11

I

A Definition of Inhibition and
Symptom

Our verbal usage permits us, in describing pathological
phenomena, to distinguish between inhibitions and symp-
toms, although without attaching very much importance
to the distinction. If we did not encounter cases of which
we are forced to say that they exhibit only inhibitions,
without any symptoms, and if we did not wish to know
the reason for this, we should scarcely think it worth
while to demarcate the concepts “inhibition” and “symp-
tom.”

The two concepts are not rooted in the same soil. In-
hibition relates specifically to function and does not neces-
sarily denote something pathological; a normal restric-
tion or reduction of a function may also be termed an
inhibition of it. To speak of a symptom, on the other
hand, is tantamount to indicating a morbid process. Thus
an inhibition may also be a symptom. Our habits of
speech are such, then, as cause us to speak of an inhibi-
tion when a simple reduction of function is present, of
a symptom when it is a question of an unusual alteration
of function or of a new modality thereof. In many cases
it seems to be perfectly arbitrary whether one emphasizes
the positive or the negative aspect of a pathological proc- ess, whether one terms its result a symptom or an in-
hibition. All this is of little real interest, however, and

12

the way in which we have formulated our problem proves
to be a rather unfruitful one.

Since inhibition is by definition so intimately bound
up with function, it is but a short step to the idea of in-
vestigating the various ego functions with reference to
the forms in which disorder of these functions is mani-
fested in the various neurotic affections. We select for
this comparative study the following: the sexual func-
tion, eating, locomotion, and vocation.

(a) The sexual function is subject to a great multiplic-
ity of disturbances, the majority of which have the char-
acter of simple inhibitions. These are grouped together
as psychic impotence. The execution of the sex act pre-
supposes a very complicated sequence of events, any one
of which may be the locus of disturbance. The principal
loci of inhibition in men are the following: a turning
aside of the libido at the initiation of the act (psychic
unpleasure [Unlust]), absence of physical preparedness
(non-erectibility), abbreviation of the act (ejaculatio
præcox), which may equally well be described as a posi-
tive symptom, suspension of the act before its natural
culmination (absence of ejaculation), the non-occurrence
of the psychic effect (of the pleasure sensation of orgasm).
Other disturbances result from the association with the
sexual function of specific conditions of a perverse or
fetishistic character.

We cannot long escape noting a relationship which
inhibition bears to anxiety. Many inhibitions are an
obvious renunciation of function, because the exercise of
the function would give rise to anxiety. Outright dread
of the sexual function is frequent in women; we catalogue
this with hysteria, as we do also the defensive symptom

13

of disgust which arises originally as a reaction following
upon the sexual act as passively experienced, but later
appears in relation to the mere idea of it. A great many
compulsive acts likewise plainly serve as a precaution
and an assurance against sexual experience, and are
therefore phobic in their character.

This does not add much to our understanding, how-
ever; one sees merely that the most varied means are
employed to impair function, as: (1) the mere turning
aside of libido, which seems most easily to produce what
we call pure inhibition; (2) impairment of the execution
of the function; (3) the rendering it difficult through the
imposition of special conditions, and its modification
through diverting it to other aims; (4) its prevention by
means of precautionary measures; (5) its discontinuance
by the development of anxiety, when the initiation of
the function can no longer be prevented; finally, (6) a
subsequent reaction of protest against the act and a de-
sire to undo it if it has actually been carried out.

(b) The most frequent disturbance of the nutritive
function is anorexia through withdrawal of libido. In
creased desire to eat is also not infrequent; there is also
a compulsion to eat, motivated by a fear of starvation,
which has been little studied. As an hysterical defense
against eating, the symptom of vomiting is familiar. Re-
fusal to eat as a reaction to anxiety belongs among the
psychotic patterns of behavior (delusions of poisoning).

(c) Locomotion is inhibited in many neurotic states
by antipathy to walking and weakness in walking; the
hysterical disability makes use of paralysis of the motor
apparatus or creates a specific suspension of this one func-
tion of the latter (abasia). Particularly characteristic are

14

the difficulties of locomotion brought about by the in
terpolation of definite conditions as prerequisites, the
non-fulfillment of which evokes anxiety (phobia).

(d) Inhibition in the field of occupation, which so
often becomes a matter of treatment as an isolated symp
tom, is evidenced in diminished pleasure in work, or in
its poor execution, or in such reactive manifestations as
fatigue (vertigo, vomiting) if the subject forces himself
to go on working. Hysteria compels the suspension of
work by producing paralysis of organs and functions, the
existence of which is incompatible with the carrying on
of work. The compulsion neurosis interferes with work
by a continuous distraction of the attention and by loss
of time in the form of procrastination and repetition.

We might extend this survey to include still other func
tions, but we should not expect to profit by so doing. We
should not get beyond a mere scratching of the surface
in this way. Let us therefore decide upon a formulation
which will leave the concept of inhibition with as little
of the mysterious about it as possible. Inhibition is the
expression of a functional limitation of the ego—a limita
tion which may have a large variety of causes. Many of
the mechanisms of this renunciation of function, and its
general trend, are well known.

In the case of certain particular inhibitions the trend
expressed is rather easily recognized. When playing the
piano, writing, and even walking are made the subject
of neurotic inhibition, analysis reveals as the basis thereof
an excessive erotization of the organ involved in the func
tion in question, the fingers and the feet. We have ob
tained the impression that as a rule the ego function of
an organ is impaired whenever its erogeneity, its sexual

15

significance, is increased. The organ then behaves-
if
we may hazard a somewhat scurrilous metaphor-like
a cook who refuses to stay in the kitchen because the
master of the house has embarked upon an affair with
her. If writing-which consists in allowing a fluid to
flow out from a tube upon a piece of white paper-has
acquired the symbolic meaning of coitus, or if walking
has become a symbolic substitute for stamping upon the
body of Mother Earth, then both writing and walking
will be abstained from, because it is as though forbidden
sexual behavior were thereby being indulged in. The
ego renounces these functions proper to it in order not
to have to undertake a fresh effort of repression, in order
to avoid a conflict with the id.

Other inhibitions evidently subserve a desire for self-
punishment, as for example not infrequently those in
the sphere of vocational activity. The ego dares not do
certain things because they would bring an advantage
and a success which the strict superego has forbidden.
Thereupon the ego renounces these activities also, in
order not to become involved in conflict with the super-
ego.

The more general inhibitions of the ego follow a simple
mechanism of another character. When the ego is oc-
cupied with a psychic task of special difficulty, as for
example by mourning, a wholesale suppression of affect,
or by the necessity for holding constantly mounting sex-
ual fantasies in check, it becomes so impoverished with
respect to the energy available to it that it is driven to
restrict its expenditure in many places at the same time,
like a speculator who has tied up his money in his various
enterprises. An instructive example of such an intense

16

but temporary general inhibition I was able to observe in
a patient with compulsion neurosis who was overcome
by a paralyzing fatigue of one to several days’ duration
on occasions which obviously should have provoked an
outburst of rage. From this point of departure there must
be found a path to the understanding of generalized in-
hibition whereby we may characterize the depressive
states and the most severe of these, psychotic depression.

One may therefore say of inhibitions, in fine, that they
represent a limitation and restriction of ego functions,
either precautionary or resulting from an impoverish-
ment of energy. It is now easy to see wherein an inhibi-
tion differs from a symptom. A symptom can no longer
be described as a process taking place either in or around
the ego.