The emerging dialogue between psychoanalysis and neuroscience: neuroimaging perspectives

Current progress in the cognitive neurosciences is highly relevant to the development of psychoanalytic theory and practice. Neuroscience is today becoming mature enough to provide empirical biological approaches for the investigation of psychoanalytic models and observations. The current state of functional neuroimaging techniques is reviewed, selected paradigms and findings relevant to psychotherapy research are presented, and ways to pursue the dialogue between psychoanalysts and neuroscientists are discussed, as are some related obstacles and pitfalls. The emerging dialogue between psychoanalysts and neuroscientists may help not only to reestablish a solid position of psychodynamic theory and treatment in contemporary medicine, but also to bridge the division between "psychological" and "somatic" treatments, and gain important insights into the mind-brain relationship.     

Renatus renatus: the Cartesian tradition in British neuroscience and the neurophilosophy of John Carew Eccles

J. C. Eccles (1903-1997) had a highly distinguished career in neurophysiology, being awarded the Nobel Prize for Medicine or Physiology in 1963. This paper sets him within the Cartesian tradition of British neurophysiology initiated by Thomas Henry Huxley in the mid-19th century. It shows how the mind-brain problematique of the Cartesian tradition troubled him throughout his career, leading him finally to a solution in terms of quantum microphysics and microphysiology. This position, which has subsequently become fashionable, is discussed and shown (at least in the form Eccles espoused) to provide no solution to the problem posed by Descartes in the early 17th century.     

From archaic narcissism to empathy for the self: the evolution of new capacities in psychoanalysis

The concept of the selfobject was central to Heinz Kohut's psychology of the self. With an eye to studying the development of narcissism and its implications for the growth of new psychic structure, this concept is reviewed and reassessed. Post-Kohutian complexities regarding its definition and use extend our consideration of the development of narcissism beyond archaic configurations toward further evolution of the self and the nature of mature narcissism. The hypothesis is offered that developing narcissism and the growth of self-regulation impact the acquisition of new structure and new capacities through the emergence of newly potentiated aspects of the self. The implications of these emergent qualities of the self are examined in the context of our understanding of self-esteem regulation, the state of the self, and the goals of psychoanalysis. A clinical example illustrates how technique and process in an analysis may be organized around the development of such new capacities.     

A new model for conceptualizing insightfulness in the psychoanalysis of young children

Traditional definitions of insight fail to take into account the cognitive and developmental limitations of young analysands, who lack the capacity to mentalize. It is suggested that insightfulness be redefined as promoting mentalization in young children. Gaining this key psychological function furthers the internal integration and self-regulation necessary to regain developmental momentum. The central importance of promoting such development in child psychoanalysis suggests that the facilitation of a mechanism for self-understanding, not the interpretation of content, is essential. Insightfulness is facilitated by employing a range of interventions beyond the interpretation of resistance and content, rendering meaningless the distinction between interpretive and relational aspects of the analyst's role.     

The analyst's knowledge and authority: a critique of the "new view" in psychoanalysis

A critical assessment is presented of positions recently taken by Mitchell and Renik, who are taken as representatives of a "new view" in psychoanalysis. One article by Mitchell and two by Renik are examined as paradigmatic of certain ways of construing the nature of mind, the analyst's knowledge and authority, and the analytic process that are unduly influenced by the postmodern turn in psychoanalysis. Although "new view" theorists have made valid criticisms of traditional psychoanalytic theory and practice, they wind up taking untenable positions. Specifically called into question are their views on the relation between language and interpretation, on the one hand, and the mental contents of the patient on the other. A disjunction is noted between their discussion of clinical material and their conceptual stance, and their idiosyncratic redefinitions of truth and objectivity are criticized. Finally, a "humble realism" is suggested as the most appropriate philosophical position for psychoanalysts to adopt.     

Regulation and standards for psychoanalysis: The place of the Other in psychoanalysis and its teaching

In numerous Western countries, psychotherapies have come under increasing governmental regulation. A more recent development is the increasing scrutiny given to psychoanalysis in the United Kingdom, in France, and in the United States. This paper examines a particular document that was created by four professional psychoanalytic organizations that are based in the United States. The document called Standards of Psychoanalytic Education aims to develop criteria that would guide accreditation and the organization of psychoanalytic institutes. The document is part of a set of concerns and actions related to the state regulation of psychoanalytic practice, its professional status, and the protection of those who seek its services. The essay examines the putative theoretical neutrality of this document by unfolding its tenets in terms of Lacanian psychoanalysis, a school of psychoanalysis that would take exception to many of the ideas suggested in the document's template for psychoanalytic education. The paper follows one line of argumentation throughout: what is the place of the Social Field, the Symbolic Other, within psychoanalytic process and as a recourse for professional legitimization that stands outside of psychoanalysis? As a practice of particularity, what relation does the discipline bear to other mental health fields and to the norms and knowledge systems of the mental health professions? Using a Lacanian orientation, two senses of the Other are discussed, and the specificity of psychoanalysis is asserted. This specificity is contrasted with some of the goals and constraints that are introduced by current approaches to regulation.