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.
This report gives an account of the work of a central panel in the Congress, which compared the positions of three analysts, coming from different analytical traditions and representing three continents, in respect to the challenges posed by current clinical conditions.
Stefano Bolognini, the co-ordinator of the panel, in his welcome speech to the participants and members of the public present, introduced the theme to be discussed and mentioned its topicality and its potential implications. He specified that each contribution represented a reflection on the expansion of the clinical field and on the resulting consequences for clinical practice and theoretical reflection. Even within the IPA there is now an acknowledgement of a plurality of theoretical approaches, which is paralleled by a diversity in clinical practice. These very developments force us to rethink and make new connections between meta-psychology and clinical practice, and again between clinical practice and theoretical models.
The first paper was presented by Norberto Marucco from Argentina (Current analytical practice and the analyst's position), who chose to develop his theme along two lines:
the present-day patient:
his/her psychopathology
emotional distress and consciousness of time
the ‘unconscious state’ (‘unconscious-ized’) and the analyst's position.
In Marucco's view there is a different approach to psychopathology in one present-day psychoanalytical orientation, with which he personally identifies: a preference for reasoning not in terms of structure, but of modes of functioning of the psychic apparatus. The author describes as ‘psychic zones’ those areas of the mind which are distinguished by different modes of ‘unconscious-ization’.