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.
IAM GREATLY HONORED to have been elected by you to the presidency of the William Alanson White Psychoanalytic Society. "Presidential Address" is an impressive caption. I suppose such an address ought to be either very witty or to ponder the state of the union. Since I cannot do the former, I shall try to do the latter—to ponder the state of our profession without, I hope, being ponderous.
At the recent annual meetings of the American Psychiatric Association and Academy of Psychoanalysis, it became more obvious that the science and profession of psychoanalysis are in a state of crisis. Many of us have been aware of the developing of this crisis for a decade: now no one can evade it. One expression of this crisis is that outstanding members of the traditional groups have turned against psychoanalysis. Their speeches sound very much to me like the "God is dead" plaint of some present-day theologians. I think the similarity can be carried further: God is dead because the God of much psychoanalysis—like that of the theologians—was on the wrong basis.
I believe the fruitful approach is to ask, What in traditional psychoanalysis as it comes into our day is wrong? What has caused the disillusionment and crisis? I propose that one central source of this crisis is the failure to solve the problem of will and decision.
Thoughtful persons have been asking, What is the relation between psychoanalysis and the individual patient's will? Silvan Tomkins,