Rubovits-Seitz P
George Washington University Medical Center, Washington, D.C.
J Am Psychoanal Assoc. 1988;36(4):933-59. doi: 10.1177/000306518803600404.
To cope with the obscure, complexly overdetermined, and unstable nature of unconscious meanings, Freud developed a pluralistic methodology that employs a wide variety of interpretive strategies and procedures. Conversely, Kohut proposed a radically abbreviated interpretive approach based on the single, subjective method of empathy. This report reevaluates Kohut's monistic interpretive methodology: (1) The principal features of Kohut's interpretive method are reviewed and evaluated. (2) Case material and interpretations from Kohut's final book are used to compare his unidimensional approach with the pluralistic methodology of traditional interpretation. (3) The epistemologic liabilities of Kohut's interpretive method are delineated and discussed. (4) Methodologically more appropriate strategies for improving clinical interpretation are presented.
为了应对无意识意义的晦涩难懂、复杂的过度决定论性质以及不稳定性，弗洛伊德发展出了一种多元方法论，该方法论运用了各种各样的解释策略和程序。相反，科胡特提出了一种基于单一主观共情方法的极端简化的解释方法。本报告重新评估了科胡特的一元论解释方法论：（1）回顾并评估了科胡特解释方法的主要特征。（2）使用科胡特最后一本书中的案例材料和解释，将他的一维方法与传统解释的多元方法论进行比较。（3）阐述并讨论了科胡特解释方法在认识论上的缺陷。（4）提出了在方法论上更合适的改善临床解释的策略。
