Szajnberg Nathan
New York, NY 10023, USA.
Bull Menninger Clin. 2011 Mar;75(1):1-20. doi: 10.1521/bumc.2011.75.1.1.
The author explores the presence and the essential tension between clarity and ambiguity as processes within our minds that become prominent in psychoanalysis. We learn from aesthetics and literary criticism that ambiguity can shade from taut disorganization to tolerating life's richness; clarity can range from a concrete fixity to a lucid grasp of one's state of mind. This article responds to Wallerstein's (1991) challenge to find common ground in psychoanalytic practice: We attempt this by avoiding metapsychological jargon and relying on more experience-near terms, such as clarity and ambiguity. The article also refers to Sandler's (1983) concept of implicit theory-that psychoanalysts use "preconscious, overlapping but not fully integrated models" (Sandler, 1988, p. 388)-in this case explicating how clarity and ambiguity are frequent but implicit phenomena in clinical work. Identifying these and the essential tension between them permits us to both improve training and identify our clinical efforts. The analyst's and analysand's tolerance of the tension between clarity and ambiguity facilitates increased structuralization and emotional robustness.
作者探讨了清晰与模糊作为我们思维过程中在精神分析里变得突出的两种状态及其本质张力。我们从美学和文学批评中学到,模糊可以从紧绷的混乱状态到容忍生活的丰富性;清晰可以从具体的固定状态到对自身心理状态的清晰把握。本文回应了沃勒斯坦(1991)在精神分析实践中寻找共同点的挑战:我们通过避免元心理学术语,依靠更贴近经验的术语,如清晰和模糊来尝试这一点。本文还提及了桑德勒(1983)的内隐理论概念——精神分析师使用“前意识的、重叠但未完全整合的模型”(桑德勒,1988,第388页)——在此阐述清晰和模糊在临床工作中是常见但内隐的现象。识别这些以及它们之间的本质张力使我们既能改进培训,又能明确我们的临床工作。分析师和受分析者对清晰与模糊之间张力的容忍有助于增强结构化和情感韧性。