The Emotions: Facts, Theories and a New Model.9. The rest of this paper will be concerned with some of the implications of my theory for psychotherapy.