The brain as the main constituent of the higher nervous activity (HNA) fulfills a systemic organization of all its components to form a systemic multi-level response adequate to its capabilities. This manifests its multi-functionality from the standpoint of psychology, psychoanalysis and psychopathology. The brain perceives information from the outside and from within; selects it with subsequent differentiated fixation, using the mechanisms of mirror neurons, eidetism, mechanisms of short-term, operational, long-term memory; chronicizes the effect of the stressor by the inclusion of a psychological mechanism – displacement; forms echo effects, creates flashbacks, dreams, somatic conversions; fills the sphere of the unconscious. This activity is provided by the mechanism of stressogenesis (there is no other) manifested by the GAS.

The first phase of the GAS is the phase of alarm – manifests itself as a non-specific symptom complex in the form of “neuroticism”. It has a bioelectric nature, and therefore a discontinuous (discrete) character; with a prolonged, lingering stress-situation a person enters the permanent stress zone, which is provided by the three-axis second phase of the GAS, which is neurohormonal in nature and manifests itself as psychosomatic symptoms, syndromes and diseases. The latter arise as a consequence of the transition of functional changes to structural in different organs and organ-systems. In the absence of psychotherapeutic and biotherapeutic assistance, permanent stress leads to the consumption of the hormonal limit, loss of some links of the GAS, which is fraught with the development of the third phase of the GAS – the phase of astenization revealed by the burnout syndrome, chronic fatigue syndrome, various asthenic and asthenic-vegetative states.

The structure of the adaptation model consists of two different levels:

1. The neurophysiological part includes: HNA with the brain in the center, sensorium, mirror neurons, the mechanism of eidetism, memory, endocrine glands, the conductor system, skin, organ systems, body.

2. The psychoanalytic part of the model includes: psychosensory reflection (sensations, feelings, pain), mechanisms of psychological defense, flashbacks, dreams, amnesias, conversions.

The inclusive concept by Hartmann (2002) regards the adaptation as a nonstop ongoing process that has its roots in the biological structure, with many of its manifestations reflecting the constant attempts of “Ego” to balance the internal or inter-systemic tension. According to A. R. Luria, if the initially developing mental activity has a relatively elementary basis while depending upon a “basal” function, it will subsequently become more complicated starting to be realized with involvement of the structurally higher forms of activity. Mental adaptation results from the activity of an open system which, according to L. Bertalanffy is characterized by “a state of mobile equilibrium” in which its structure remains constant. But in contrast to an ordinary equilibrium, this constancy persists in the process of continuous motion of its constituent substance. The mobile equilibrium of open systems is characterized by the principle of equiphility, that is an open system can be preserved and develop not depending on the initial conditions. At the same time, the author emphasizes, “the living systems can be defined as hierarchically organized open systems that preserve themselves or develop in the direction of achieving the state of mobile equilibrium” (L. Bertalanffy, 1969).

The main distinction of psychological adaptation from the biological is in that the latter provides the adaptation of man to the environment, i.e. has the function of an adaptive character when the environment is primary and determines the sphere and the range of man’s activity and behavior. Figuratively we can imagine that man and environment roll along the road of life in the same harness wherein environment is the “wheel horse”. This adaptation assumes a reasonable conformity with regard to the outside realities, therefore in many cases it also includes activities aimed at modifying the environment or its adequate control. It is this process that initiates and triggers the psychological adaptation enabling man to change the environment adapting it to his needs, demands and purposes. And so, already not two horses, but three: “Environment, Man and his Intellect” are tearing along the road of life, among which the anchor is variable.

As a separate, third form of adaptation appears the choice of a new environment, where alloplastic and autoplastic changes are combined. Human as a carrier of consciousness has one more form of adaptation including both the first and the second kinds, but containing a qualitatively new purpose, namely, the search for and choice of a “new” – “the new environment”, which is favorable for human functioning. This constant search for “the new” is very meaningful in human life and adaptation. It is implemented by the functional subsystem of perception and information processing, the so-called “information subsystem” consisting of a number of leading links. One of those is a link providing search and information processing, its storage and usage. For a full-scale work of this subsystem it is necessary that the information items contain elements of novelty and be somewhat indeterminate. It is the presence and search for novelty in information flows that are developed in males but not due to genetic peculiarities of their brain structure but as a consequence of the developing psychosocial adaptation in the world full of stresses.

The activity of this subsystem functioning is directly proportional to the state of the environment in which a person lives at every particular moment in his life. The more crisis-prone the environment, the less active is the search for novelty in information, but the greater the need for experience to overcome the complexities of this environment.

Another important principle of adaptation, according to Hartmann, is change of function. To estimate the adaptive significance of a particular behavior, it is necessary to distinguish the currently existing function of this behavior from the one that existed originally. Behavioral functions often change in the process of adaptation, and, ultimately, behavior can serve a purpose different from the original. The knowledge that functions change helps to avoid the so-called “genetic error”, a simplified assumption that an individual’s current behavior is a direct outcome of the past. This point of view confirms the role of the social environment in changing the genetically engineered program, i.e. “A man himself is able to choose some part of his fate and adjust it himself”. Change in the environment and change in the functions provide the flexibility of mental adaptation, without which a productive full-fledged life is impossible.

