神经精神分析学对压抑机制的研究简析

神经精神分析学是一门试图将神经科学与精神分析学结合起来的学科, 作为一个新兴的领域, 在其成立的短短10年中, 已取得了丰硕的研究成果。为精神分析学这拥有一百年历史的学科带来了新的生机。对精神分析的基石——压抑的研究是神经精神分析学的热点。神经科学家试图从不同角度证明精神分析中压抑这一过程确实是存在的, 而且还存在相应的神经基础, 但是, 目前神经精神分析学的研究还存在一些局限。     

Anxiety, signal anxiety, and unconscious anticipation: neuroscientific evidence for an unconscious signal function in humans

A central tenet of psychoanalysis, and arguably of any comprehensive theory of mind, is the existence of a psychological unconscious. Years of clinical investigation into the nature of unconscious processes have facilitated the development of psychoanalysis as a clinical method. Empirical investigations of unconscious mental processes, however, have lagged behind clinical inquiry. With few exceptions, attempts to understand unconscious processes using rigorous experimental controls have remained sequestered in scientific domains other than psychoanalysis, where they have proliferated recently. In view of this recent upsurge of research on unconscious processes outside of psychoanalysis, efforts to integrate such knowledge into general theories of psychopathology and clinical investigation are critical. In this paper, an interdisciplinary approach is taken to the study of one aspect of unconscious mental functioning--what Freud originally termed signal anxiety. Signal anxiety is examined using information from cognitive psychology and learning theory, psychophysiology, behavioral neuroscience, and psychoanalytic theory. Though the original concept of signal anxiety is supported by recent research, it is concluded that signal anxiety is probably best thought of not as the affect of anxiety but as a subset of unconscious mental processes that have a signal function of anticipating danger. Such unconscious anticipatory processes are a general feature of the mind that includes responses to both real and imagined (neurotic) appraisals of a situation. The neurophysiological structures and processes associated with unconscious anticipation in humans are just beginning to be understood.     

The case for neuropsychoanalysis: Why a dialogue with neuroscience is necessary but not sufficient for psychoanalysis

Recent advances in the cognitive, affective and social neurosciences have enabled these fields to study aspects of the mind that are central to psychoanalysis. These developments raise a number of possibilities for psychoanalysis. Can it engage the neurosciences in a productive and mutually enriching dialogue without compromising its own integrity and unique perspective? While many analysts welcome interdisciplinary exchanges with the neurosciences, termed neuropsychoanalysis, some have voiced concerns about their potentially deleterious effects on psychoanalytic theory and practice. In this paper we outline the development and aims of neuropsychoanalysis, and consider its reception in psychoanalysis and in the neurosciences. We then discuss some of the concerns raised within psychoanalysis, with particular emphasis on the epistemological foundations of neuropsychoanalysis. While this paper does not attempt to fully address the clinical applications of neuropsychoanalysis, we offer and discuss a brief case illustration in order to demonstrate that neuroscientific research findings can be used to enrich our models of the mind in ways that, in turn, may influence how analysts work with their patients. We will conclude that neuropsychoanalysis is grounded in the history of psychoanalysis, that it is part of the psychoanalytic worldview, and that it is necessary, albeit not sufficient, for the future viability of psychoanalysis.     

The psychoanalytic process

Analysts differ in how they conceptualize the psychoanalytic process, according to their understanding of the psychoanalytic theory of mental functioning in general and the nature of pathogenesis in particular. Emphasizing that psychoanalysis is a psychology of mental conflict, the authors see the psychoanalytic process in terms of the dynamic interplay between the manifestations of the patient's unconscious and the analyst's interventions. What analysts communicate to analysands serves to destabilize the equilibrium of forces within the mind, leading to the analysands' growing understanding of the nature of their conflicts and how they deal with them. Psychoanalytic process, accordingly, cannot be distinguished or separated from psychoanalytic technique.     

