The mind's ingrained need to reduce and resolve conflicting perspectives, it is argued, is at the root of struggles among “schools” of analytic thought. Focusing attention on the conflictual process in analytic work can help both patients and analysts appreciate the fundamentally complementary nature of mind and the value of embracing distinctive points of view.
Get full access to this article
View all access options for this article.
References
1.
Barzun, J. (1983). A Stroll with William James. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
2.
Beebe, B., & Lachmann, F. (1992). The contribution of mother-infant mutual influence to the origin of self- and object representations. In Relational Perspectives in Psychoanalysis, ed. N.J. Skolnick & S.C. Warshaw.Hillsdale, NJ: Analytic Press, pp. 61—81.
3.
Berlin, I. (1959). The Crooked Timber of Humanity: Chapters in the History of Ideas, ed. H. HardyNew York: Vintage Books, 1992.
4.
Brenner, C. (1976). Psychoanalytic Technique and Psychic Conflict . New York: International Universities Press.
5.
——— (1982). The Mind in Conflict. New York : International Universities Press.
6.
Dahl, H., Kächele, H. , & Thomä, H., EDS. (1988). The specimen hour. In Psychoanalytic Process Research Strategies . New York: SpringerVerlag, pp. 15—28.
7.
Emde, R.N. (1993). Epilogue: A beginning—research approaches and expanding horizons for psychoanalysis.Journal of the American Psychoanalytic Association41(suppl.):411—424.
8.
Fenichel, O. (1935). Psychoanalytic method. In The Collected Papers of Otto Fenichel. 1st series. New York: Norton, 1954, pp. 318—330.
9.
——— (1941). Problems of Psychoanalytic Technique, transl. D. Brunswick. New York: Psychoanalytic Quarterly.
10.
——— (1944a). Brief psychotherapy. In The Collected Papers of Otto Fenichel. 2nd series: New York: Norton, 1954, pp. 243—259.
11.
——— (1944b). Psychoanalytic remarks on Fromm's book Escape from Freedom. In The Collected Papers of Otto Fenichel. 2nd series: New York: Norton, 1954, pp. 260—277.
12.
Freud, A. (1936). The Ego and the Mechanisms of Defense. New York: International Universities Press , 1966.
13.
——— (1964). Links between Hartmann's ego psychology and the child analyst's thinking. In Psychoanalysis—A General Psychology: Essays in Honor of Heinz Hartmann, ed. R.M. Loewenstein, L.M. Newman, M. Schur, & A.J. SolnitInternational Universities Press, 1966, pp. 16—27. ——— (1965). Normality and Pathology in Childhood: Assessments of Development. New York: International Universities Press .
14.
——— (1980). “Insight” symposium. Bulletin of the Hampstead Clinic3:139—193.
15.
Freud, S. (1916). Some character-types met with in psycho-analytic work. Standard Edition14:311—333.
16.
——— (1921). Group psychology and the analysis of the ego. Standard Edition18:67—143.
17.
——— (1940a). An outline of psycho-analysis. Standard Edition23:144—207.
18.
——— (1940b). Splitting of the ego in the process of defence . Standard Edition23:275—278.
19.
Gray, P. (1994). The Ego and Analysis of Defense. Northvale, NJ: Aronson.
20.
Greenberg, J.R., & Mitchell, S.A. (1983). Object Relations in Psychoanalytic Theory. Cambridge: Harvard University Press.
21.
Grossman, W.I., & Simon, B. (1969). Anthropomorphism: Motive, meaning, and causality in psychoanalytic theory. Psychoanalytic Study of the Child24:78—114.
22.
Hartmann, H. (1939). Ego Psychology and the Problem of Adaptation. New York: International Universities Press , 1958.
23.
——— (1964). Introduction. In Essays on Ego Psychology: Selected Problems in Psychoanalytic Theory. New York: International Universities Press, pp. ix—xv.
24.
——— & Kris, E., (1945). The genetic approach in psychoanalysis. Psychoanalytic Study of the Child1:11—30.
25.
——— ——— Loewenstein, R., (1946). Comments on the formation of psychic structure . Psychoanalytic Study of the Child2:11—38.
26.
Holton, G. (1988). Thematic Origins of Scientific Thought: Kepler to Einstein. Rev. ed. Cambridge: Harvard University Press.
27.