Equally important role in the process of adaptation plays the automation mechanism, which provides, as opposed to flexibility, the rigidity of mental adaptation. The interrelation and interdependence of the mental and somatic in the course of human evolution and the formation of a healthy “I” (“Ego”) are manifested in a systemic behavior and use of bodily capabilities – the somatic system for adaptation. Integration of somatic systems involved in the operation, with their constant use, is automated; the same happens with mental efforts involved in the action. With the increased training of some action, its intermediate steps disappear from consciousness.

To explain this, E. Kretschmer (1922) proposed a law of “formula abbreviation”: not only motor behavior, but also perception and thinking show automation (a certain similarity to a habit). S. Freud (1905) wrote: “Such processes played out in the preconscious and elusive, with which consciousness is connected, can be called the appropriate term “automatic”. The place of these automatisms in mental topography is the preconscious, rather than the unconscious (“Id”), besides, these automatisms can be distinguished from the automatisms of the unconscious”. We are interested here in the purpose-oriented achievements of these automatisms and their important role in the schematics of the adaptation process. Automation has undoubted economic advantages and stipulates many complex achievements in central psychic domains. It is common knowledge in physiology that generation of automatism reduces metabolic expenditures, accelerates transformation and saves energy.

As Hartmann writes (2002), “we can say, automatisms – like other mental phenomena are also under the control of the external world, and under certain conditions, formula-abbreviated behavior is a better guarantee of mastering reality than new adaptation in each specific occasion”. This manifests the protective role of pre-consciousness automatisms, their stimulus barrier.

Thus, both flexibility and automation (rigidity) are inherent and necessary for the “Ego”. There are three groups of functions that are active in the mental sphere of man: some mental functions assuming a flexible form provide flexibility and plasticity of the psyche, behavior of man and his state of health; other functions assuming the automated form provide lower expenditure of energy resources and time that are often crucial for adaptation, accelerating the conversion of energy; and the third group is comprised of mental functions, which combine the initial two in different proportions.

In a complex human mental sphere thought, imagination, and recollection often become a triggering factor, “stressor of stressors” activating the mechanism of stressogenesis, eliciting the entire range of the vegetosomatic effect inherent to the phases of GAS. As a result mental adaptation becomes more complex, expanded, evolved, reflecting the evolution of the world of man and the evolution of man himself, his knowledge, values, wishes and purpose of life. In the course of evolution there comes about the “central regulating organ”, commonly called “the inner psychic world” that is located between the receptors and the effectors. This inner world (psychic) is built up gradually, by virtue of the so-called existing “stimulus barrier” that enables to perceive and to forward “only a fragment of the initial (stimulus)” reality of the world of man (Freud, 1920).

But man is an amazing creature! He is not content with a life-long adaptation to the actually changing environment, the changing human environment and to his own self. With the development of consciousness an individual, and only he, as shown by many studies, while living his own life, is also permanently forming his own “subjective reality”, his own idea of the world of things, of other people and of his own status. Meanwhile, the latter category is associated with self-rating, varying from an overestimation of oneself, one’s capacities and capabilities, to their underestimation. The result is that the individual adapts not so much to the objective reality but to the so-called “psychic reality” built by himself as an integrative “product”, as a fundamental integrative formation of the perceived outside world, colored by personal experiences and personal estimates. As a result, a “semantic reality” is created, enriched and framed by thoughts, feelings, fantasies, anxieties and suspicions. In forming this reality a sizeable role belongs to the past events, imagination and perspectives, to say nothing of the unconscious predictions forming the guidelines.

The emerging mental reality is not the reality that is mostly identified with the outside world and regarded as “objective reality”. The mental reality, at close scrutiny, is a colored palette of diverse interpretations of the outside world by different people, for each of them “his own reality is the most objective”, the one he is being adapted to. The mental reality is constructed through personal experience enabling perception of current life. E.g., a person gone through a traumatic situation, retains this experience, often perceives this world acting in it at present and in the future in the light of a traumatic reality of the past. It is this person who crosses the threshold of the doctor’s office, having his own idea of the disease, the formulated internal picture of the disease. The mental reality can be regarded as synonymous to the inner and subjective reality. All three terms – mental, inner, and subjective realities are designed to limit the subjective experience of an individual from the world of physical objects. Some theorists attempt to introduce certain corrections to delimit the mental and the inner reality.

They correlate the mental reality with the inner sources of subjective experience that is with unconscious fantasies and images, for which the perceptions incoming from the outside world are an outside source of subjective experience. With regard to the term “inner reality”, they understand it as a most general phenomenon reflecting a total subjective experience based upon integrative images of the perceived outside world.

