Psychic Truth and the In-Session Work of the Analyst

I seek to address one of the issues most affected by the postmodern culture, such as the crisis of rationality and truth, and try to reformulate its place within the psychoanalytic clinic using the contributions of Freud and Ferenczi, who drew the matrix of a passionate dialogue about the truth and the analyst work that has nurtured many contemporary theoretical developments. Essentially, the major influences of postmodern thought in psychoanalysis are to emphasize the importance of the patient–analyst interaction, the role played by the analyst in the patient’s transference and the rejection of the model of the analyst as a distant observer who interprets without having anything to do with whatever happens within the mind of the patient. Consequently, because both postmodernism and psychoanalysis are concerned with human subjectivity and love for truth, although indeed understanding them from different perspectives, both schools of thought become easily interrelated. I conclude that psychoanalysis, committed as it is with the search for truth, cannot ignore the influence of postmodern thought, as well as the postmodernist movement should not disregard all theoretical consistency provided by psychoanalytic theory and metapsychology.     

Freud and the Psychoanalysis of Telepathy: Commentary on Claudie Massicotte’s “Psychical Transmissions”

Freud was interested in and eventually accepted the diverse forms of telepathic communication as psychoanalytic rather than occult phenomena, particularly as manifested in dreams. Massicotte revisits the topic of Freud and his interest in the occult in a manner that invites serious reconsideration of this aspect of his work, long the subject of intense controversy in the history of psychoanalysis. In my response to Massicotte’s paper I argue that Freud’s interest in telepathy or thought transference belongs to his psychoanalytic theories of the unconscious and transference. His approach to telepathy parallels his approach to religious beliefs: He accounts for both as creations of the human mind as individuals attempt to make sense and meaning of their real experiences. What Freud meant by telepathy is what contemporary psychoanalysis refers to as unconscious communication, and the strange, often inexplicable forms it takes in clinical contexts. For Freud, instances of telepathy or unconscious communication are to be understood contextually and relationally, revealing important data about the nature of affectively charged human relationships.     

On the need of fundaments in psychoanalytic thinking

The questions concerning the foundations of psychoanalytic knowledge have been pressing from the beginning. Beside as a therapeutic practice, Freud conceived psychoanalysis as a science, maintaining that like other sciences psychoanalysis should have sound empirical and conceptual fundaments. Freud claimed that there is an inseparable bond (ein Junktim) between cure and acquiring knowledge in psychoanalysis. One of his aims in developing a metapsychology (analogously to metaphysics) was to explicate the conceptual structure of psychoanalytic knowledge. After Freud psychoanalysts have not reached a consensus in the questions concerning the foundations. What kind of foundations does psychoanalytic knowledge need? Are they to be found from the psychoanalytic practice and research on the couch, or rather from metapsychological constructions? In what way should psychoanalysis rely on external scientific research? The article addresses these questions, arguing that even though psychoanalytic work and knowledge do gain justification from various external sources, in the end psychoanalysis stands on its own foundations. It is further argued that especially under the prevailing plurality of theoretical and clinical approaches, psychoanalysis does not have – and does not need – a foundation that could not be further questioned. Thus a coherentist picture of psychoanalysis is defended.     

Anna Freud: The Hampstead War Nurseries and the role of the direct observation of children for psychoanalysis

The psychoanalytic tradition of direct observation of children has a long history, going back to the early 20th century, when psychoanalysis and the emerging field of 'child studies' came into fruitful contact in Freud's Vienna. As a leading figure in the attempted integration of direct observation with the new psychoanalytic knowledge emerging from the consulting room, Anna Freud played a crucial role in the emergence of this field. But her major contribution to the theory and practice of observing children came during the Second World War, when she founded the Hampstead War Nurseries. The author describes in detail this important period of Anna Freud's career, and discusses the impact it had on later work. He explores the theoretical contribution that Anna Freud made in the post-war years to the debate about the place of direct observation in psychoanalysis, and concludes that Anna Freud's 'double approach' (direct observation plus analytic reconstruction) still has a great deal to offer as a method of both psychoanalytic research and education.     

The empiricist as rebel: Jung,Freud, and the burdens of discipleship

However little they share in common, both Freudian and Jungian commentators have long agreed that Jung's theoretical development in the years following his psychoanalytic affiliation prompted an open “split” with Freud and the psychoanalytic movement. Careful examination of Jung's principal “rebel” works does not sustain this thesis, however, but rather indicates Jung's honest belief that his limited appropriation of certain psychoanalytic mechanisms and attendant theoretical modifications constituted full-fledged loyalty to psychoanalysis as he understood it. This perception receives significant support from the Freud-Jung correspondence which reveals Jung openly articulating the ground rules defining his loyalty to psychoanalysis as early as 1906, and Freud accepting, and even approving, his protégé's empirical reservations over the course of the next five years.     

