• 主题
高级搜索  >
历史搜索 清空历史
首页> 外文期刊>Psychoanalytic Dialogues >Reply to Commentaries
【24h】

Reply to Commentaries

机译：回复评论

获取原文
获取原文并翻译 | 示例
           
页面导航
  • 摘要
  • 著录项
  • 相似文献
  • 相关主题

摘要

Questions of historical context resonate with an Independent view of the importance of history. The historical backgrounds of North American and British psychoanalysis are relevant. Some American analysts may be seen as belonging to the Independent tradition, and the relation between Independent analysis in Britain and Relational analysis in America needs further consideration. I ask how far Relational analysis is taking on an institutional identity, and link this to Poland's discussion of “outsiderness.” Responding to Bass's and Berman's comments on my clinical examples I discuss why I sometimes do think analysts need to ascribe meaning to a patient's material. In other instances an analyst will invite the patient more into the process by which meaning evolves between them. To move freely between these positions is central to my view of clinical technique. I express doubts about analysts asking patients for their emotional reaction to an analyst's interventions. This risks being intrusive, and may tend to keep the exchange at the conscious level of a patient's mind. The analytic relationship is an interpersonal one between real people, but the analyst needs also to remain symbolically available as an object of unconscious fantasy and projection.
机译：历史背景的问题与历史重要性的独立观点产生共鸣。北美和英国心理分析的历史背景是相关的。某些美国分析师可能被视为属于独立传统，因此英国的独立分析与美国的关系分析之间的关系需要进一步考虑。我想问一下关系分析在多大程度上具有制度上的认同感，并将其与波兰对“局外人”的讨论联系起来。在回应Bass和Berman对我的临床实例的评论时，我讨论了为什么我有时确实认为分析人员需要将含义赋予患者的材料。在其他情况下，分析人员会邀请患者更多地参与其中意义之间演变的过程。在这些位置之间自由移动对我的临床技术观点至关重要。我对分析师要求患者对分析师干预的情绪反应表示怀疑。这具有侵入性的风险，并且可能倾向于使交换保持在患者头脑的意识水平上。分析关系是真实人与人之间的人际关系，但分析人员还需要保持象征性地用作无意识的幻想和投射的对象。

著录项

相似文献

  • 外文文献
  • 中文文献
  • 专利
获取原文

客服邮箱：kefu@zhangqiaokeyan.com

京公网安备：11010802029741号 ICP备案号：京ICP备15016152号-6 六维联合信息科技 (北京) 有限公司©版权所有

  • 客服微信

  • 服务号