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 explores formal aspects of psychoanalytic education relevant to the fostering or inhibiting of creativity in the work of candidates. He refers to thirty features of psychoanalytic institutes that inhibit candidates' creativity and, by implication, illustrate problems in psychoanalytic education that require our attention. These features include systematic slowing down of institutional progression of candidates, repetitive and unquestioning teaching of key papers by Freud, monolithic tendencies regarding theoretical approaches, isolation of candidates from the professional and scientific activities of the psychoanalytic society, accentuation of the hieratical relations among the psychoanalytic faculty, graduation rituals, discouragement of original contributions by candidates, intellectual isolation of institutes, lack of full presentation of clinical work by senior members of the faculty, neglect of studies of controversies regarding psychoanalytic technique, ‘paranoiagenic’ features of the relationship among faculty and regarding requirements for candidates, the ‘convoy’ system, neglect of exploration of the scientific and cultural boundaries and applications of psychoanalysis and the effects of institutional conflicts around the appointment of training analysts.