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 issue is the first of two dedicated to the papers presented at the Journal's fifth international conference held in Charleston, South Carolina, in April 2003, on the theme ‘Science and the Symbolic World: New Paradigms for Psychoanalysis and Analytical Psychology’. Speakers explored a range of scientific, clinical and philosophical issues which enrich our understanding of clinical and theoretical aspects of psychoanalysis and analytical psychology. The papers from the plenary sessions and from various workshops are divided between the February and April 2004 issues.
The theme of this conference arose out of our recognition that psychoanalysis and analytical psychology cannot continue to remain insulated from the new discoveries and new paradigms in related disciplines or they will carry diminishing authority as scientific models for understanding the human psyche.
For some speakers, a detailed exploration of the developmental foundations of the psyche remains the most effective tool for deepening our understanding of our clinical work. This developmental approach drew on a range of sources, some from within psychoanalytic theories and some from more empirical scientific studies, such as cognitive neuroscience, attachment theory and self- organizing systems such as robotics. Other speakers preferred to place the clinical picture into a wider philosophical frame, some examining the historical and philosophical contexts of psychodynamic theory, while others preferred a post-modern approach, in which hermeneutics is given priority over empirical objectivity. This diversity has been actively fostered in the Journal, on the basis that our clinical work and theoretical concepts are enriched by debate and comparison with information from a range of other disciplines.
One constant theme running through the whole conference was that our theories have a profound impact on the nature of our clinical practice and some of the most lively discussions arose in relation to the dif