Barratt Barnaby B
WITS Institute for Social and Economic Research, University of Witwatersrand, c/o The Heritage Stone House, 122 Virginia Ave., Parkmore (JHB), 2196, South Africa. E-mail:
Psychoanal Rev. 2018 Feb;105(1):31-50. doi: 10.1521/prev.2018.105.1.31.
This paper briefly reports on the current expansion of opportunities for clinical education in psychoanalysis in southern Africa, various regions of Asia, and Iran. It is a preliminary reconsideration of whether the disciplinary export of psychoanalysis is another egregious exercise in neo-colonialism, as contrasted with its possibly liberatory significance. The author argues that much of the discussion around the universality of many theoretical propositions needs to be reformulated. For example, the controversies over the Oedipus complex have typically been articulated in terms of the effects of specific social arrangements, familial structures, and styles of maternal and paternal functioning, rather than in terms of the universal-but with much cultural variation in its implementation-incest taboo. It is argued that dissemination of the psychoanalytic method (and the four coordinates that follow from it) may be desirable, but in ways the export of the hermeneutic assumptions of certain theoretical models is not.
本文简要报道了目前在非洲南部、亚洲各地区以及伊朗精神分析临床教育机会的扩展情况。这是对精神分析学科输出是否是新殖民主义的又一恶劣行径的初步重新审视,与其可能具有的解放意义形成对比。作者认为,许多围绕诸多理论命题普遍性的讨论需要重新阐述。例如,关于俄狄浦斯情结的争议通常是根据特定社会安排、家庭结构以及父母功能模式的影响来阐述的,而不是根据普遍存在但在实施中有很大文化差异的乱伦禁忌来阐述。有人认为,精神分析方法(以及由此产生的四个坐标)的传播可能是可取的,但某些理论模型的诠释学假设的输出方式则不然。