A combination of new concepts and the enormous powers of computation now available have created the beginnings of a major new scientific revolution. It does not have to do with psychoanalysis per se, but with some basic assumptions among the sciences generally. The result is already showing in new visions of nature variously called “deterministic chaos,” “nonlinear dynamics,” or “sciences of complexity.” For the first time it is possible to study complex systems in process, over time. This paper, especially attending to issues of separation and integration, focuses on two components of the new understandings, fractal geometry (part of the mathematics of topology) and deterministic chaos (the tendency of nonlinear systems to oscillate toward and away from absolute chaotic disorganization). In a diverse group of intellectual disciplines, it is now possible to describe systems in operation in detail, in terms of nonlinear differential equations. From these, computer models of multiple variables in interaction can be produced. In turn, this allows experimentation on the models by altering variables. At this time, psychoanalysis can only use deterministic chaos and fractals metaphorically, but in the future, especially if psychoanalysis is seen in terms of process or organismic theory, it is likely that such models can be produced.
Get full access to this article
View all access options for this article.
References
1.
AbramsS. (1987). The psychoanalytic process: a schematic model. Int. J. Psychoanal., 68:411–452
2.
AbramsS. (1988). The psychoanalytic process in adults and children. Psychoanal. Study Child, 43:245–262
3.
BeresD. (1965). Structure and function in psychoanalysis. Int. J. Psychoanal., 46:3–63
4.
BrennerC. (1982). The Mind in Conflict.New York: Int. Univ. Press
5.
CastiJ. (1990). Searching for Certainty.New York: William Morrow
DahlH.KächeleH.DahlH.KächeleH., Eds. (1988). Psychoanalytic Process Research Strategies.New York: Springer
8.
FogelG. (1990). Review of James Gleick'sChaos. Bull. Assn. Psychoanal. Med., 29:89–94
9.
FreudS. (1891). On Aphasia.New York: Int. Univ. Press, 1953
10.
FreudS. (1900). The interpretation of dreams. S. E., 4 & 5
11.
FreudS. (1901). The psychopathology of everyday life. S. E., 6
12.
FreudS. (1913). On beginning the treatment (further recommendations on the technique of psychoanalysis I). S. E., 12
13.
FreudS. (1915a). Instincts and their vicissitudes. S. E., 14
14.
FreudS. (1915b). A Phylogenetic Fantasy: Overview of the Transference Neuroses, ed. Grubrich-SimitisI.. Cambridge, MA: Harvard Univ. Press, 1987
15.
FreudS. (1923). The ego and the id. S. E., 19
16.
FriedmanL. (1988). The Anatomy of Psychotherapy.Hillsdale, NJ: Analytic Press
17.
Galatzer-LevyR. (1978). Qualitative change from quantitative change: mathematical catastrophe theory in relation to psychoanalysis. J. Amer. Psychoanal. Assn., 26:921–935
18.
Galatzer-LevyR. (1986). What the analyst can learn from computer science. Presented at the Research Seminar, Chicago Psychoanalytic Institute, November 12, 1986
19.
Galatzer-LevyR. (1988). On working through: a model from artificial intelligence. J. Amer. Psychoanal. Assn., 36:125–151
20.
GleickJ. (1987). Chaos: Making a New Science.New York: Viking/Penguin
21.
GödelK. (1931). On Undecided Propositions in Formal Mathematical Systems. Lecture Notes by L. C. Kleene and J. B. Rosser.Princeton, NJ: Princeton Univ. Press, 1934
22.
GreenblattM.GreenblattM., Eds. (1953). The Frontal Lobes and Schizophrenia.New York: Springer
23.
GrossmanW. T. (1982). The self as fantasy: fantasy as theory. J. Amer. Psychoanal. Assn., 30:919–938
24.
GrossmanW. T. (1989). Hierarchies, boundaries, and representation in the Freudian model of mental organization. J. Amer. Psychoanal. Assn., 40:27–62
25.
GrossmanW. T.GrossmanW. T. (1969). Anthropomorphism: motive, meaning, and causality in psychoanalytic theory. Psychoanal. Study Child, 24:78–111
HoffmanI.HoffmanI. (1988). A scheme for coding the patient's experience of the relationship with the therapist (PERT): some applications, extensions and comparisons. In Psychoanalytic Process Research Strategies, ed. DahlH.KächeleH.DahlH.KächeleH.New York: Springer, 1988, pp. 67–98
28.
