Meetings of the Psychoanalytic Association of New York

DISCUSSION: Dr. Charles Brenner affirmed the incontestable importance of a psychoanalytic encyclopedic dictionary. He emphasized that the lexicography should be an exacting, pedantic discipline which should try to avoid the more informal, discursive approach he felt was manifested at times in Dr. Eidelberg's presentation. A dictionary of this type should be not merely a survey of the varying opinions and meanings of a term but should convey a sense of authoritative evaluation. In referring to the concrete examples from the dictionary, he noted that in the matter of the preferable translation of Trieb Strachey, in contrast to Hartmann, Kris, and Loewenstein, prefers the term 'instinct'. Dr. Brenner noted several examples of Freud's own inconsistencies and confusion in his usage of terminology he himself had originated. Dr. Brenner felt that the definition of the term defense mechanism, as presented in the paper, could be widened to include such considerations as defense against superego demands. Which specific mechanisms should be chosen to be defined under the heading of defense is really a matter of convention, since in the broad sense anything available to the ego can be utilized for defensive purposes.

Dr. Richard Drooz believed that the clarity of thought, as illustrated in the examples taken from the work, was admirable but he had reservations about aspects of the format in regard to lexicography. Dr. Mark Kanzer emphasized the vastness of the task of examining the basic terminology of psychoanalysis. It has taken four years for the editorial staff of this dictionary to examine and define a mere two hundred terms. Dr. Jan Frank commented that perhaps we should not be so defensive about the complications and contradictions in our terminology, for these very features indicate scientific growth and progress. In