Psychoanalytic approaches to lying
Les approches psychanalytiques du mensonge
Abstract
Objectives. – In psychoanalysis, words such as deception, untruth, mythomania or pseudology are generally
preferred to the word lying. However, the heterogeneity of the lexical categories used raises an epistemological problem, since it is difficult to determine what distinguishes these notions. This article sets out to
list these theories in order to provide an overview. It studies the different approaches to understand what
distinguishes and what connects them. The authors likewise explore the reasons why some people exhibit
an addiction to lies.
Method. – To achieve this, the article reviewsthe different existing theories. It provides a chronologicalstudy
of the work conducted on lying from the mid-nineteenth century to the present day. The authors compare and
analyze research on the themes of mythomania, deception, untruth, pseudology, etc. The authors propose to
refer to the relevant phenomena in terms of “lying”. They discuss the relevance of this notion, which could
appear simplistic.
Results. – Thus, by close examination of the various theories, this article demonstrates that the conception
of lying in fact opens up a new clinical sphere. This contributes to describing the intersubjective dynamics
through which people are unconsciously trying to protect themselves from interpersonal ties while at the
same time trying to establish them. It is true that this action takes on a transgressive aspect by undermining
a primary function of language: connecting people, but the destructiveness inherent in this act appears quite
meaningful. The violent emotions raised by a lie take on a messenger dimension. The individual actively
passes on to the receiver his own anxieties, and especially his distrust towards ties and language.
Discussion. – One of the main problems raised by this clinical field is whether or not the individual intends
to fool the person before him. The work on mythomania reinforced the idea that the subject adheres to
his fictional scenarios. According to this conception, the individual “lies to himself”, and is not conscious
he is fooling the person he is talking to. So, is it possible to make people believe things that are untrue
while thinking they are true? This article suggests not. Research on deception shows that the subjects that
lie very readily have a remarkable ability for persuasion, to the point that they may obtain the unconscious
complicity of their audience. It seems that they possess a very acute sense of the real which can win people over. Paradoxically, their problem could be the fact they are more in tune with the mental world of others
than with their own. Nevertheless, a part of the research goes against this viewpoint and some divergences
between the theories arise. This is primarily the result of a practical element: the practitioners who deal
with this unusual pathology are few. Alongside, the issues faced by these individuals lead them to avoid
anything relating to the “psy” culture. In addition, lying is very difficult to observe, which complicates its
approach. It is nevertheless easier to perceive when it comes from children. The reasons why they lie are
more transparent. The phenomenon has indeed been more widely studied by child therapists. Their work is
used here on the basis of the idea that the motivations leading a child to lie can cast light on pathological
lying among adults. Lying is a narcissistic solution used to preserve the subject from encroachment anxiety.
Conclusion. – This article shows the need to use the notion of the lie to describe clinical situations as yet too
poorly studied. This notion unifies a corpus hitherto too broad and imprecise because of the diversity of the
lexical categories used. From a clinical standpoint, it provides better understanding of the compulsion to lie
to other people. By categorizing liars as impostors, or as mythomaniacs, there is a danger of obliteration of
the transference-cons-transference dimension of their behavior.
Objectifs. – En psychanalyse, des terminologies comme l’imposture, le faux, la mythomanie, ou la pseudologie sont préférées à celle du mensonge. Cette hétérogénéité lexicale pose un problème épistémologique.
Cet article recense l’ensemble des théories existantes afin d’en offrir un panorama et de proposer un corpus
plus unifié. Ce faisant, il vise à mieux comprendre pourquoi certains sujets éprouvent un irrépressible besoin
de mentir.
Méthode. –Cet article recense pas à pas les théories formulées depuis la fin du dix-neuvième siècle. Il
compare et analyse les différents travaux portant sur la clinique du « mensonge ».
Résultats. – L’analyse des dynamiquesintersubjectives propres à l’acte de mentir montre que lesindividusse
protègent du lien tout en tentant paradoxalement d’en établir un. Certes cet acte revêt un aspect transgressif,
mais que la destructivité qui lui est inhérente est néanmoinssignificative. Il est montré que les affects violents
que le mensonge suscite ont une dimension messagère. Le sujet « injecte » ses propres angoisses chez l’autre.
Discussion. – Un des problèmes majeurs soulevé concerne l’intention que le sujet aurait, ou non, de tromper
ses interlocuteurs. Les travaux consacrés à la mythomanie ont conforté l’idée selon laquelle le sujet adhérait
à ses propres scénarii fictionnels. Il ne serait donc pas conscient de tromper les autres. Or, est-il possible
de réussir à faire croire des choses fausses à quelqu’un tout en y croyant soi-même ? La réponse semble
négative. Les « imposteurs » possèdent en effet une remarquable faculté de persuasion. En fait, c’est leur
sens très aiguisé du réel qui leur permet d’obtenir l’adhésion d’autrui. Cela semble être leur problème : ils
sont plus en phase avec le monde mental d’autrui qu’avec le leur. Cet aspect de la pathologie des sujets
a néanmoins été peu étudié, d’autant moins qu’ils évitent les lieux entendus comme « psy ». De plus, le
mensonge est par essence difficilement observable, ce qui complexifie encore son approche. En revanche,
cet acte est plus aisément identifiable lorsqu’il émane d’enfants. Aussi ce phénomène a-t-il été assez bien
cerné par les thérapeutes d’enfants. Leurs travaux sont ici utilisés pour montrer que les motifs inconscients
qui poussent l’enfant à mentir éclairent la tendance pathologique au mensonge des adultes. Tous utilisent le
mensonge comme un bouclier narcissique, les défendant d’une angoisse d’empiètement.
Conclusion. – La notion de mensonge a l’intérêt d’unifier un corpus jusqu’ici trop épars. Elle permet aussi
de mieux appréhender les motifs inconscients à la source d’un besoin de tromper autrui.