The wonderful adventures of Nils: or Taking leave of childhood

The relationship between neuroscience and psychoanalysis is studied by taking “the new mechanism of neuroscience” under scrutiny. That new trend stresses that neuroscientific explanations are mechanistic explanations in particular. Since the issue of psychological mechanisms lies at the core of psychoanalysis, it is crucial to study the relationship between neural and psychological mechanisms. The authors argue that neuroscience cannot verify psychoanalytic theories. However, by combining neuroscientific and psychoanalytic (psychological) viewpoints, it will be possible to approach a more holistic picture of psychological phenomena, here suggested by a new conception of defense mechanisms.     

Fairy Tales—a Royal Road to the Child Within the Adult

Concepts from the history of neuroscience and neuropsychology are introduced as a background to current research findings with emphasis on the neuropsychology of memory. The author thinks that psychoanalysis should be interested in this research, but is critical of establishing a new discipline, the so-called neuropsychoanalysis.     

Further evidence for the case against neuropsychoanalysis: How Yovell,Solms, and Fotopoulou's response to our critique confirms the irrelevance and harmfulness to psychoanalysis of the contemporary neuroscientific trend

In their paper “The case for neuropsychoanalysis” Yovell, Solms, and Fotopoulou (2015) respond to our critique of neuropsychoanalysis (Blass & Carmeli, 2007), setting forth evidence and arguments which, they claim, demonstrate why neuroscience is relevant and important for psychoanalysis and hence why dialogue between the fields is necessary. In the present paper we carefully examine their evidence and arguments and demonstrate how and why their claim is completely mistaken. In fact, Yovell, Solms, and Fotopoulou's paper only confirms our position on the irrelevance and harmfulness to psychoanalysis of the contemporary neuroscientific trend. We show how this trend perverts the essential nature of psychoanalysis and of how it is practiced. The clinical impact and its detrimental nature is highlighted by discussion of clinical material presented by Yovell et al (2015). In the light of this we argue that the debate over neuropsychoanalysis should be of interest to all psychoanalysts, not only those concerned with biology or interdisciplinary dialogue.     

The scientific status of unconscious processes: is Freud really dead?

At regular intervals for over half a century, critiques of Freud and psychoanalysis have emerged in the popular media and in intellectual circles, usually declaring that Freud has died some new and agonizing death, and that the enterprise he created should be buried along with him like the artifacts in the tomb of an Egyptian king. Although the critiques take many forms, a central claim has long been that unconscious processes, like other psychoanalytic constructs, lack any basis in scientific research. In recent years, however, a large body of experimental research has emerged in a number of independent literatures. This work documents the most fundamental tenet of psychoanalysis--that much of mental life is unconscious, including cognitive, affective, and motivational processes. This body of research suggests some important revisions in the psychoanalytic understanding of unconscious processes, but it also points to the conclusion that, based on controlled scientific investigations alone (that is, without even considering clinical data), the repeated broadside attacks on psychoanalysis are no longer tenable.     

Linking mind,body and language: free association revisited

Psychoanalysis differs from other theories because of the great significance it attributes to a man's unconscious. Psychoanalysis differs fundamentally from other therapeutic methods in its use of free association and the significance and power it gives to this method when investigating unconscious phenomena. The present article begins with a brief review of the history of free association and its use as a method. After that, I discuss the relationship between free association and memory, neuropsychoanalysis and semiotics. Free association is linked with implicit memory and seen as a way of remembering; unconscious experiences are given a verbal form with the help of free association. The psychoanalytical setting and transference together constitute a psychic space, in which it becomes possible for the patient to get into touch with his or her bodily, psychic and verbal experiences and material simultaneously. The author sees free association specifically as a form of mental processing which is typical to psychoanalysis; it is a core process where the experiences of mind, body and language and their expressions link together. Free association is simultaneously the result of a memory activity and creative activity and, above all, a combination or synthesis of these two processes.     

Characters on the Stage. Ibsen's “Life-Lie” Revisited

The authors inquire as to how far psychoanalysis uses its inherent capabilities to decipher the inner structure of subjectivity in present-day psychoanalytic practice and thinking. They maintain that in psychoanalytic practice, the analyst's unresolved neurotic conflicts cause him to create conscious mystifications of his own unconscious situation, thus distorting his understanding of the patient's unconscious in a systematic manner.     

