Editorial

Bion writes that the aims of psychoanalysis are to ‘introduce the patient to himself’ and, in time, to achieve ‘a sufficiently introjected capacity for learning from experience’. These are both simple and profound objectives, but is this science or is it art? Contributing to this eternal debate, Meg Harris Williams writes of the ideas of Bion and Meltzer that grasp the essential point that psychoanalysis is both an artistic and a descriptive-scientific endeavour: emotional truth is captured by artistic means while the truths gleaned will form a network of logical/scientific psychic fact. Thus, psychoanalytic method is an art form with the scientific aim of discovering personal truth and enduring truths about ourselves as human beings.

The main tools of our trade are words, and the meaning of words that refer to key concepts has been known to change over time. The terms we use to define mental phenomena gain (or lose) weight and depth as further observations are made and refinements of conceptualization take place. Thus, the term ‘projection’, which Freud used to refer to an important type of mental event, has developed since Freud to describe events of greater complexity, and now projective identification in turn has broadened in its meaning. It is presently thought to be an essential component of all communication. Carol Weaver in her article in this issue compares the concept of projective identification with that of intersubjectivity, demonstrating much similarity and overlap between the two.

Taking in the patient's projections for processing while, at the same time, juggling numerous other tasks in a limited space of time poses the challenge for the interviewer doing assessments for psychotherapy. Although some psychoanalysts do not believe in assessments, taking on allcomers, an assessment of suitability for treatment is a regular procedure for most psychotherapy services. This is in order to maximize the prospects for successful treatment in the face of limited