From the author: Original: Zhang W. Resolving defense mechanisms: a perspective based on dissipative structure theory / W. Zhang, B. Guo // The International Journal of Psychoanalysis. – 2017. – No. 98 (2). – P. 457-472.doi: 10.1111/1745-8315.12623 INTRODUCTION What is the nature of defense mechanisms? How do they work? There is no clear answer to these questions (Cramer, 2015; Hart, 2014; Vaillant, 2000). Since Freud (1894), who proposed this concept in his model of personality, its content has evolved and changed. First of all, defense mechanisms have previously been used to describe and interpret the work of the ego to reduce feelings of anxiety when an individual is faced with external or internal conflicts. In addition, they were understood as predominantly unconscious or automatic processes (Vaillant, 1971, 1994), including such variants as suppression, denial, reaction formation, inhibition, intellectualization, and so on (Freud, 1946). Later, thanks to the efforts of many researchers, a large number of defense mechanisms were systematized, the number of which reaches over 100 (Blackman, 2004). As a result, the field covered has become broader to include unconscious, conscious and actual actions (Erdelyi, 2001; Horowitz, 1988; Kline, 2004). Defense mechanisms have been adopted into many areas of psychology (cognitive psychology, psychology personality, clinical psychology (Cramer, 2000)), but so far there is no single theory that would be universal. Lewis and Junyk (1997) summarized a number of theoretical models of defenses, including the psychodynamic, social-personality, developmental, and emotional models. After this, they outlined a model of self-organization built on the principles of dynamic systems. They did not consider defense mechanisms as adaptive strategies, but viewed them as the result of self-organization, which contributes to the stability of the individual’s state through the interaction of the cognitive and emotional spheres. Hart (2014) made an attempt to integrate a number of theories into a single one: he suggested that defense mechanisms function through the support of psychological resources in order to cope with various threats. However, all of the above theories can only describe different aspects of the same phenomenon and need integration. Let us add that there are also works on the classification of defense mechanisms. Fenichel (1945) divided them into successful (allowing instinctive drives to be expressed) and unsuccessful (needing repetition of protection because the instinct was not expressed). Horney (1945) classified defenses into 3 groups: moving toward, moving against, and moving away from people. Another classification was created according to the criterion of the degree of maturity, in which all defenses are divided into primitive (pathological), immature, neurotic and mature (Vaillant, 1971) or immature, neurotic and mature (Vaillant, 1994). Perry and Henry (2004) developed a more detailed hierarchy (seven adaptive levels model) which is shown in the table. However, the number of defense mechanisms is so large that the presented classifications cannot accommodate them all, which means that the question of classification remains open. Levels of defense mechanisms Level of defense Defense mechanisms Highly adaptive (mature) Affiliation, altruism, anticipation, humor, sublimation, suppression, self-affirmation , self-observation Obsessive Isolation, intellectualization, invalidation Hysterical Repression, dissociation Neurotic (others) Displacement, reactive formation Narcissistic Idealization, devaluation, omnipotent control Level of non-recognition (Disavowal) Denial, rationalization, projection, autistic fantasizing Borderline Splitting, projective identification Active Acting out, complaints, not accepting help ( help-rejecting complaining), passive aggression , turning against oneself.