Colman Warren
Int J Psychoanal. 2010 Apr;91(2):287-303. doi: 10.1111/j.1745-8315.2009.00226.x.
This paper describes some similarities and differences between contemporary approaches to analysis as practised by 'Freudians' and 'Jungians' in London today. It aims to contribute to mutual understanding between different schools of analysis by showing how the analyst's interventions can only be understood in terms of the theoretical context from which they arise (cf. 'the analyst's preconscious', as discussed by Hamilton [1996]). A discussion of five key themes of Jungian theory is followed by an account of clinical work with a patient who enacted her inner world through the use of material objects brought to the consulting room, presenting difficult technical dilemmas concerning boundaries and enactment. The paper aims to shows how these Jungian themes influenced the analyst's response, particularly in relation to ideas of symbolic transformation, the unknowable nature of unconscious processes and the purposive orientation of the self towards wholeness and integration.
本文描述了当今伦敦的“弗洛伊德派”和“荣格派”在当代分析方法上的一些异同。其目的是通过展示分析师的干预措施只有从其产生的理论背景角度才能得到理解（参见汉密尔顿[1996]所讨论的“分析师的前意识”），为不同分析流派之间的相互理解做出贡献。在对荣格理论的五个关键主题进行讨论之后，本文讲述了与一位患者的临床工作，该患者通过带到咨询室的实物来展现其内心世界，呈现出了有关界限和展现的棘手技术难题。本文旨在展示这些荣格派主题如何影响分析师的反应，尤其是在象征转化、无意识过程的不可知性以及自我朝向整体性和整合的目的性取向等观念方面。
