Refine
Document Type
- Articles (108)
- Reviews (9)
- Event Reports (5)
- Books (3)
- Collections (1)
Report from Locarno
(1989)
Compares FROMM's position on psychoanalytic technique with that of other analysts. Of the 2 essential therapeutic factors, insight and experience of new relationships, FROMM only stresses the first. Yet, his insistence on direct relatedness implies that the patient's experience of a new relationship with the analyst would inevitably become the 2nd major factor in a FROMMian analysis. However, FROMM never discussed this in theoretical terms. FROMM's reference to nonerotic love would lead one to define his attitude as that of parental love, although FROMM would suspect this definition to encourage in the analyst a narcissistic self-image as a good parent.
Fromm’s distinction between authoritarian and humanistic conscience is summarized. Recent de-velopments in the fields of psychoanalysis, evolutionary biology and developmental psychology, leading to a reconceptualization of guilt, are reported. It is claimed that these developments were anticipated by Fromm. On the other hand, they can integrate Fromm’s concepts as regards onto-genesis, aggression and phylogenesis.
Fromm ha scritto molto poco sulla tecnica psicoanalitica, e le sue vedute vanno ricostruite soprattutto sulla base di fonti inedite e indirette. In questo lavoro viene condotto un confronto sistematico tra Freud e Fromm su dodici aspetti della tecnica. Fromm è d’accordo con Freud che lo scopo della psicoanalisi sia quello di rendere cosciente l’inconscio, ma amplia questo scopo fino al pieno recupero dell’inconscio. La differenza più netta rispetto a Freud riguarda il ruolo dello psicoanalista. Secondo Fromm, l’atteggiamento distaccato è il difetto più grave della tecnica di Freud. L’analista invece deve entrare in contatto col paziente con tutto se stesso e stabilire un rapporto >dal profondo al profondo<. Deve offrirsi come oggetto transferale, ma anche come persona reale. Le resistenze vanno affrontate molto attivamente. In questa modificazione della tecnica di Freud, Fromm considera Ferenczi e Sullivan come suoi precursori. La posizione di Fromm viene anche confrontata con sviluppi più recenti della psicoanalisi. Viene suggerito che, per il fatto di essere intensamente coinvolto a livello empatico ma di non vedersi come inevitabilmente coinvolto nella ripetizione del passato e di non rendere esplicita l’interazione terapeutica, Fromm appartine agli analisti caratterizzati dalla >partecipazione con< e non a quelli caratterizzati dalla >partecipazione a<.
Fromm wrote very little on psychoanalytic technique, and his views have to be reconstructed mainly from unpublished and indirect sources. In this paper, a systematic comparison between Freud and Fromm on twelve points of technique is carried out. Fromm agrees with Freud that the aim of psychoanalysis is that of making the unconscious conscious, but he extends this aim to the full recovery of the unconscious. Fromm differs most sharply from Freud on the role of the analyst. In his view, the detached attitude is the most serious defect in Freud’s technique. According to Fromm, the analyst should be his full self with the patient and aim at a >core-to-core< relatedness. He should offer himself as an object of transference, but also as a real person. Resistances should be approached very actively. In this modification of Freud’s technique, Fromm views Ferenczi and Sullivan as his precursors. Fromm’s position is also compared with more recent psychoanalytic developments. It is suggested that, by being intensely involved at an empathic level but by not seeing himself as inevitably enmeshed in the repetition of the past and by not making the therapeutic interaction explicit, Fromm belongs to the analysts characterized by >participation with< and not to those characterized by >participation in<.