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.
To the Editor:
HERBERT ZUCKER (1993) IN HIS RECENT ARTICLE portrays himself as one who has the courage to face up to his responsibilities as an
analytic theorist and therapist by trying to wrestle with the realities of the psychoanalytic process, unlike authors like myself whose allegedly "untroubled capitulation to the problem of the ambiguity of our [psychoanalytic] material" leads to a situation in which any interpretation of any experience or interpersonal event is as good as any other, and to the total abdication of theory-building in psychoanalysis (pp. 480–481). One who is so respectful of the existence of "facts, " however, might do well to pay closer attention to the facts of what someone else has written before blithely going about elevating himself as the voice of reason at their expense. To give him the benefit of the doubt, perhaps Zucker's intention was to prove his thesis by demonstrating how ignoring facts can lead to authoritatively stated but careless misrepresentations of someone else's position.
The following are just a few published statements, a small sample of "facts, " as it were, that might be considered in evaluating the validity of Zucker's claims about my point of view: