Refine
Language
Document Type
- Articles (390)
- Ebooks (38)
- Collections (35)
- Books (23)
- Reviews (21)
- Journals (2)
- Dissertations (1)
- Forewords (1)
Has Fulltext
- no (511) (remove)
Year of publication
- 1992 (511) (remove)
Critical Theory was born at a dark moment in world history. The Weimar Republic in Germany had given way to National Socialism, fascism reigned in Italy, and the Bolshevik revolution in Russia had begun its descent into the whirlpool of Stalinism. It became clear that >class consciousness< does not spring fully formed from economic crisis, as many Marxists had imagined, and that socialist democracy is far more difficult to achieve than even its enemies had believed. Nowhere was this more apparent than in Germany, wherein 1933 the proudest and strongest labor movement in history fell victim to a grotesquely reactionary regime. Democracy in every form seemed alarmingly fragile, too feeble and embattled to resist the >dictatorship of the corporals< that Max Weber had feared. This was the context in which the renowned >Frankfurt Institute< began its odyssey from traditional to critical theory.
Ego receptivity has been described as important for the psychotherapy process and as a characteristic of hypnosis (Deikman, 1974; Dosamantes-Alperson, 1979; Fromm, 1979). Receptivity also has been associated with a measure of absorption (Tellegen, 1981). In the first pilot study with 6 dance/movement therapy students, higher observer ratings of receptivity were associated with greater hypnotizability (r = .79, df = 4, p < .05, 2-tailed test). In the second pilot study, the correlation was replicated (r = .51, df = 12, p = .06, 2-tailed test) with 14 dance/movement therapy students. In the second pilot study, receptivity did not correlate with absorption. Receptivity and absorption, however, accounted for 54% of hypnotizability population variance in a step-wise multiple regression. Receptivity accounted for a unique part of the variance after the effects of absorption were removed. It was concluded that receptivity should be explored as a potential predictor of hypnotizability, and that a reliable scaled measure of receptivity should be developed.
Update 91: The myth of the new impotence—is the new liberated woman destructive to male sexuality?
(1992)
Review Emmy Gut:Productive and Unproductive Depression: Success or Failure of a Vital Process
(1992)
Masochism and fear of success in Asian women: Psychoanalytic mechanisms and problems in therapy
(1992)
The Psychoanalytic Envelope
(1992)
Analytic Time
(1992)
The Semiotics of Gender
(1992)
Afterword
(1992)
This article illustrates the varying transference meanings of defense analysis as conceptualized from a self psychology perspective. A case presentation is offered demonstrating the changing meanings of the analyst's defense interpretations resulting from the differing developmental contexts that organized the transference during the course of the analysis. It is emphasized that what the analyst interprets should be guided by an understanding of the primary developmental longings mobilized in the transference at any juncture.
There is substantial and often heated debate concerning the true nature of psychoanalytic expertise. The position is taken that no such characterization will ever attain anything approaching universal consensus. Conclusions that are drawn concerning the nature of psychoanalytic expertise are unalterably influenced by underlying fundamental assumptions concerning emotional development, psychopathology (when that term is even used), and what is needed for useful change to come about. This paper explores the nature of psychoanalytic expertise as it is conceptualized and understood within the three models articulated by Mitchell (1988) that have dominated psychoanalytic theorizing: the drive-conflict model, the developmental-arrest model, and the relational-conflict model. Special attention is paid to considerations of asymmetry and mutuality in the analytic relationship.