Already in the first decade of the 19th century and of its existence psychoanalysis has been under attack. Freud the psychoanalyst, the moralist, and the healer, and his new message to mankind, were under fire both ad rem and ad hominem: people attacked both the message and the messenger. In the recent decades, one of the most powerful challengers of Freud's legacy is Pittsburgh philosophy professor Adolf Gr nbaum. This paper is the author's answer to Gr nbaum's challenges, as presented at the 1998 IFPS Congress in Madrid. The author offers a rebuttal of a number of Gr nbaum's critical contentions about the legitimacy of psychoanalysis as a method, a theory of disorder, and a healing profession and analyzes the flaws in Gr nbaum's arguments.
Action and interaction, and emotion and thought as the inner wellsprings of action, play a central role in the lives of individuals, families, and society, spanning the continuum between everyday life and disorder. Until now, the narrative tradition has been the main methodology for portraying and formulating human action and interaction, and little has been written about the dramatic approach to life, disorder, and therapy. Since the essence of drama is action, dialogue, character, and emotion, it is time to give drama its due. The author proposes a methodological concept – dramatology – analogous to narratology, to highlight the dramatic method of investigating action and interaction in life, disorder, and therapy. Breuer and Freud presented both aspects of dramatology: dramatization in dream and fantasy, and dramatization in act, focusing on the person. This approach was elaborated by psychoanalysts with an interpersonal orientation, focusing on the person and speech as action. Dramatology is applied to exploring ongoing patient–therapist interactions as reality and as transference. Analyzing unconscious and latent dramatization in dream, fantasy, and enactment with free association is enhanced by utilizing clarification and confrontation, focusing on the manifest and mutually observable expressive form and style of actions and enactments, defenses and resistances, and the discharge and meaning of emotions. Dramatology puts forward a new paradigm for psychiatry, psychotherapy, and psychoanalysis.
Freud and the Interpersonal
(1997)
The goal of this communication is to uncover a hitherto unacknowledged interpersonal aspect in Freud: his implicit dyadic conception of symptom formation and interpretation, the competing claims of the object relation and the interpersonal schools notwithstanding. It is argued that Freud delineated a number of models of symptom formation: a drive, dream, and a dyadic, or relational model. I have renamed the dyadic model the love model? This has implications concerning areas of consensus and conflict among the various psychoanalytic schools of thought.
Love, Seduction, and Trauma
(1987)
Reality, Dream and Trauma
(1983)
Schreber's fantasy of turning into a woman to be fertilized by God and produce a new race of mankind was a major motive for Superintendent of Sonnenstein, Dr Guido Weber, to maintain that Schreber was a case of chronic and incurable paranoia and unfit for life in society, failing to see the difference between the concrete and the metaphorical. Schreber not only proved Weber wrong, but prophetically anticipated a number of issues in current awareness of gender psychology and gender roles in society. – In Schreber's system the two principal elements of his delusions (his transformation into a woman and his favored relation to God) are linked by the assumption of a feminine attitude towarh God. It will be our task to show that there is an essential genetic relation between these two elements. Otherwise we shall be like a man holding a sieve under a he-goat while some one else milks it.
By 1900, Freud had formulated an original and operational method of psychoanalytic treatment and research: the technique of free association. In 1912–1915 and later writings, he recommended it as a fundamental procedure and process, called the fundamental rule, in psychoanalytic therapy. In recent years, free association as a method has been variously misrepresented, misunderstood, and denied by some schools of psychoanalysis. This paper reviews the history of free associations and argues for upholding the continuity and relevance of Freud's fundamental methodology and for a renewal of interest in reciprocal, i.e., interactive and interpersonal, free association.