Acrimony, dissension, and controversy have characterized psychoanalytic education from the beginning. The usual scapegoat for this situation has been the training analyst system. But this system is seen as just a symptom of deeper, underlying conflicts about our field and preparing for it. In particular, the tendency toward authoritarian dogmatism amongst psychoanalysts is a prime contributor. This inclination derives from the defensive idealization and fanaticism characterizing many psychoanalysts. Such idealization helps us to manage the many uncertainties that characterize our theory, our practice, and our pedagogical efforts. Various methods to address these uncertainties more directly are suggested as a way to counteract the negative effects of fanaticism.