A Woman Is Being Beaten - Issues on Violence and Femininity

What kind of contributions can psychoanalysis make toward issues that concern violence and femininity, specifically the violence that women establish in the relations with the significant other and themselves? In this paper, the authors attempt to answer this question by dealing with concepts such as instinct, masochism and enjoyment. Additionally, they recognize the act of psychoanalytic listening as a genuine and valid manner of getting the unconscious to speak. This act of listening can be practiced either in the traditional psychoanalytic setting of private offices or in psychoanalysis applied to public institutions, for the principal tool is language as it permeates human relationships and proportions the structure of the unconscious mind.     

On the scientific standing of psychoanalysis

This paper speaks for the claim that psychoanalysis qualifies as a scientific enterprise. It will derive from the conceptual and evidential structure of psychoanalysis a causal empirical hypothesis that admits of scientific intraclinical testing. Relevant topics from the philosophy of science (especially the nature of causal explanation and the work of Grünbaum) and the psychoanalytic theories of pathogenesis and therapeutic action are discussed in a preliminary way to create a framework for the demonstration. The dynamic unconscious is examined as the core causal concept of psychoanalysis. Taken together with an account of the structure of the mental apparatus, a coherent picture of mental causation (the propagation of an unconscious impulse) comes into view. This leads to the formulation of a set of clinical propositions that unite to generate a causal empirical hypothesis based solely on data from the analytic setting--namely, that the transferences and symptoms that appear in free association in the analytic situation possess an interrelational structure that is theoretically implied and can be statistically confirmed.     

Critical refl ections on intersubjectivity in psychoanalysis1

The authors review the philosophical trend known as postmodernism and the way it has infl uenced a part of psychoanalytic thought, concluding with some comments on the qualities and shortcomings of the new developments. The authors consider the origins and the cultural and aesthetic‐philosophical meaning of postmodernism, identifying some key concepts such as deconstructionism, the disappearance of the ‘individual subject’ and individual identity, and the rejection of ‘in‐depth’ models of psychoanalysis. Then they examine various, wide‐ranging developments in psychoanalytic thought and treatment. They review the intersubjective fi eld in psychoanalysis, especially in the USA, and then explore whether the underlying lack of truth to be discovered, stressed by these ‘new view’ statements, or the fact that the ‘truth’ only exists in linguistic‐narrative constructions is consistent with basic analytic concepts such as the unconscious, phantasy, transference and countertransference, which recall the tri‐dimensional nature of inner psychic reality. The psychoanalytic process is a condition activated through a bond that is able to hold and contain the relationship of the analytic couple and the patient's unconscious world and not through hermeneutic or narrative constructions.     

Psychoanalysis and Neuroscience in Dialogue: Commentary on Paper by Arnold H. Modell

Arnold H. Modell has been engaged in an ongoing effort to advance psychoanalysis as well as to integrate psychoanalytic theory and relevant domains of science, particularly neuroscience, with psychoanalytic practice. He has been articulating a biology and construction of meaning and the role of metaphor as he attempts to understand the relationship between mind and brain. Modell strives to understanding how “matter becomes imagination,” as well as the relationship between the first-person psychological unconscious and the third-person neurophysiological unconscious. The latter, according to Modell, is interpreted by a personal “autobiographical self” and given meaning. This discussion of Modell's theories will include historical and contemporary attempts to understand how “matter becomes imagination.” Although there is a growing neuroscience research base for articulating the reverse, i. e., “how imagination becomes matter,” the present author will focus on the project Modell h as placed before himself and his audience. The role of consciousness in the brain-mind interface, mirror neuron systems and intersubjectivity will be discussed. Clinically, the role of trauma's effects on memory and metaphor as well as the defensive functions of non-relatedness and counter-dependency will be examined within the wider context of the very rich and subjectively meaningful journey of matter becoming imagination.     

