In fact, it is a commonly recognized psychological term used by many psychologists/philosophers (not, when Eliot was at Harvard, clearly separate) with a specific meaning. Eliot had read and commented on some of them (for example, William James), and he knew the meanings. He uses them explicitly in many of his writings--especially many not collected. 

What someone now just thinks it means without any of that context is really not an answer to Diana.

>>> Ken Armstrong 05/06/10 10:10 PM >>> 
DIana Manister wrote: 
> Nonetheless, I agreed with Nancy's opinion that dissociation is a 
> misleading term. 
No one ever said there is either association or dissociation, black 
and white. It's a relative term, which way I suspect most people take it 
and Eliot meant it in talking about sensibility. I see no problem using 
it this way. 

> My post in no way indicated that Pound was psychoanalyzing Eliot. 
> That's a ridiculous interpretation of my comment. 
But it must be entirely your own, as no one else, recently at least, 
made any such statement. 

Ken A