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.
It is my responsibility, as first speaker in this plenary session, to present an overview of the classical theory of affects with special attention to the historical development of these theories. This review must include the changes in classical theory, the controversies which have existed in the past and some of the controversies which persist at the present time.
It is easiest, to begin with, to note the two large areas of agreement among analysts of all persuasions. First, everyone seems to agree that affects are phenomena of the utmost importance in the human experience. Affects are vital events of everyday life and are of vital importance for understanding normal human behavior as well as understanding all aspects of psychopathology. Affects are a central consideration in the psychoanalytic process. Distressful affects, especially anxiety and depression, are the reasons that patients seek psychotherapeutic or psychoanalytic help. The patient's affects are among the most important data which the psychoanalyst monitors in the psychoanalytic process and they are most profoundly affected by successful psychoanalytic treatment.
The second area of agreement is that we do not possess a satisfactory or a unitary theory of affects. Many attempts have been made to construct a consistent and inclusive metapsychology of affects. Some of these theories have been brilliant, creative and often very useful, especially when they have been primarily clinical in emphasis. Nevertheless, a majority of writers invariably begin their publications on affect theory by asserting that this area remains extremely obscure. The essence of affects is nonverbal and