Ahumada J L
Int J Psychoanal. 1994 Aug;75 ( Pt 4):695-707.
This paper is an attempt to raise questions about certain underlying and implicit assumptions in some hermeneutic and narrative approaches to psychoanalysis. Starting from the view that Freud saw interpretation in the clinical setting as an attempt to unveil the analysand's psychic reality, it is argued that he envisaged that psychoanalysis aims to interpret what is real in the analysand's inner world--an empirical line of thought underpinned by the idea of analytic neutrality and an emphasis on the analysand's capacity to judge reality. By contrast, the tendency within the hermeneutic-narrative tradition is to demote psychic reality in favour of an emphasis on the analyst's capacity to interpret in order to help his analysand construct meaning. This approach may be said to put the analyst's words in the place of those of the Creator; in other words, it amounts to a 'verbal creationism', which the author argues is rooted in the idealistic philosophy of Hegel, Vico and Descartes and, further back, can be traced to the Book of Genesis--a conclusion causing the author to express some reservations.
本文试图对精神分析的某些诠释学和叙事学方法中潜在的和隐含的假设提出质疑。从弗洛伊德将临床情境中的解释视为揭示分析对象心理现实的尝试这一观点出发，本文认为他设想精神分析旨在解释分析对象内心世界中的真实情况——这一经验性的思路以分析中立性的理念和对分析对象判断现实能力的强调为支撑。相比之下，诠释学-叙事学传统的倾向是贬低心理现实，转而强调分析师的解释能力，以帮助其分析对象构建意义。可以说，这种方法将分析师的话语置于造物主的话语之位；换句话说，它相当于一种“言语创世论”，作者认为这种理论植根于黑格尔、维柯和笛卡尔的唯心主义哲学，再往前追溯，可追溯到《创世纪》——这一结论让作者表达了一些保留意见。
