Commentaries

Commentaries by:
Alexandra M. Freund and Michaela Riediger, What I Have and What I Do— The Role of Resource Loss and Gain Throughout Life, p.370
Richard S. Lazarus, Conservation of Resources Theory (COR): Little More Than Words Masquerading as a New Theory, p.381
James Campbell Quick and Joanne H. Gavin, Four Perspectives on Conservation of Resources Theory: A Commentary, p.392
Ralf Schwarzer, Stress, Resources, and Proactive Coping, p.400
Murray S. Thompson, A Rose By Any Other Name . . . : A Commentary onHobfoll's Conservation of Resources Theory, p.408     

Commentaries

Kurt W. Fischer and Michael W. Connell, Using neuroconstructivist tools to understand developmental pathways to disorders, p.24 Usha Goswami, The potential of a neuroconstructivist framework for developmental dyslexia: the abnormal development of phonological representations?, p.27 Laurent Mottron and Jacob A. Burack, On why simulated developmental disorders don’t predict real ones, p. 29 Joan Stiles, The neuroconstructivist approach to the study of developmental disorders: strengths, constraints andchallenges, p. 31 Helen Tager‐Flusberg, Differences between neurodevelopmental disorders and acquired lesions, p. 33 Michael Thomas, Neuroconstructivism’s promise, p.35     

Consciousness and Commentaries

There are several neuropsychological syndromes in which good residual function is retained in the absence of acknowledged awareness, among them blindsight, amnesia, and unilateral neglect. All of them point to the need in studying conscious awareness not only for an “on-line” demonstration of the relevant capacity, but for an independent commentary or classificatory response by the subject, whether human or animal. The parametric limits of blindsight (visual discrimination without awareness) can be measured using a “commentary key” psychophysical paradigm, and the results may possibly allow an approach to identifying neural structures involved in visual awareness.     

Relational Trouble: Reply to Commentaries

This reply to the commentaries by Corbett, Hansell, and Stern explores whether Lacan's concept of the real can—or should—be translated into more readily recognizable terms. It extends our previous discussion of impossibility by arguing that not all ideas and experiences can be brought within the realm of the known and familiar. We suggest that impossibilities of meaning should not be understood primarily in phenomenological terms, and we demur from the assessment that our concept of impossibility offers nothing for clinical work. Claiming that what resists meaning also impedes relationality, we encourage relational theorists to address the nonrelational processes that subtend relationality, including the relation between analyst and patient. We acknowledge that the theory of impossibility—or what we now call “negative mediation”—raises a fundamental challenge to relational theory, but we insist that disruptions of relationality need not be considered pathological. Taking into account the nonrelational may enhance rather than impoverish relational psychoanalysis.     

朱熹论《太玄》

本文梳理了《朱子语类》中对《太玄》的评价。朱子基于儒学正统立场,对扬雄的拟《易》之作《太玄》的主要方面都进行了评说。朱子认为扬雄的模仿不足道,《太玄》高处乃是道家之学;其以三起数,失《易》之本义;《太玄》只是在作历,其数零星凑补得可笑,而其卦气有气无朔,是没有道理的;且《太玄》的“爻位”吉凶太笃定,把《易》变动不居之理说死了。总之,朱子认为,扬雄虽费力安排,但《太玄》的内容和形式都不足道。     

Dialectics Forever: Reply to Commentaries

The dialectic between repetition and transformation, an inherent aspect of the therapeutic dialogue, is elaborated. Dialectic refers to an ever-present tension within a process, a pull by opposite tendencies in contradictory directions. Checks and balances between repetition and transformation are crucial. Too great a tilt toward transformation can bring the system into disorganization and instability. Too great a tilt toward repetition and the system can stagnate. The term “dialectic” is also used to refer to the tension between an emphasis on process and an emphasis on content or outcome. The massive challenges to traditional psychoanalytic treatment that stem from the empirical infant research, self psychology, general systems theory, and motivational systems are discussed. Their contributions are of particular relevance to the nonverbal dimension of the analyst-patient interaction.     

Ideology Springs Eternal: Reply to Commentaries

Empathy has come to occupy a central place in much discourse on psychoanalytic theory and practice. Since empathy is fundamental to how data are obtained and interpreted within psychoanalysis, it is essential to understand its relationship to the assumptions underlying any psychoanalytic epistemology. This paper examines some of the epistemological issues involved in Kohut's view of empathy as a mode of inquiry. The Kohutian view of empathy is contrasted with the understanding of empathy employed by Harry Stack Sullivan and the epistemology of American pragmatism. The epistemology inherent in empathy as a mode of inquiry is then clarified in relation to hermeneutics, phenomenology, structuralism, and deconstruction. The paper concludes with a case example to illustrate the clinical implications of the particular meaning of empathy as a mode of inquiry.     

I Have Loved: Reply to Commentaries

In replying I explore in more depth the journey of reclaiming the lost love and the mourning of a relationship that could not be publicly or privately grieved. Disavowed love, in its melancholic haunting, compels identity. In agreement with the model of multiplicity proposed by Harris and Hill I delve further into our hybridic racialized identities. I also come to an understanding of our differences, including our experience of whiteness and our processes of racialization. Finally, I engage with the complex issues of anger and forgiveness.     

Personality Process-Structure Duality: Reply to Two Commentaries

In two commentaries, Kostromina and Grishina (2018) and Mironenko (2018) offered constructive thoughts and questions in response to an article by Giordano (2018, Culture & Psychology, 23, 502–518) on the merits of an approach to understanding individual personality that focuses on the processes rather than structures of personality. In this reply, the authors seek to clarify some of the points made in the original article. The authors also describe a personality process-structure duality, whereby personality is conceptualized in terms of processes or structures based on the methods used to study it. If the goal is to understand the dynamic and emergent properties of individual personality, the authors continue to argue for the merits of a process-centric approach and the avoidance of structural thinking.     

Searching for the Ethical: Reply to Commentaries

In replying to the commentaries I challenge the notion that the analyst can remain an apolitical or dehistoricized subject. As relational analysts our work is to keep broadening our reach, and expanding our thinking including addressing the ethical imperatives of our times. I raise the philosophical issue of collective responsibility which deals with moral rather than causal responsibility and the concept of metaphysical guilt, guilt based on who one is rather than what one has done. I also address the need for more innovative forms of writing in psychoanalysis, and my own style of writing in which language attempts to perform the theory. In creating a more narrative driven style of writing I hope that the reader will be able to experience from the inside, rather than solely from a theoretical position, the concepts I am exploring.