The story of an ambivalent relationship: Sigmund Freud and Eugen Bleuler

This paper examines the short-lived flirtation between psychoanalysis and academia and psychiatry in Europe and the reasons for, and consequences of, the fact that their paths diverged. It is argued that Bleuler's break with the psychoanalytic movement is a crucial and, until now, largely underestimated turning point. Bleuler's separation from the psychoanalytic movement was probably more important for the course it has since taken than those of Adler, Stekel, or even Jung. Bleuler's analysis by correspondence by Freud, and its failure, was of paramount importance for the future relationship between Freud and Bleuler, and for Bleuler's assessment of psychoanalysis.     

Freud's metapsychological speculations1

In this paper, the author seeks to analyse the nature and function of metapsychological theory in Freudian psychoanalysis. He shows that Freudian psychoanalytic theory is composed of an empirical part‐the psychology of clinical facts‐and a speculative part‐metapsychology. Freud considers this latter part as being a speculative superstructure of value that is only heuristic, capable of being supplanted by other superstructures of the same type. The author sustains the idea that this metapsychology is the fruit of speculative method, whose foundations were elaborated by philosophers and epistemologists before Freud, including Immanuel Kant and Ernst Mach. He concludes with considerations regarding the future of metapsychological theorisation, presenting criticisms of Freudian metapsychology offered by both philosophers and psychoanalysts, and pointing to the perspective opened by Donald W. Winnicott of a psychoanalysis without metapsychology.     

BEFORE BABEL: REFLECTIONS ON READING AND TRANSLATING FREUD

The author offers some thoughts on reading and teaching Freud, on translating Freud, on translation in general, and on a possible kinship between translation and the psychoanalytic process. His reading of Freud's works, and the years he spent translating them into Hebrew and editing Hebrew editions of his writings, have made a deep and salient impression on his personal psychoanalytic palimpsest. The author began this labor prior to his psychoanalytic training and has no doubt that, to this day, the experience greatly shapes not only his attitude toward Freud himself, but also the nature of how he listens to patients and the way he thinks and writes about psychoanalysis.     

Psychoanalysis,religion, philosophy and the possibility for dialogue: Freud,Binswanger and Pfister

Abstract

This article considers the longstanding disciplinary tensions between psychoanalysis, religion, and philosophy. It argues for a cross-disciplinary understanding of human experience by examining the relationship of Sigmund Freud to his two Swiss colleagues, Ludwig Binswanger and Oskar Pfister. In contrast to Freud's avowed atheism and pronounced ambivalence on philosophy, Binswanger and Pfister both professed a strong religious sensibility and philosophical outlook. The article juxtaposes their theoretical divergences on religion and philosophy with personal interactions and correspondence. The relationship of Freud to Binswanger and Pfister is instructive for understanding the historical and contemporary interaction of psychoanalytic theory and practice with other disciplines and diverse viewpoints. The dialogical spirit that connects the three protagonists constitutes a critical engagement with learning and is essential to psychoanalysis today.     

Women on the Couch: Genital Stimulation and the Birth of Psychoanalysis

Following Freud's emphasis on his rejection of hypnosis as leading up to the development of psychoanalysis, there has been little mention in the psychoanalytic literature of the larger context of the somatic medical treatment of hysteria within which Freud treated his hysterical patients, and which Freud himself practiced. We contend that Freud's emphasis obscured his association with massage, electrotherapy, and the procedure of genital stimulation practiced by his medical colleagues in the treatment of hysteria. We show that the history of genital stimulation—including its obfuscation, desexualization, medicalization, and co-option from traditional women healers by an exclusively male medical establishment—provides us with the background for a more sophisticated understanding of the context in which Freud developed his theories. Specifically, we examine the contribution of this understanding to Freud's theoretical emphases on autonomy and individuality, abstinence and the renunciation of gratification, penis envy, clitoral versus vaginal orgasm, mature genital sexuality, and the “repudiation of femininity” as the “bedrock” of psychoanalysis. We demonstrate that Freud's position as a Jew in an anti-Semitic milieu fueled his efforts to distance his psychoanalytic method from the more prurient practices of his day, including one his society associated with Jewish doctors and patients.     

Sullivan und die intersubjektive Sichtweise

The author sees H.S. Sullivan??s (1892?C1949) interpersonal theory as the best theoretical framework for the contemporary intersubjective perspective in psychoanalysis and presents it in its pluridimensional articulation. After having extended Freud??s therapeutic approach to psychotic patients, Sullivan developed both a developmental psychology and a psychoanalytic and psychotherapeutic technique based on the ??interpersonal field?? as the basic unit of study. To the pluridimensional character of his theory also belongs its application to the cultural and social aspects of our personal identity. Because the contemporary psychoanalytic authors who shaped the intersubjective perspective limited themselves to the clinical dimension, Sullivan??s interpersonal theory can still provide the theoretical framework which any psychoanalytic perspective needs.     

