Some Notes on Object Relations, “Classical” Theory, and the Problem of Instincts (Drives)

Object relations theory directly confronts certain assumptions that are at the heart of Freud's basic ideas. Although all object relations theorists do not reject Freud's instinct or drive theory they all challenge Freud's view that the object can be simply defined as the aim of an instinct. I intend to focus here upon the problem of the concept of instinct itself, which highlights the controversy between object relations theory and “classical” theory. This controversy has a certain practical consequence as it influences our theory of treatment and our therapeutic strategies.

Fairbairn's rejection of instinct theory in favor of energized structures is the most radical alternative to Freud's tripartite model of the mind. Fairbairn (1952) viewed energy as inseparable from psychic structure. (p. 85) “‘Impulses’ cannot be considered apart from the endopsychic structures which they energize and the object-relationships which they enable these structures to establish; and equally, ‘instincts’ cannot profitably be considered as anything more than forms of energy which constitute the dynamic of such endopsychic structures.”

Kohut, as did Fairbairn, eliminated Freud's instinct or drive