On the Receiving End: Facilitating the Analysis of Conflicted Drive Derivatives of Aggression

Abstract

Freud's delay in giving aggression an instinctual role comparable to that of libido had clinical effects. Historically, this delay rescued psychoanalysis and its practitioners from destruction by Austria's anti-Semitic leadership. Since today the cultural threat to analysis is of quite a different nature, methods are proposed for making drive derivatives of aggression (and, in turn, libidinal drive derivatives) more accessible. Certain traditional methods have in significant degree distracted analysts from techniques that more effectively allow patients to bring conflicted derivatives of aggression into nonneurotic management through analytically facilitated ego growth. Approaches that move away from the concept of conflicted instinctual drives compound the basic resistance to analyzing defended drive derivatives of aggression. A recommendation is made for a two-tier choice of method: (1) a traditional technique for patients needing relatively less access to their aggression to achieve a satisfying outcome, and (2) close process attention for the analysis of analytic candidates and others for whom it is professionally advantageous to achieve greater insight into their aggressive potential. Recommendations are made regarding how the analyst can attain the neutrality necessary to conduct analyses of the latter sort without having to suffer narcissistic trauma while on the receiving end of verbally explicit, undisplaced drive derivatives of aggression.