You do not currently have permission to view the full text for this document. Please sign in to an account with an active subscription or contact support.
For at least the past decade, Arnold Richards has been a leader in the progessive effort to open American psychoanalytic institutions and psychoanalytic dialogue to the widest range of voices, challenging
traditional orthodoxies and establishment practices. In this most interesting and timely article about psychoanalytic politics in America, Richards provides a history, largely political and organizational, of the developments of the past quarter-century that have led to the contemporary scene of multiple competing psychoanalytic groups that represent, to one degree or another, differing theoretical ideas, professional criteria, and educational backgrounds. He asks us for a measure of humility in the contemporary dialogue, lively and at times tempestuous, that is going on in the new psychoanalysis. He expresses his general approval of the diversity that has evolved, and suggests an attitude of tolerance and civility among competing organizations and views. Given our history of religious wars, I believe that almost everyone will support his plea. However (there is almost always a however), as is the case with all historical accounts, the author inevitably reflects his own political and philosophical biases; and as Richards would surely acknowledge, there is room for alternative views of what events are most significant in our analytic history and alternative interpretations of those events. I will briefly discuss (1) the importance of distinguishing political, religious, and scientific pluralism in psychoanalysis today; (2) the different roles of humility in scientific and religious discourse and the place of humility in psychoanalytic debate; and (3) some cavils with Richards's version of analytic history.
Most psychoanalysts today welcome the pluralism of ideas, institutions, and publications that has replaced the monotony of a worn-out ego psychology and the at times heavy-handed hegemony of the American Psychoanalytic Association in American psychoanalysis. In d