The theory of positive disintegration is fascinating. The book gets very repetitive toward the end, stating the basic tenet of the theory over and over again: (certain) behaviors and attitudes often ascribed to mental illness are actually signs of the development of personality, often through the upheaval or dissolution (disintegration) of previous, "lower" aspects of personality, and therefore are actually signs of mental health, if anything.
At first, this repetition is helpful, because the explanations rely heavily on fuzzy terminology that is never fully explained or defined, with terms such as "disposing and directing center" and "the third factor". The repetition helps consolidate the reader's understanding through osmosis, eventually. But in the end, it becomes excessive.
Still, the basic idea of the theory seems valuable, to me. The factual accuracy of it is difficult for me to determine, although it helps in this regard that the author does stress that there are also pathological forms of this disintegration process, thus defending the theory against anecdotal counterexamples. But he does seem to be of the opinion that in the majority of cases, a nervous, self-dissatisfied person experiencing feelings of guilt and shame is actually undergoing a healthy form of personality development. I don't know if that's right, quantitatively. But if nothing else, it's a pleasant thought to hold on to if you ever experience these sorts of emotions, yourself.
Dąbrowski mentions that these episodes of personality development through positive disintegration are aimed at a "personality ideal", and early in the book this seems to be a rather prescriptive and somewhat old-fashioned ideal. The "lower" personality aspects relate to instinctual impulses and egocentric behaviors; the "higher" aspects are more cultural and alterocentric. I thought perhaps this lower end of the spectrum, which relates to a "primary integration" that is perhaps the default for most people early in life, might be similar to Freud's "id". The higher end, the "secondary integration", would then be the "superego". The "ego" seems to be missing, unless that is this disposing and directing center that keeps popping up.
Freud's ego helps the person select when to follow the id and when to follow the superego, so there is less of an inherent judgment in favor of one or the other, but Dąbrowski, stating it in terms of "lower" and "higher", seems more judgmental here. Furthermore, sometimes specific ideals are suggested, such as committed monogamous relationships rather than shallow sexual pursuits. I think people should be free to decide this sort of thing for themselves, and one is not necessarily superior to another, so I was unhappy with this aspect of the book. But then in the final chapter, he writes, "In assessing the mental health of outstanding persons one should apply individual, almost unique, personality norms, for the course of their development must be evaluated in terms of their own personality ideals." Alright then.
All in all, this was very interesting, and I'm glad this book was recommended to me. I think I'll be thinking this one over for quite a while.