The Edge of Chaos: Enactment,Disruption, and Emergence in Group Psychotherapy

The author outlines his approach to the theory and practice of group psychotherapy. The emphasis is on therapy by the group rather than therapy in the group. The therapist's task is to help the group itself become the agent of change. The group is conceived as being composed of many multiple selves. The process of group psychotherapy unfolds through enactments that involve the whole group and the group therapist entering into the grip of repetitive and unmentalized self-states. These enactments are resolved when the group members, with the therapist's help and containment, can access alternative self-states that allow for new and unformulated experience to emerge. This dialectical movement between the rigid “familiar chaos” of enactment and the reflective and related working through is compared to the dynamic systems theory articulation of the tension between rigidity and chaos captured by Kauffman's notion that “life exists at the edge of chaos.” A group session is described that involves a painful enactment. It illustrates how the therapist allows the enactment to unfold by holding and containing intense affect and how the group members are helped to find their own meaning and new experience in interaction with each other.     

What is Social Equality? An Analysis of Status Equality as a Strongly Egalitarian Ideal

What kind of equality should we value and why? Current debate centres around whether distributive equality is valuable. However, it is not the only (potentially) morally significant form of equality. David Miller and T. M. Scanlon have emphasised the importance of social equality—a strongly egalitarian notion distinct from distributive equality, and which cannot be reduced to a concern for overall welfare or the welfare of the worst-off. However, as debate tends to focus on distribution, social equality has been neglected and we do not have a clear understanding of what it is and why it might be valuable. This paper aims to address this gap.     

The Man of the House: Commentary on Thomas Burkhalter’s “Foregrounding Masculinities in Psychoanalytic Psychotherapy”

Thomas Burkhalter is complemented on so vividly bringing the reader into his personal struggles to find a true masculinity in the unforgiving context of contemporary South Africa where White masculinity is associated with apartheid. The struggle to be free of old identifications with the patriarchal order and gender binaries saturate the paper, and attention is drawn to the lingering presence of older conceptions of masculinity as a monolithic concept that leaves women as victims and nurturers and the male as dominant. Burkhalter’s clinical vignette is examined and found to illustrate well his struggle and to capture the vulnerability to genderized enactments and the enduring presence of the old order manifested by a reliance on defense analysis that constrains his construal of Mr. Jones’s statement that he is “after all the man in the house.” Potential alternative meanings of this phrase that foreground grief, hope, and a plea for companioning in pain are offered and a deeper engagement with Mr. and Mrs. Jones’s conscious and unconscious worlds is encouraged.     

‘A Way Out’ and A Way In: Reply to Commentary

I express my appreciation for Michal Rieck's thoughtful and fully felt reading of my paper. I underline her points that the regression that an unobtrusive yet fully engaged analyst can allow, is not solely a phenomenon in work with more disturbed patients, and that the essence of this position is to be without separateness. I outline a process of the “flow of enactive engagement,” which fosters a narrative unfolding of the field of the treatment. I suggest that the flow of enactive engagement is a contemporary mutual form of enacted free association and that Rieck is correct in saying that from my perspective psychoanalytic cure need not involve the analyst's interpretation. The mutual enactment itself can be the interpretation.