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.
International Forum of Psychoanalysis 11, 10-17, 2002
On the subject of countertransference we attempt to establish a line of continuity between Freud's own expression ‘blind spot’ and Fromm's idea of ‘counterattitude’. It is pointed out that both expressed the idea of the analyst's unconscious as an ‘instrument’ for understanding the patient's unconscious. It follows that the decision to openly use or not to use countertransference in analysis also depends on the concept we have of it and on its extent. The psychoanalyst's real and illusory values and his convictions with regard to human nature influence the countertransference and the analytic relationship. Analytic listening itself may be distorted by it. We must be highly aware of this to avoid enclosing what the patient says in a theoretic scheme. What is needed, therefore, is an open theoretic scheme, more oriented towards understanding than interpretation. Aspects of analytic communication and of the relationship between language, thought and insight are examined. A humanistic point of view is assumed in distinguishing between the transferral and the real plane, and the reasons behind the legitimacy of such a distinction are expounded.
International Forum of Psychoanalysis 11, 45-48, 2002
Our profession is being challenged theoretically and by practical realities. Many of its basic premises are being questioned and a hostile managed care bureaucracy has been curtailing treatment opportunities. These challenges force a latent issue into full view. Is psychoanalytic wisdom tied to its dogma and technical rituals or can much of its wisdom be integrated into a more inclusive interdisciplinary perspective? Psychoanalysis has a history of resisting change. It defined too early what was and what was not to be considered psychoanalysis. Dogmatization made idols out of theories and the r