Notes

THE BOSTON PSYCHOANALYTIC INSTITUTE has issued the Annual Report of the Educational Committee 1936–1937 through its Chairman, M. Ralph Kaufman, M.D. The following is quoted from its report: "The increased number of candidates are bringing to the Institute and Society a number of problems. In line with its policy, the Educational Committee feels the need for the utmost rigidity of standards, both as to preliminary qualifications and to the personality

and character of all candidates. Psychoanalysis is a growing science, and, we all know, a very difficult one. There is an absolute need for a fundamental training and mastering of its technique, clinical application, and its theoretical superstructure, before one is equipped as a psychoanalyst. There is a great danger, particularly in American psychoanalysis, of a dilution and rejection of some of the most fundamental aspects of analysis under various guises, such as progress, eclecticism, 'scientific' work, and other illusions. It is the function of any training group to see to it that those under its guidance and jurisdiction shall be properly equipped to represent psychoanalysis in its most fundamental and scientific form. John Dollard in his introduction to his recent book 'Criteria for the Life History', makes the following statement in another context, which I believe is pertinent to the problem of psychoanalytic training: 'Scientific thought is not "fair" to erroneous notions; it is rather organized realism. A man cannot indulge his passion for keeping the peace, if he has one, or for staying in good with the right people, and be a scientist. Science is after the "best way to say it", completest, briefest, directest.' The matter of training has occupied the attention of all training groups in America and in Europe for some years past, and although we do not believe that we have arrived at an ultimate solution, we are on our way. There is a need for a fundamental, well-rounded curriculum, to the stu