Boesky D
Int J Psychoanal. 1988;69 ( Pt 3):303-16.
This paper advocates the clinical and theoretic superiority of structural theory in accounting for our therapeutic efforts to influence the phenomena of intrapsychic conflict. The fit between structural theory and technique is epitomized in the equidistant posture of interpretations vis à vis the id, ego, and the superego. The therapeutic effect of interpretations thus viewed is to alter pathologic compromise formations in a manner which will ultimately result in structural change that will be observable by the reduction of psychic pain, the increase in opportunities for realistic pleasure, and the diminished need for punishment. The paper reviews certain recent disagreements about the relation between interpretation, insight, and change on the one hand and the nature of transference and resistance on the other. Arguments are presented against the view that positive and negative transference can be simply contrasted as helping or hindering the progress of analytic treatment. Finally, the terms 'structure' and 'structural change' are defined.
本文主张结构理论在解释我们为影响内心冲突现象所做的治疗努力方面具有临床和理论上的优越性。结构理论与技术之间的契合体现在解释相对于本我、自我和超我的等距姿态中。如此看来，解释的治疗效果是以一种最终会导致结构变化的方式改变病理性妥协形成，这种结构变化可通过心理痛苦的减轻、现实愉悦机会的增加以及惩罚需求的减少来观察到。本文回顾了近期在一方面解释、洞察和改变之间的关系，以及另一方面移情和阻抗的本质方面存在的某些分歧。文中提出了反对以下观点的论据：即正向和负向移情可以简单地对比为对分析治疗进程有帮助或有阻碍。最后，对“结构”和“结构变化”这两个术语进行了定义。
