Response to Commentaries by Mitchell and by Butler

This paper is a response to a discussion of my work by Stephen Mitchell and Judith Butler. I treat a number of issues raised by those writers. Chief among the issues raised by Mitchell are the status of drive theory and the interrelation of the intersubjective and the intrapsychic. I clarify that, although I do value the paradoxical tension between opposites in relation to many binaries, I do not aim to preserve Freud's instinct theory alongside current views of object relations. However, I do believe that intersubjectivity theory should posit an inherent conflict in the mind that is not simply a reflection of object relations, that is, experiences with outside others. Rather, the inherent difficulty in recognizing the other, and the attendant problems of splitting and destructiveness, are crucial aspects of intersubjective theory. Precisely for this reason I reject Butler's claim that my theory does not see destruction and breakdown as essential to the movement of recognition. I see my own intentions as closer to those expressed by Butler's own statements about the relation of destruction and recognition. However, the faith that the clinical endeavor can overcome destructiveness may be the real point of contention. Another important difference relates to the question of the triad and the third. I accept Butler's view that I emphasize the dyad over the triad and attempt to take up some of her questions about triadic relations and the nature of thirdness.