Barratt B B
Michigan Psychoanalytic Institute.
J Am Psychoanal Assoc. 1994;42(3):697-725. doi: 10.1177/000306519404200302.
The extant literature on psychoanalytic methodology scarcely addresses the question as to when, or under what conditions, the psychoanalyst's inner activities of theoretical formulation might be resistive to or facilitative of the psychoanalytic process. These notes are a preliminary exploration of what might be at issue in answering such questions. General problems concerning the status of theorizing in contemporary philosophy of science and in psychoanalysis are reviewed, and some elementary ways in which theorizing activity might govern the psychoanalyst's functioning are discussed. It is suggested that there are currently three radically divergent attitudes toward such activity, and these are depicted as the computational, the engaged, and the cadaverized psychoanalyst. It is argued that these attitudes foster or fixate the psychoanalyst's illusions, and are therefore resistive to the psychoanalyst's radical responsibility to interrogate free-associatively his or her own suppositions and discursive maneuvers.
即精神分析师进行理论构建的内在活动在何时或何种情况下可能会阻碍或促进精神分析过程。这些笔记是对回答此类问题时可能涉及的问题进行的初步探索。回顾了当代科学哲学和精神分析中关于理论化地位的一般问题,并讨论了理论化活动可能影响精神分析师功能的一些基本方式。有人认为,目前对这种活动存在三种截然不同的态度,分别被描述为计算机化、投入型和僵化型精神分析师。有人认为,这些态度助长或固化了精神分析师的幻想,因此不利于精神分析师以自由联想的方式审视自己的假设和话语策略的根本责任。