Transpersonal psychology,physical health,and mental health: Theory,research, and practice

Abstract

Throughout its existence, transpersonal psychology has held a strong interest in exploring the implications of consciousness and spirituality for health, both physical and mental. This article provides a brief overview of the theoretical, empirical, and clinical contributions of transpersonal psychology to the understanding and facilitation of human health and well‐being. It also critiques the methodological basis of some of these contributions, concluding that transpersonal psychological studies of the relationship between spirituality and health are still in their infancy and that practitioners interested in using approaches based on these findings need to exercise caution as well as excitement about the interesting developments unfolding at an ever increasing rate.     

The idea of a moral psychology: The impact of psychoanalysis on philosophy in Britain1

In this paper the author addresses the question of the significance of psychoanalysis for moral psychology via a more specific question: the impact of psychoanalysis on British philosophy in the twentieth century. He argues that there has been no influence of any real significance, and offers intellectual reasons why not. However, he also argues that there has recently emerged the possibility for a future engagement between psychoanalysis and philosophy, and he offers a history of the emergence of this possibility. In particular, the author discusses how the emerging interest within philosophy to work out a satisfying approach to naturalist moral psychology leads it to a concern with internal mental structure and, most importantly, to transformations of intrapsychic structures. He believes that this will lead philosophy to take a greater interest in psychoanalysis.     

JUMPING FROM THE COUCH

This paper addresses two questions: first, how do phantasies work? Second, how do these mental activities affect a person's overall emotional life? The first question tends to be overlooked since those who accept, for example, projective identification as a basic mental activity tend also to treat it as an explanatory primitive. On this view, there is no further question to ask about how projective identification itself works; rather, other psychological and emotional phenomena are explained in terms of it. By contrast, this paper asks, how does projective identification itself work? The aim is not to provide a reductive explanation but to ask how it is that phantasies have the efficacy they have. To that end, one moment in the analysis of the Rat Man is re‐examined. There is then an attempt to show the difficulties involved in weaving an account of phantasy into the broader‐scale interpretation of emotional life.     

Technique and final cause in psychoanalysis: Four ways of looking at one moment

This paper argues that if one considers just a single clinical moment there may be no principled way to choose among different approaches to psychoanalytic technique. One must in addition take into account what Aristotle called the final cause of psychoanalysis, which this paper argues is freedom. However, freedom is itself an open‐ended concept with many aspects that need to be explored and developed from a psychoanalytic perspective. This paper considers one analytic moment from the perspectives of the techniques of Paul Gray, Hans Loewald, the contemporary Kleinians and Jacques Lacan. It argues that, if we are to evaluate these techniques, we must take into account the different conceptions of freedom they are trying to facilitate.     

Response to Hubert Dreyfus and Nancy Sherman

This paper tries to make clear what practical intelligibility is and how it is threatened at times of cultural breakdown or devastation. It argues that it is easy to overlook a breakdown in practical intelligibility because there is a tendency to frame the problems in terms of theoretical reason. Once one gets clear on what the threat to intelligibility is (and what it is not) one can see fairly straightforward ways to respond to the comments made by Dreyfus and Sherman.