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.
Relationships have always been central to psychoanalysis. Relationships can influence the development of human personality and fulfillment of human desires and potential. The psychoanalytic method is, itself, based on a relationship between two persons therapist and patient — who engage in a highly structured yet close relationship.
The nature of relationships has been an interesting theme in discussions of Japanese psychology. An example of this is a series of debates on the meaning of Amae. The meaning of Amae was initially proposed by Doi (1971, 1988) as motivation for dependency and as a unique feature of monolithically considered Japanese mind. Kimura (1972), Lebra (1976), Kumagai (1981), and Taketomo (1986b) presented critiques of Doi's theory from different angles with all agreeing on the inadequacy of considering Amae without specific considerations of interactants. Taketomo's critique, further clarified in subsequent papers (1988, 1989), proposed that Amae is a metalanguage for sharing a specific mode of interaction and that the motivations involved in such interaction are not exclusively satisfaction of the need for dependency. Further clarification of this issue will be found in a subsequent part of this paper entitled Amae.
In addition, Roland (1988) has presented an analysis of family and group relationships and their significance to the psychology of the Japanese and of Indians.
Relationships are also very important in Japanese-originated