|
Library
|
Your profile |
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial 4.0 International License.|
Psychology and Psychotechnics
Reference:
Gabbard, Glen O.
A Reconsideration of Objectivity in the Analyst: Critical Analysis of Post-Modernistic
Point of View. Translated by Sultanova, M. A.
// Psychology and Psychotechnics.
2012. ¹ 11.
P. 29-40.
URL: https://en.nbpublish.com/library_read_article.php?id=61669
Gabbard, Glen O. A Reconsideration of Objectivity in the Analyst: Critical Analysis of Post-Modernistic Point of View. Translated by Sultanova, M. A.Abstract: Today, when such terms as social constructivism, perspectivism and intersubjectivity are becoming popular in psychoanalysis, the concept of objectivity loses its importance. Nevertheless, the author of the given article believes that the concept of objectivity has a rather important meaning or psychoanalysis and psychoanalysis can and must survive the opposition between modernistic and post-modernistic points of view. Very often researchers underestimate the relation between the term ‘objectivity’ and the term ‘object’. Position of an analysist as an object exterior to consciousness or patient’s subjectivity is a very comfortable position. Patient’s unconscious motivations are usually more accessible when an analyst studies the patient’s reaction towards the ‘object’. And even though an analyst cannot go beyond the borders of intersubjectivity, part of such intersubjectivity creates a perspective outside the patient’s intersubjectivity. Keywords: psychology, p sychoanalysis, o bjectivity, i ntersubjectivity, m entalization, r eflexive p roperty, t ransference, countertransference, perspectives, object relations.
This article can be downloaded freely in PDF format for reading. Download article
This article written in Russian. You can find original text of the article here . References
1. Aron L. (1996). A Meeting of Minds: Mutuality and Psychoanalysis. Hillsdate, NJ: Analytic Press.
2. Benjamin J. (1988). The Bonds of Love: Psychoalalysis, Feminism and the Problem of Domination. New York: Pantheon Books. (1990). An Outline of intersubjectivity: the development of recognition. Psychoanal. Psychol., 7: 33-46.
3. Brandchaft B. & Atwood G. (1987). Psychoanalytic treatment: An Intersubjective approach. Hillsdale, NJ: Analytic Press.
4. Brown L. (ed.). The New Shorter Oxford English Dictionary of Historical Principles, Volume 2, N-Z. Oxford: Clarendon Press, 1993.
5. Cavell M. (1988a). Interpretation, psychoanalysis and the philosophy of mind. J. Amer. Psychoanal. Assn., 36: 859-879. (1988b). Solipsism and community: two concepts of mind in psychoanalysis: Contempt. Psychoanal. Thought, 11: 587-613.
6. Dunn J. (1995). Intersubjectivity in psychoanalysis: a critical review. Int. J. Psychoanal., 76: 723-738.
7. Elliot A. & Spezzano C. (1996). Psychoanalysis and its limits: navigating the post-modern turn. Psychoanal. Q., 65: 52-83.
8. Fonagy P. (1993). Psychoanalytic and empirical approaches to developmental psychopathology: an object-relation perspective. J. Amer. Psychoanal. Assn., 41 (suppl): 245-260.
9. Freud S. (1912). The Dynamics of transference. S.E. 12.
10. Friedman L. (1996). Overview: knowledge and authority in the psychoanalytic relationship. Psychoanal. Q., 65: 254-265.
11. Gabbard G.O. (1995). Countertransference: the emerging common ground. Int.J.Psychoanal., 76: 475-485. (1996a). The analyst’s contribution to the erotic transference. Contemp. Psychoanal., 32:249-273. (1996b). Love and hate in the analytic settihg. Northvale, NJ: Jasson Aronson.
12. Gill M.M. (1994). Psychoanalysis in Transition: A Persoal View. Hillsdale, NJ: Anallytic Press. (1996). Discussion: Interaction 111. Psychoanal.Inq., 16: 118-134
13. Goldberg A. (1996). It is all interaction. Psychoanal.Inq., 16: 96-106.
14. Goldberger M. & Evans D. (1985). On transference manifestations in male patients with female analysts. Int.J.Psychoanal., 66: 295-309.
15. Green A. (1975). The Analyst, symbolization and absence setting (on changes in analytic practice and analytic experience). Int.J.Psychoanal. 56: 1-22.
16. Greenberg J. (1991). Oedipus and Beyond: A Clinical Theory: Cambridge, MA: Harvard Univ.Press.
17. Hamilton V. (1993a). Lettrer to the editor. Int.J.Psychoanal., 74: 1066-1068. (1993b) Truth and reality in psychoanalytic discourse. Int.J.Psychoanal., 74: 63-79.
18. Hanly C.M. (1995). On facts and ideas in psychoanalysis. Int.J. Psychoanal., 76: 901-908. (1996). Reflections on feminine and masculine authority: a developmental perspective. Psychoanal.Q., 65: 84-101.
