Editorial

In this issue, the Romanian Journal of Psychoanalysis brings together a series of clinical and theoretical reflections centered on the same fundamental question: how is the subject transformed when confronted with their own limits? The authors refer to limits of perception, intuition, psychic time, and the relationship with the other—whether that other is the analyst, the partner, or even an apparently empathic technological device.

In the first article, psychoanalyst Bogdan Cuc, in Alterity between epiphany and intuition, addresses intuition, the central theme of this issue, as a discreet, difficult-to-define, yet essential instrument in the analytic act. From Bion to Aulagnier, intuition is seen as a way of perceiving what is not yet representable, what exists “before” the word. In this article, the author succeeds in offering valuable clarifications regarding the way intuition assists us in encountering mystical phenomena. Thus, intuition suggests the idea of an intermediate space between analyst and patient in which meaning begins to take shape.

Psychoanalyst Virgil Ciomoş addresses the theme of psychic time as it appears in the relationship between knowledge, anamnesis, and the unconscious in the article The Function of anamnesis in Freudian psychoanalysis and its philosophical resonances. Beginning with Plato, passing through Kant, and arriving at Freud and Lacan, the article leads us into a meditation on the way self-understanding always involves a “conversion” of time: not merely the reconstruction of the past, but the revelation of that originary point that gives meaning to the entire internal history.

In the current clinical context, the emergence of remote practices raises new questions about presence and phobia. Psychoanalyst Roland Havas, in his article Remote sessions: a counter-phobic solution? proposes an analysis that invites an uncomfortable reflection: was distance a technical solution or a psychic one, a response to unformulated anxieties on the par