——— (1993). Science and Anti-Science. Cambridge: Harvard University Press.
28.
——— (1996). Einstein, History, and Other Passions: The Rebellion against Science at the End of the Twentieth Century. Reading, MA: Addison-Wesley.
29.
Jacobs, T.J. (1997). In search of the mind of the analyst: A progress report. Journal of the American Psychoanalytic Association45:1035—1059.
30.
James, W.(1890). The Principles ofPsychology. 2 vols. New York: Dover, 1950.
31.
Kris, E. (1938). Review of The Ego and the Mechanisms of Defense by Anna Freud. In The Selected Papers of Ernst Kris. New Haven: Yale University Press, 1975, pp. 343—356.
32.
Loewald, H. (1960). On the therapeutic action of psychoanalysis. In Papers on Psychoanalysis. New Haven: Yale University Press, pp. 221—256.
33.
Loewenstein, E.A. (1994). Dissolving the myth of the unified self: The fate of the subject in Freudian analysis. Psychoanalytic Quarterly47:715—732.
34.
Loewenstein, R.M. (1966). On the theory of the superego: A discussion. In Psychoanalysis—A General Psychology: Essays in Honor of Heinz Hartmann, ed. R.M. Loewenstein, L.M. Newman, M. Schur , & A.J. SolnitNew York: International Universities Press, 1966, pp. 298—314.
35.
Manchester, W. (1992). A World Lit Only by Fire: The Medieval Mind and the Renaissance. Boston: Little, Brown.
36.
Masters, R.D., (1998). Fortune Is a River: Leonardo da Vinci and Niccolo Machiavelli's Magnificent Dream to Change the Course of Florentine History . New York: Plume.
37.
Mitchell, S. (1988). Relational Concepts in Psychoanalysis. Cambridge: Harvard University Press.
38.
——— (1997). Influence and Autonomy in Psychoanalysis. Hillsdale, NJ: Analytic Press.
39.
Modell, A. (1984). Psychoanalysis in a New Context. New York: International Universities Press.
40.
Opatow, B. (1989). Drive theory and the metapsychology of experience . International Journal of Psycho-Analysis70:645—660.
41.
Pais, A. (1986). Inward Bound: Of Matter and Forces in the Physical World. Oxford: Oxford University Press
42.
——— (1991). Niels Bohr's Times: In Physics, Philosophy, and Polity. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
43.
Pine, F. (1988). The four psychologies of psychoanalysis and their place in clinical work. Journal of the American Psychoanalytic Association36:571—596.
44.
Pizer, S.A. (1998). Building Bridges: The Negotiation of Paradox in Psychoanalysis. Hillsdale, NJ: Analytic Press.
45.
Pray, M. (1994). Analyzing defense: Two different methods. In Danger and Defense, ed. M. Goldberger.Northvale, NJ: Aronson, 1996, pp. 53—106.
46.
Rapaport, D. (1944). The scientific methodology of psychoanalysis. In The Collected Papers of David Rapaport, ed. M. GillNew York: Basic Books, 1967, pp. 165—220.
47.
——— (1954). Clinical implications of ego psychology. In The Collected Papers of David Rapaport, ed. M. GillNew York: Basic Books, 1967, pp. 586—593.
48.
Renik, O. (1998). The analyst's subjectivity and the analyst's objectivity . International Journal of Psycho-Analysis79:487—497.
49.
Rosenbaum, R. (1995). Explaining Hitler. The New Yorker, May1, pp. 50—70.
50.
Silverman, M. (1987). Clinical material. Psychoanalytic Inquiry7:147—165.
51.
Slavin, M.O., & Kriegman, D. (1992). The Adaptive Design of the Human Psyche: Psychoanalysis, Evolutionary Biology, and the Therapeutic Process. New York: Guilford Press.
52.
Stern, D. (1985). The Interpersonal World of the Infant. New York: Basic Books.
53.
Waelder, R. (1960). Basic Theory of Psychoanalysis. New York: International Universities Press.
54.
——— (1962). Psychoanalysis, scientific method, and philosophy . In Psychoanalysis: Observation, Theory, Application: Selected Papers of Robert Waelder, ed. S.A. Guttman.New York: International Universities Press, 1976, pp. 248—274.
55.
Young-Bruehl, E. (1988). Anna Freud: A Biography. New York: Summit Books.