Similar to the inner reality, which is not a “pure” product of imagination, the outside reality has its complex structure. The outside reality is reducible to two basic manifestations: “the actual” – objectively verifiable and confirmed by the scientific cognition of the world, and “the artificial” – the intersubjectively generally accepted “conventional” consisting of the world of words, myths, traditions, interpersonal and collective forms of behavior. The abovementioned shows the variety of factors and situations that can cause a state of deadaptation, anxiety, stress in modern man, and as a consequence, the improvement and complication of the adaptation system itself.

In the outside world structure the major portion falls on the world of people, so that task number one in human everyday life becomes man’s ability to adapt to another person, to other people who are carriers of individual psychosocial “Egos” that are present from the very beginning of life and to the last breath. “Man is a tangle of interrelationships” is an ancient philosophical aphorism. And this kind of adaptation is a super task and super goal for any person. K. Cherry (1972) believes that every act of communication between people, each new perception of another person adds something to the experience and improves the adaptability. Communication with people of one’s own kind is already a subsystem of social contacts, leading to an expansion of mental adaptation which in fact becomes psychosocial adaptation. L. Feuerbach (1955) noted that the individual “as something isolated” could not comprise the human essence in himself “either as a moral being, or as a thinking entity”; the human essence is “evident only in communication, in the unity of man with man…”. Thus, a crucial adaptation to be performed by man is adaptation to the social structure and his participation in building it up (Bernfeld, 1931). This type can be attributed to the fourth form of adaptation. The SPA is characterized by the multidimensional self-organizing subsystems, which provide greater freedom and variability in the choice of adaptation.

The mechanisms of the SBA and SPA, which determine the vital activity of a person, are extremely complex structures containing multiple subsystems, interconnected and interdependent. N. P. Bekhtereva regarded the increasing number of flexible links in the control system of mental activity as the main principle of complicating the brain systems. She assumed that the mental activity was supported by the cortical-subcortical structural-functional system with links of varying degrees of rigidity. Human adaptive capabilities have the widest range of flexible links, which when interacting with the environment allow to keep “essential variables” within the physiological boundaries. This is reflected in the”interfunctional” reorganization of the entire structure of mental activity in the process of ontogenesis.

The system adaptive approach enables to present a complete picture of man in his onto- and phylogenetic development; in health and illness; a picture stipulated by psychosomatic interrelations between the component paradigms – the biological and the psychosocial.

A historical development of human consists in the fact that today we have a person as a conscious volitional trinity (biological, social and mental), for whom sense formation (meaning formation) has become a leading need. Sense formation is the main function of the brain distinguishing a person from all living beings, and it is this ability to attach personal significance to environmental signals that makes each person unique and unrepeatable. It is sense formation that underlies many conscious and unconscious psychological defenses that make up the core of the SPA.

Example. They say that “Rafael Santi was driven mad with love towards a model for the image of Psyche. Once he, a dreamy young man was walking in the park thinking about finding a model for his canvas “Cupid and Psyche”. Suddenly he noticed a beautiful girl resting in the shade. Such pure features, such angelic face he had never seen! “Psyche” looked with interest at Rafael blinded by her beauty. She was 17 years old. Her name was Margarita Luti. Rafael immediately invited her to become model for the image of Psyche. Painter offered her a gold ring for ten kisses. Maid graciously agreed. Rafael lost his head with passion. Rafael went mad with beautiful “Fornarina” (translated from Italian means “baker”). Her delicate face with expressive brown eyes, silky skin and lush shoulders forced him to get off the breath. But that was not the Fornarina, whom worshiped Rafael. The young mistress of Raphael, though living with him, twisted love affairs with wealthy Romans right and left, often returning home at dawn. What about Rafael Santi? He did his job – he painted, and his paintings have become part of the golden fund of world art. The beauty with innocent charm, that struck the painter’s heart, became a common courtesan. Rafael went crazy with countless betrayals of Margarita but in work continued to depict the ideal he “was looking for Psyche”. The most famous of his creations became written in the years 1512–1513 “Sistine Madonna.” Flying in the clouds the Virgin with child still touches deeply. The model for the image of Mary became the same Margarita Luti. The artist gave her face an expression that he would like to see and “saw”: a mother’s love, the fear of the loss of a child, tenderness. He loved and painted the one whom he sought, whom he loved and by virtue of whom created his works. He lived in his world woven out of values, desires and symbols. Suffering from reality, he immersed into work and came back to reality again. Rafael suffered unspeakably, like any addict, splashing his hidden feelings on canvas or wet plaster. Perhaps his work would not be so heartfelt, if his life with Fornarina evolved happily.

Patient's drawing.

Is it so or not – we will never know.

We will not make any conclusions with respect to a specific example, because we are deeply convinced that it will be another version and nothing more if follow the basic principle of psychology “That might be so, might be otherwise” of which we wrote at the beginning.

But it seemed to us that the example will help understand all of the above said on the individual, his life, motivation, adaptation, objective and subjective realities, psychological defense and the role of suffering in his deeds.