Uncanny Communication and the Porous Mind

In this paper I examine the phenomenon of “uncanny” unconscious communication and the plausibility of “telepathic” interconnectivity between patient and therapist. While reexamining long-standing psychoanalytic reluctance to engage with the topic of the “uncanny,” I present clinical examples of seeming anomalous transmission, followed by discussion from contrasting perspectives of psychoanalysis, neuroscience, quantum physics, and parapsychology. The patient’s and analyst’s reactions to these uncanny moments are explored, along with the potential clinical value of nurturing receptivity to this “frequency” of unconscious attunement.     

Emotional Memory,Metaphor, and Meaning

Advances in neuroscience make it possible to view the construction of meaning as a biological property. Freud's Project for a Scientific Psychology in which emotion and memory form a seamless unified system is seen as an attempt to establish psychoanalysis as a neurobiology of meaning. In the unconscious construction of meaning, metaphor plays a salient role; metaphor is the currency of mind. I have suggested that metaphor functions unconsciously as a pattern detector and thus plays a dominant role in the organizing and categorizing of emotional memory. Consideration of the evolution of the limbic system enables us to make a functional distinction between unconscious emotional memory and conscious feelings. These observations should lead to a revision of our current psychoanalytic theory of affects.     

Intersubjektivit?t und psychoanalytische Identit?t

The psychoanalytic identity is the result of identification with a psychoanalytic introject. It protects against the fears to which everyone who is attempting to illuminate the unconscious is exposed. In this paper the substantive issues of identity are discussed as a psychoanalyst who is a support for the work by providing concepts for the understanding of the unconscious. Using the example of the intersubjective wend in psychoanalysis it will be examined how these contents have changed under the influence of intersubjectivity. The notion that psychological development also occurs in psychoanalysis in unmistakable interpersonal contexts implies removing the restraints imposed by commitment to the technical rules and normative expectations. The intersubjective view of psychoanalysis therefore demands from the psychoanalyst an identity which is fundamentally different from that of the classical psychoanalyst. Processing the associated fears places the psychoanalytic identity at a more mature stage.     

Some psychoanalytic viewpoints on neuropsychiatric disorders in children

The author addresses issues interfacing neuropsychiatry and psychoanalysis. He recommends psychoanalysis for children with Attention Deficit, Hyperactivity Disorder (ADHD) and Dysfunction in Attention and activity control, Motility control and Perception (DAMP). He attributes its low status in neuropsychiatric treatment recommendations partly to the fact that psychoanalysts do not always declare their specific field of investigation. The scientific community then assumes that psychoanalysis aims to comment on issues outside its field of investigation, e.g. on neurobiological aetiology. The community therefore fails to discern the psychoanalyst's specific task, to help the child express and work through his conscious and unconscious experiences. Clarity on the analyst's part will improve relations with the scientific community and facilitate a relevant comparison of treatment methods. Another reason for neuropsychiatry's negative attitude towards analysis is its unwillingness to accept that unconscious conflict influences behaviour. With theoretical and clinical arguments, the author argues that unconscious factors must be taken in to understand and to treat the child. Countertransference, often cumbersome with neuropsychiatric children, becomes easier to handle if the analyst is clear about his field of investigation. If he sees through simplistic formulations on aetiology, countertransference gets even more manageable. Psychoanalysis can result in considerable intellectual and emotional development, as illustrated by work with a latency boy with DAMP, autism and slight mental retardation. In his psychoanalytic theoretical framework of the case, the author unites ego-psychological formulations with a Bionian conceptualisation of the thought disturbance.     

Unconscious Process: Zen and Psychoanalytic Versions

Attention to unconscious processes forms the nexus of the psychoanalytic endeavor and adds dimension to the theoretical and clinical integration of Buddhism and psychoanalysis. The author traces convergences between Freud's, Matte-Blanco's, and D.T. Suzuki's explication of the psychoanalytic and Zen readings of the unconscious. The Buddhist understanding of the unconscious propensity to reify experience can be integrated with psychoanalytic thinking. An alternative understanding and processing of aggression with supporting clinical material provides a case in point. The author concludes that continued Buddhist practice holds the potential to alter radically existing psychoanalytic models without destroying the efficacy of well-established formulations and accompanying techniques.