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 assurance of “being able to say everything” during the psychoanalytical process corresponds to the psychoanalytic setting. On the other hand it is the same setting that provides the psychoanalyst with the possibility of listening “with free-floating attention”. Here the question is, whether the analyst can listen to everything that is said to him, especially when it comes to patients who are victims of extreme violence. How far can the analyst avoid being captive of the adaptive function of uncertainty and how far can he keep his neutrality? Perhaps the answer is until experiencing shame, as Sylvia Amati Sas proposes. According to her, shame is a sign that the ego gives to oneself so that the uncertainty does not go over a certain limit. This is related to the subject's being conflictual (conflictualité), to her project of becoming subjective and her need to protect her investment for the future. At the same time, Catherine Malabou's concept of “plasticity” (plasticité) is also important. Contrary to a flexible being, the plasticity allows the individual to endure pressure up to a certain point, this point puts an absolute limit to abuse, forms a threshold that would respond to being exposed to pressure and be broken. There is a limit to the way communities and individuals can endure oppression.
In 2013, the Gezi revolt has been the answer of the society “enough is enough” to the question “how far?”