| Abstract: | I have reviewed Hobson and McCarley's activation-synthesis hypothesis of dreaming which attempts to show that the instigation and certain formal aspects of dreaming are physiologically determined by a brainstem neuronal mechanism, their reasons for suggesting major revisions in psychoanalytic dream theory, and neurophysiological data that are inconsistent with their hypothesis. I then discussed the concept of mind-body isomorphism pointing out that they use this concept inconsistently, that despite their denials they regularly view physiology as primary and psychological processes as secondary, and that they frequently make the error of mixing the languages of physiology and psychology in their explanatory statements. Finally, in order to evaluate Hobson and McCarley's claim that their findings require revision of psychoanalytic dream theory, I examined their discussions of chase dreams, flying dreams, sexual dreams, the formal characteristics of dreams, the forgetting of dreams, and the instigation of dreams. I concluded that although their fascinating physiological findings may be central to understanding the neurobiology of REM sleep, they do not alter the meaning and interpretation of dreams gleaned through psychoanalytic study. |
