Subjectivity and Objectivity in the Analyst

Glen Gabbard set the stage by reviewing the increasingly pluralistic nature of psychoanalysis. This pluralism is fostered by the postmodern emphasis on the interrelated perspectives of social constructivism, mutuality, intersubjectivity, relativism, and perspectivism. In contrast to Freud's positivist approach, these perspectives suggest that reality is a social construction created and negotiated between people. Whereas Freud's positivist orientation generated a dispassionate search for an objective truth, the postmodern position is that the inevitable influence of the analyst's subjective perceptions makes absolute objectivity impossible. An extreme position, relativism, holds that truth is impossible. The more moderate views of realism and perspectivism, held by many contemporary psychoanalysts, suggest that a workable understanding of the patient's reality emerges from the negotiated meaning between the perspectives of both participants in the analytic dialogue.

The clinical application of these notions leads to a focus on the intersubjective nature of the analytic process as delineated by Ogden, Natterson, Benjamin, Stolorow, and Gill. A radical application of these ideas was formulated by Owen Renik, who suggested that the intersubjective nature of psychoanalysis undermines the principles of neutrality and anonymity. Other intersubjectivists support the open expression of feelings and judgments by the analyst. While many support the current view of psychoanalysis as a two-person psychology, others such as Boesky warn of the potential dangers in forsaking neutrality, abstinence, and other aspects of standard technique. Gabbard asked the panelists to articulate their perspective on the analyst's subjectivity