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.
We seem to be at a unique point in the development of psychoanalysis. In the past, the usual consequence of the propogation of alternative viewpoints was schism or excommunication. Today, we are again in a period of ferment, comparable in significance to the earlier periods in which Jung and Adler sparked the first deviations from Freud or in which Horney, Fromm, and Sullivan forged an interpersonal alternative to mainstream views. Something important is different this time, however. There has been much less tendency toward schism, much more of an inclination to examine and struggle with competing points of view.
Indeed, the new approaches that have gained the center of psychoanalytic interest in recent years not only have failed thus far to produce the usual splintering, but have actually contributed to healing some of the major fault lines that have plagued psychoanalysis for the past 4 or 5 decades: Interest in the recent work of Kohut and in the old work of the English object relations theorists has been considerable among Freudians and interpersonalists alike, and proponents of both have claimed these theorists for their own.
In his important book, Recent Developments in Psychoanalysis, Morris Eagle contrasts the developments that have been in the center of psychoanalytic concerns in recent years with the kinds of theoretical modifications that