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.
The author addresses how privileging of dyadic learning structures (supervision and personal analysis) in psychoanalytic institutes contributes to a paucity of attention to group processes in psychoanalytic training. Because groups resist development that disrupts the established order, this is a controversial article, for it questions traditional assumptions regarding the ways in which psychoanalytic theory is taught. Following a historical trajectory, the author discusses five examples of analysts' lack of attention to group dynamics. The group processes occurring in these situations are analyzed from the perspective of Bion's (1961) theory of groups, which shows how primitive anxieties emerging in groups encourage dependency on particular theories and analysts, fighting between those of different theoretical persuasions, and the development of a psychoanalytic aristocracy (an “in-group” of training analysts). This detracts from critical thinking, and undermines efforts to find new solutions to the problems psychoanalysts face in today's world.