The history of Russian psychoanalysis and the problem of its periodisation

The formation and spread of the psychoanalytic teaching of Sigmund Freud and his followers is one of the most significant events in the life of the spirit in the twentieth century. The recognition of this as an historical fact--irrespective of its relation to Freud and his ideas--assumes of course and need to gain a proper understanding and appropriate interpretation of psychoanalysis in all its dimensions. Generally speaking, the history of psychoanalysis and the psychoanalytic movement has been researched quite fully, although for a variety of reasons and circumstances there are a number of gaps in it. Perhaps the most important of these is the history of Russian psychoanalysis, which has developed within a country where, at the beginning of the century, Freud's works were translated and published in a most effective and representative way, and where psychoanalytic ideas drew a response both from specialists and among the public at large, although in content and inclination the Russian mentality did not at heart suit a psychoanalytical treatment of man and his culture.     

The plight and promise of contemporary psychoanalysis in the light of its social history

This paper addresses the many changes which have beset psychoanalysis and the psychoanalytic community since the widespread, general acceptance of both by the educated, middle-class public in the 1950s. It attempts to explain these changes, at least in part, by reflecting upon them in the light of the history of the psychoanalytic movement and upon the rise of dynamic psychology as well. Many in the psychoanalytic community think that their work is being ignored, devalued, and even attacked by an increasing number of influential persons and organizations. Critics claim that, epistemologically, psychoanalysis is scientifically invalid; therapeutically, it is ineffective; economically, it is too costly and takes too long; and theoretically, it is pluralized to the point of fragmentation. This is the plight of psychoanalysis. This paper argues that many of the major problems which once beset Freud and his colleagues, and which beset the psychoanalytic community today, are best understood in terms of two sociological processes, legitimation and institutionalization. Legitimation is the socio-cultural process whereby a new idea (e.g., Freud's theories, Jung's theories) contests the established web of ideas which give coherence and meaning to social and personal identity. Institutionalization refers to the way legitimated ideas replace once-contested views of reality. The single most decisive factor generating the plight of contemporary psychoanalysis is the ‘decision’ (1) to socially locate (institutionalize) psychoanalysis in institutes, rather than in clinics or universities, and (2) to represent psychoanalysis to the public (legitimation) as a medical science. In order to illustrate and advance these claims, I first define and distinguish sociologically the institute, the clinic and the university. Second, I describe the origins and development of the ‘decision’, made by Freud and his followers, to locate or institutionalize psychoanalysis in institutes. Third, I compare and contrast this early pattern of legitimation and institutionalization with that of the present-day psychoanalytic movement in England (relatively benign institutionalization) and in the United States (relatively destructive institutionalization). Throughout this discussion I draw upon the new literature on the history of psychoanalysis, past and present. As for the ‘promise’ for psychoanalysis, it can materialize insofar as psychoanalysis establishes contact with the clinic and the university (re-legitimation) and insofar as that contact becomes so self-evident that it is taken for granted (i.e., it is re-institutionalized).     

Toward a Genealogy of Culture

Using psychoanalytic theory, this paper attempts to trace the natural history of the phenomenon designated as Culture. It postulates that psychoanalysis, a product of the Hegelian philosophical revolution, is still one of the best instruments to understand Culture. It traces the origins of culture as postulated by Freud and the pioneer anthropologists and its course from early and evolved religion through humanism, science, and finally postmodernism. It emphasizes the dialectical concepts in psychoanalysis and reviews summarily those psychoanalysts that, according to the author, have had a major impact on the study of culture: Freud, Horney, and Lacan.     

Philosophical assumptions in Freud, Jung and Bion: questions of causality

The historical development of concepts of causality in philosophy is described. Since the Enlightenment and the growth of science, exponents of the two most important concepts, determinism and teleology, have been in conflict. At the inception of psychoanalysis at the end of the nineteenth century this conflict was particularly intense. It was the cause of the first major schism in psychoanalysis between Jung and Freud. Psychoanalytic theorists have continued to disagree over this issue. Post-modernist philosophy has abolished all metaphysics and therefore called into question concepts of psychic causality. Parallel to, but uninfluenced by this development, Bion has developed a psychoanalytic conceptualization which may be seen as transcending causality. The clinical and theoretical implications of these developments are described.     

