The Economic Point of View and Defense

The energic propositions of psychoanalytic theory are perhaps among the most problematic of Freudian conceptualizations. In view of the nature of recent attention given the topic, it might be more appropriate to start with a "defense of economy" rather than the "economy of defense."

Perhaps the most pervasive problem of the economic point of view stems from a failure to accept that the division of psychoanalytic theory into five metapsychological points of view is an artifact. It was most recently stressed by Rapaport and Gill (1959) for essentially two purposes. The first was the hope of making discussion easier, and the second was to stress that no psychoanalytic discourse was complete—no description or explanation complete—that did not use all. Each of the "points of view" is permeated with the others. For example, the dynamic point of view has within it some of Freud's richest genetic (libidinal development), adaptive (object relations), structural, and economic propositions. Such divisions as are necessary for discussion are our divisions—not an inherent divisibility of psychic phenomena. When we single out one point of view, we must remain aware of the distortions we thus introduce. However, even taking these considerations into account, the economic point of view has certainly been the single most attacked formulation in the literature.

The exclusive use of economic concepts is justifiably criticized as a misuse of metapsychology. There can be no doubt that the economic view lends itself to glib and excessively simplistic explanation—if used alone. It has also been the set of concepts most frequently