19. Hoffman I.Z. (1991). Discussion: toward a social-constructivist view of the psychoanalytic situation. Psychoanal. Dialogue, 1: 74-105. (1992). Some practical implications of a social constructivist view of the psychoanalytic situation. Psychoanal. Dialogue, 2: 287-304. (1996). The intimate and ironic authority of the psychoanalyt’s presence. Psychoanal.Q., 55: 102-136.
20. Holland N.N. (1993). Post-modern psychoanalysis. In Innovation/Renovation: New Perspectives on the Humanities, ed. I. Hassan & S. Hassan. Madison, WI: Univ. Wisconsin Press, pp. 291-309.
21. Kohut H. (1971). The Analysis of the Self: A Systematic Approach to the Psychoanalytic Treatment of Narcissistic Personality Disorder. New York: Int. Univ. Press.
22. Lazar S. (in press). The necessity of specific facilitating enactments in the treatment of regressed patients. In “Optimal responsiveness: How Therapists Heal their Patients”. ed. H.A. Bacal. Hillsdane, NJ: Jason Aronson, pp. 463-481.
23. Leary K. (1994). Psychoanalytic ‘problems’ and post-modern ‘solutions’. Psychoanal.Q., 63: 433-465.
24. Lester E.P. (1995). Bjundaries and Boundary Violation in Psychoanalysis. New York: Basic Books.
25. Levine H.B. (1994). The Analyst participation in the analytic process. Int.J. Psychoanal., 75: 665-676. (1996). The Analyst’s infatuation: reflections on an instance of countertransference love. Presented at the December meeting of the American Psychoanalytic Association in New York.
26. Lichtenberg J. et al. (1996). The clinical exchange: Techniques derived from self-and motivational systems. Hillsdale, NJ: Analytic Press.
27. Lindon J.A. (1991a). Does technique require theory? Bulln. Menninger Clin., 55: 1-21. (1991b). Treatment techniques in evolution. Bulln. Menninger Clin., 55: 30-37.
28. Loewald H. (1986). Transference-countertransference. J .Amer. Psychoanal. Assn., 34: 275-287.
29. Megill A. (ed.) (1994). Rethinking objectivity. Durham, NC: Duke Univ.Press.
30. Mitchell S.A. (1993). Hope and Dread in Psychoanalysis. New York: Basic Books.
31. Natterson J. (1991). Beyond Countertransference: The Therapist’s Subjectivity in the Therapevtic Process. Northvale, NJ: Jason Aranson.
32. Ogden T.H. (1994). The Analytic Third: working with intersubjectivity clinical facts. Int. J. Psychoanal., 75: 3-19.
33. Orange D.M. (1995). Emotional understanding: Studies of Psychoanalytic Epistemology. New York: Guildford Press.
34. Renik O. (1993). Analytic interaction: conceptualizing in light of the analyst’s irreducible subjectivity. Psychoanal.Q., 62: 553-571.
35. Richards A.D. & Richards A.K. Notes on psychoanalytic theory and its consequences for technique. J. Clin Psychoanal., 4: 429-471.
36. Rorty R. (1979). Philosophy and the mirror of nature. Princeton, NJ: Princeton Univ. Press.
37. Sandler J. (1996). Comments on the psychodynamics of interaction. Psychoanal. Inq., 16: 88-95.
38. Schwaber E.A. (1983). Psychoanalytic listening and psychic reality. Int. Rev. Psychoanal., 10: 379-392. (1990). Interpretation and the therapeutic action of psychoanalysis. Int.J Psychoanal., 71: 229-240. (1993). Letter to the editor. Int. J. Psychoanal., 74: 1068. (1996). Toward a definition of the term and concept of interaction: its reflection in analytic listening. Psychoanal. Inq., 16: 5-24.
39. Stolorow R. & Atwood G.E. (1992). Contexts of being. Hillsdale, NJ: Analytic Press.
40. Symington N. (1990). The Possibility of human being and its transmission (with paticular reference to the thought of Bion). Int. J. Psychoanal., 71: 95-106
41. Target M. & Fonargy P. (1996). Playing with reality: 11. The Development of psychicreality fron a theoretical perspective. Int.J. Psychoanal., 77: 459-479.
42. Target M. (1996). Playing with reality: 1. Theory of mind and the normal development of psychic reality. Int. J. Psychoanal., 77: 217-233.
43. Wilkinson S.M. (1996). Nominal gender and gender fluidity in the psychoanalytic situation. Gender & Psychoanal.,
44. Winnicott D.W. (1949). On Hate in the countertransference Int.J. Psychoanal., 30: 69-74.-(1963). Communicating and not communicating leading to a study of certain opposites. In “The Maturational processes and the Facilitating Environment”. New York: Int. Univ. Press.1965, pp. 179-192
|
© 1998 – 2024 Nota Bene. Publishing Technologies. NB-Media Ltd.
Eng