Psychoanalytic lexicography: notes from two "harmless drudges"

The co-Editors in Chief of the American Psychoanalytic Association's new edition of Psychoanalytic Terms and Concepts (previously edited by Moore and Fine and last revised in 1990) recount their lexicographical adventures. Editing a dictionary at the turn of the twenty-first century is a daunting, some might say foolhardy, undertaking. The most obvious challenge faced by the editors was the growing pluralism within psychoanalysis. However, a more fundamental challenge was that the object of psychoanalytic study, the mind and its processes, can be known only by putting words to our observations, inferences, and interpretations. Psychoanalytic thinkers, starting with Freud, have wrestled with this challenge in ways that define the history of psychoanalysis itself. Long gone are the days when Freud could commend the "correctness" of Sterba's lexicographical efforts. Today postmodern critics, at the opposite extreme, argue that terms and concepts are best understood as "verbal gestures" in the "language-game" of psychoanalysis. Some go so far as to assert that dictionary-writing is obsolete. The co-Editors in Chief of Psychoanalytic Terms and Concepts have not succumbed to such nihilistic views, but have instead struggled to establish a reasonable stance within contemporary debates over the nature of psychoanalytic language.     

Foundations of psychoanalysis reconsidered

Grünbaum's approach to psychoanalysis suffers from several difficulties. It imposes a standard of logical reductionism and methodological purity that not only violates the nature of psychoanalytic knowledge, but imposes an invalid standard of verification and scientific confirmation. It utilizes a brand of dichotomous reasoning that forces psychoanalytic propositions into artificial positions that do not reflect the actuality of analytic practice. It imposes a standard of verification that is impossible for psychoanalysis, along with all forms of psychological knowledge, to reach. It visualizes psychoanalysis as encompassing only one form of knowledge of human psychic life, forcing it into a model that eliminates other aspects of the psychoanalytic process, so that psychoanalysis is subjected to criticism only on one dimension among several--a kind of psychoanalytic straw man. The psychoanalysis that is so impaled often is difficult for the psychoanalytic practitioner to recognize. To the extent that Grünbaum's skillful and highly informed criticism of the philosophical bases of psychoanalysis encounters these difficulties, the value of his argument falls short of providing a useful basis for advancing psychoanalytic knowledge and particularly for promoting the quest for pertinent standards of validation within psychoanalysis.     

The enigmatic “nature of the subject”

Freud once placed psychoanalysis in a “middle position between medicine and philosophy”. Yet, the meaning of that position has never been sufficiently clarified. The author suggests that the essence of the psychoanalytic experience is defined by the fact that its clinical practice operates within a basically relational or intersubjective frame containing the analysand's self-interpreting reflection, which here is identified as ethical in nature. It is further argued that late modernity is experiencing a crisis in the art of reflection, accompanied by a flight from this ethical dimension. A common social response is to fall back on the authority of neo-positivistic science, making psychoanalysis increasingly redundant. To meaningfully connect with the consequences of this state of affairs, psychoanalysis needs to deepen the understanding of its unique essence. To that end, a model for collaboration with philosophy is briefly sketched.     

A training analysis for psychoanalytic psychotherapists

For historical reasons, psychoanalytic psychotherapy has been regarded as a second-class treatment in comparison with psychoanalysis, and standards for training in it have lagged behind those for psychoanalysis. However, psychoanalytic psychotherapy is the treatment of choice for many healthier (or higher-level) patients who cannot receive analysis for any reason, and also for a large population of more-disturbed patients who are not appropriate for psychoanalysis. Mastering techniques of psychoanalytic psychotherapy may be as difficult as mastering those of psychoanalysis, and should require comparable theoretical training, supervision, and personal treatment. This "development lag" in the training of psychoanalytic psychotherapists has taken place for several reasons: (1) Psychoanalytic ideas first emerged in America in the context of a new movement toward an electric, but dynamic psychiatry from which psychoanalysis had to establish its separate identity. (2) Psychotherapy was associated with techniques of suggestion and manipulation from which psychoanalysis wished to separate. (3) Because psychotherapy was seen as an inferior form of therapy which required little training, institutes were slow in being established, and reluctant to require a "training analysis." It is suggested that with the full training of psychoanalytic psychotherapists, this discipline may be regarded as a profession comparable to psychoanalysis. It is further suggested that the optimal treatment for the full training of the psychoanalytic psychotherapist is psychoanalysis, and that a "training psychotherapy" is not an adequate substitute, but may provide a transitional step to resolve initial resistances and to prepare the therapist for a training analysis.     

THE STORIED ANALYST: DESIRE AND PERSUASION IN THE CLINICAL VIGNETTE

Beginning with the quintessentially psychoanalytic tales of Freud, the case history has held a privileged position in the history and practice of psychoanalysis. Psychoanalysts grow up with, grow into, and grow out of these narratives as clinical practitioners. Alongside the representational aspects of these case histories, there is a rhetorical or persuasive force that significantly influences us. The author contends that the theory of narrative and rhetoric can inform the how, the why, and the “so what?” of our relationship to these stories of psychoanalysis.