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.
HOW ONE DEFINES RESISTANCE IS determined by one's theoretical assumptions. We know that Freud defined resistance in accordance with his structural model of the mind. If everything that is evoked by the therapeutic process can become a focus of resistance, then any psychic structure can also become a source of resistance. Accordingly, Freud listed (Freud, 1926, p. 160) five kinds of resistance—three emanating from the ego, and one from the id and superego respectively. Repression, transference resistance, and the secondary gain of illness arise from the ego. Id (instinctual) resistance, is the resistance of repetition, that which requires "working through." Super ego resistance is expressed as the sense of guilt and the need for punishment which opposes recovery and opposes the diminution of pain. Freud's use of the term resistance also included opposition to the ultimate aims of treatment, that is, resistance to recovery from neurotic suffering as well as resistance to the therapeutic process itself, such as the resistance to the acceptance of the therapist's interpretation.
No matter how resistance is defined, resistance assumes many forms which I will not attempt to elaborate. Instead I will focus on only one facet of character resistance—the resistance to the exposure