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.
The psychoanalyst influences the psychoanalytic process both as a participant and as an observer. The theoretical concepts held by the analyst determine his perception of whatever evolves between him and the analysand in the course of their common “transference-countertransference neurosis” (Racker, 1988). A concept of “coevolution” (Bateson, 1984) indicates the type of mutual influence being exerted in this process. I examine and validate this model by applying the theory of “radical constructivism” (von Glasersfeld, 1985; von Foerster, 1985a) and by drawing on “the theory of living systems” and “bio-epistemology” (Maturana with Varela, 1985; Varela, 1988).
Dr. Brodbeck is a member of the IPA (International Psycho-analytical Association); Training Analyst of the DPV (Deutsche Psychoanalytische Vereinigung) at the Psychoanalytische Arbeitsgemeinschaft Köln-Düsseldorf; and has a private practice in psychoanalysis.
This article is a revised version of a paper delivered at the Karl Abraham Institute of the DPV in Berlin on June 7, 1990. Translated by Stephen C. Cox.
Such a perspective raises questions about the very nature of knowledge and science. By taking into account “bio-epistemological” insights we can appreciate the central role played by the perception and assessment of countertransference for the direction taken by the psychoanalytic process. The analyst's interpretative treatment of the analysand is understood as an interactive occurrence and not simply as a transmission of information; it prompts the analysand into also viewing the relationship from a metalevel and thus developing a “triangulation in thought.”