On an Ethic of Psychoanalytic Technique

Gone but not forgotten: declarative and nondeclarative memory processes and their contributions to resilience

Cognitive psychology research challenges traditional psychoanalytic understanding of memory. The memory of facts and events is now referred to as declarative memory. Nondeclarative memory systems, in contrast, process patterns of perception, emotion, and action without representing the past in terms of any consciously accessible content. The author examines the contributions of declarative and nondeclarative memory processes to resilience. Declarative memories can promote resilience through their capacity to evoke soothing emotional responses. Nondeclarative memory processes can foster resilience through underlying the capacity to elicit and maintain supportive relationships. The concept of nondeclarative memory has potential to inform the understanding of essential psychoanalytic phenomena, including transference, countertransference, and enactment.

The problem of self-disclosure in psychoanalysis

The problem of self-disclosure is explored in relation to currently shifting paradigms of the nature of the analytic relation and analytic interaction. Relational and intersubjective perspectives emphasize the role of self-disclosure as not merely allowable, but as an essential facilitating aspect of the analytic dialogue, in keeping with the role of the analyst as a contributing partner in the process. At the opposite extreme, advocates of classical anonymity stress the importance of neutrality and abstinence. The paper seeks to chart a course between unconstrained self-disclosure and absolute anonymity, both of which foster misalliances. Self-disclosure is seen as at times contributory to the analytic process, and at times deleterious. The decision whether to self-disclose, what to disclose, and when and how, should be guided by the analyst's perspective on neutrality, conceived as a mental stance in which the analyst assesses and decides what, at any given point, seems to contribute to the analytic process and the patient's therapeutic benefit. The major risk in self-disclosure is the tendency to draw the analytic interaction into the real relation between analyst and patient, thus diminishing or distorting the therapeutic alliance, mitigating transference expression, and compromising therapeutic effectiveness.

Psychic reality in the psychoanalytic process

The case is made for regarding psychic reality as synonymous with subjective (conscious) experience, which is inherently open to, but not reducible to, unconscious determinants. Both analyst and analysand engage in the analytic relation and interaction from the perspective of their respective psychic realities. Thus, components of the analytic relation--transference/countertransference, alliance, and real relation--are forms of psychic reality. The tensions of subjectivity and objectivity are discussed in relation to the analytic situation, especially with regard to whether the patient's or the analyst's psychic reality is to be given priority or preference. The same reality, situation, or relationship can be viewed from different perspectives and subjected to varying interpretations without any one being exclusively true or false-each may be partially true and/or partially false. The patient's recounting of his history is a part of the patient's psychic reality that intersects with a necessarily divergent account constructed by the analyst. The ensuing dialogue seeks a form of real coherence that is mutually realistic and makes realistic sense for both parties. Reliance on subjective psychic reality becomes a possible, but precarious and potentially misleading, basis for analytic understanding without other observational (verbal and behavioral) or objective data.

Passion, countertransference enactment, and breakdown in the psychoanalysis of a young woman

Transference-countertransference involvement with patients the analyst finds "pleasurable" is examined. Analysis of such patients courts the danger that pathological identifications will go unrecognized and the analysis end at a point where the opportunity for decisive change, which to the patient appears physically and psychically catastrophic, is forgone. A presentation of one aspect of the analysis of a young woman reveals the psychic pain experienced by analysand and analyst when the feared breakdown places a pathological identification in doubt, and the difficulties that can ensue in treatment. Other psychodynamic lines of interpretation and differential diagnostic considerations are put aside in favor of an examination of the special role of enactment and countertransference enactment and their impact in promoting development or strengthening defense.

On subjectivity and objectivity in psychoanalysis

Epistemological subjectivism has found its way into psychoanalysis along several theoretical and clinical paths. It has developed out of the clinical interest in transference and countertransference and, in particular, from the broadly generalized definition of countertransference now popular. The clinically necessary attention to analyst-analysand interaction has been turned into interactionism or intersubjectivism and a denial of epistemological subject-object differentiation. These perspectives transform a clinical focus on the here and now of the analytic relation into the determination of the past by the present and a teleological reversal of causality. Once this reversal is made, narrative in the analytic situation becomes the co-creation of the analysand's past by the present analyst-analysand relation. Psychoanalysis, on this view, can at best substitute a coherent, novelistic account for the life history of a person. Some of the problems of subjectivism are examined here with a view to restoring to psychoanalysis the epistemology of science and common sense.