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.
Dear Editors,
In her recent article, Affirming ‘That's not psycho-analysis!’, Rachel Blass (2010) provocatively argues for an exclusive, limiting definition of psychoanalysis on the grounds that it is reasonable, intellectually honest, and conducive to constructive debate, to articulate the ‘truth’ about what psychoanalysis is. She implies that such a definition would somehow transcend the historical proliferation and progression of ideas regarding the nature of mind and therapeutic action in our field, and would aid in the determination of which among these ideas are truly psychoanalytic and which are not.
In making her assertions, although seeking to avoid committing herself to a particular definition, Blass clearly has in mind a type of definition that I believe has, at this point in our history, outlived its usefulness. It is problematic because it perpetuates a longstanding category error (Aron, 2009; Stern, 2009a, 2009b) - namely, equating our field of professional practice with a particular theory, treatment arrangement, technique, or conception of therapeutic process. No other comparable profession does this. Imagine if the field of medicine had defined itself in terms of the practice of bloodletting (the most common medical practice for 2000 years ending in the late 19th century), or if the field of clinical psychology had, in the 1970s, defined itself as following Skinner's laws of operant conditioning. I wouldn't say our situation is quite that dire, but the extreme examples dramatize the problem. These other professional fields wisely define themselves in terms of the domain of human problems or needs they address and/or their general fields of inquiry and the evolving body of knowledge, skill, and wisdom that are the constant products of those fields of inquiry. While psychoanalysis may not have been in a position to define itself in this way when Freud invented it, I believe it is in such a position now. We now have a substantial, complex, and evolving b