This is an exceedingly timely and important paper and in scope goes far beyond the problems of sublimation. The author concludes that the term sublimation is an ambiguous one and should be discarded, that there is no valid way of distinguishing sublimated behavior from normal behavior, and that there is no special mechanism identifiable by the concept. The concept of sublimation is shown to be an outgrowth of the 'special psychoanalytic theories with their untenable differentiated energies …'. The concepts of neutralized or sublimated energy are questioned. It is felt that they are confusing, ambiguous, and irreconcilable with general metapsychology. Kaywin offers the following tentative formulation: 'It is the degree of ideational associativeness at certain hierarchic levels that determines the sexualization … or aggressivization of any reaction pattern. The emphasis is on a structuro-energic approach rather than on a purely energic one.'