Mayer E L
Int J Psychoanal. 1996 Aug;77 ( Pt 4):709-37.
The author has learned a great deal from the IJPA 75th Anniversary Issue, particularly regarding ways in which psychoanalysts across the world are consensually re-defining psychoanalysis as a quintessentially subjective and intersubjective endeavour. In summarising her response to the Issue, she addresses the ways in which its focus on psychoanalytic subjectivity and intersubjectivity helps to define the nature of psychoanalysis as a scientific endeavour. In addition, she identifies an area that she wished had been more developed in the Issue: some further specification of the cognitive and communicative processes that make for psychoanalytic subjectivity and intersubjectivity. She speculates that, as we continue our attempts further to understand those processes, we may find it valuable to look towards a body of research that is absent from consideration in the 75th Anniversary Issue (and is, for that matter, absent from serious and scientific consideration by psychoanalysts in general): research on mental effects currently considered 'anomalous', or outside the bounds of conventionally defined human mental function and capacity. She describes briefly some of that research in the context of its possible relevance to issues of psychoanalytic subjectivity and intersubjectivity. She takes up the specific relevance of that research to phenomena we have traditionally subsumed under categories of experience like intuition, empathic attunement and unconscious communication.
作者从《国际精神分析杂志》75周年特刊中学到了很多，特别是关于世界各地的精神分析学家如何一致地将精神分析重新定义为一种本质上主观且主体间性的努力。在总结她对该特刊的回应时，她探讨了特刊对精神分析主体性和主体间性的关注如何有助于界定精神分析作为一项科学努力的本质。此外，她指出了一个她希望在特刊中能得到更多发展的领域：对构成精神分析主体性和主体间性的认知和交流过程进行更深入的阐述。她推测，随着我们继续努力进一步理解这些过程，我们可能会发现参考75周年特刊中未涉及（实际上，精神分析学家总体上也未进行严肃科学考量）的一批研究是有价值的：关于目前被视为“异常”的心理效应的研究，即超出传统定义的人类心理功能和能力范围的研究。她简要描述了其中一些研究，并探讨了其与精神分析主体性和主体间性问题的可能相关性。她还阐述了该研究与我们传统上归类于直觉、共情协调和无意识交流等经验范畴下的现象的具体关联。