KoenigsbergH.KernbergO. F.KoenigsbergH.KernbergO. F. (1985). Development of a scale for measuring techniques in the psychotherapy of borderline patients. J. Nerv. Ment. Dis., 173:424–431
29.
KrisA. O. (1982). Free Association.New Haven, CT: Yale Univ. Press
30.
KuhnT. (1962). The Structure of Scientific Revolutions.Chicago: Univ. Chicago Press
31.
KuhnT. (1977). The Essential Tension.Chicago: Univ. Chicago Press
32.
LewinB. D. (1954). Sleep, narcissistic neurosis, and the analytic situation. Psychoanal. Q., 23:487–510
33.
LewinB. D. (1955). Dream psychology and the analytic situation. Psychoanal. Q., 24:169–199
34.
LiefH.LiefV.SpruiellV.LiefH.LiefV.SpruiellV. (1960). A psychodynamic study of medical students and their adaptational problems. J. Med. Ed., 35:696–704
35.
LoewaldH. W. (1970). Psychoanalytic theory and the psychoanalytic process. Psychoanal. Study Child, 25:45–68
36.
LoewaldH. W. (1971). The transference neurosis: comments on the concept and the phenomena. J. Amer. Psychoanal. Assn., 19:54–66
37.
LorenzE. (1963). Deterministic nonperiodic flow. J. Atmospheric Sci., 20:130–141
38.
LuborskyL.MintzJ.AuerbachA.ChristophP.LuborskyL.MintzJ.AuerbachA.ChristophP. (1980). Predicting the outcomes of psychotherapy: Findings of the Penn psychotherapy project. Arch. Gen. Psychiat., 37:471–481
39.
MandelbrotB. (1986). Fractals and the rebirth of iteration theory. In The Beauty of Fractals: Images of Complex Dynamical Systems, ed. PeitgenH.-O.PeitgenH.-O.. Berlin: Springer, pp. 151–160
SashinJ. (1985). Affect tolerance. A model of affect-response using catastrophe theory. J. Sociobiol. Struct., 8:175–202
57.
SchaferR. (1968). Aspects of Internalization.New York: Int. Univ. Press
58.
SchutzA. (1973). On multiple realities. In Collected Papers, Vol. 1. Evanston, IL: Northwestern Univ. Press, pp. 207–259
59.
SkardaC.SkardaC. (1987). How brains make chaos in order to make sense of the world. Behav. Brain Sci., 10:161–195
60.
SpruiellV. (1983). The rules and frames of the analytic situation. Psychoanal. Q., 52:1–33
61.
SpruiellV. (1987). Crowd psychology and ideology: a psychoanalytic view of the reciprocal effects of folk philosophies and personal actions. Int. J. Psychoanal., 69:171–178
62.
SpruiellV. (1989). The future of psychoanalysis. Psychoanal. Q., 58:1–28
63.
SpruiellV. (1990). The analytic situation: “sheltered freedom.” Annual Freud Lecture, Psychoanalytic Assn. New York, May 21, 1990
64.
StentG. (1975). Limits to the scientific understanding of man. Science, 187:1052–1057
65.
StentG. (1978). Paradoxes of Progress.San Francisco: Freeman
66.
StewartI. (1990). Does God Play Dice? The Mathematics of Chaos.Cambridge, MA: Basil Blackwell
67.
TellerV.TellerV. (1986). The microstructure of free association. J. Amer. Psychoanal. Assn., 34:763–798
68.
ThomR. (1975). Structural Stability and Morphogenesis.Reading, MA: Addison-Wesley
69.
ToulminS. (1982). The Return to Cosmology.Berkeley & Los Angeles: Univ. California Press
70.
TuringA. (1937). Computing machinery and intelligence. Mind, 59:433–460, 1950
WallersteinR. S. (1983). Reality and its attributes as psychoanalytic concepts: an historical overview. Int. Rev. Psychoanal., 10:125–144
73.
WallersteinR. S. (1986). Psychoanalysis as a science: response to new challenges. Psychoanal. Q., 55:414–451
74.
WallersteinR. S. (1988). Psychoanalysis, psychoanalytic science, and research—1986. J. Amer. Psychoanal. Assn., 36:3–30
75.
WeinshelE. M. (1990). Autonomy, freedom, and the psychoanalytic process. Presented at Panel, “Classics Revisited: Freud's Papers on Technique.” Fall Meeting, American Psychoanalytic Association, New York, December 8
76.
WhiteheadA. (1929). Process and Reality.New York: Free Press, 1978
