A comprehensive examination of Kristeva's work from the seventies to the nineties.

Since its inception in the 1900s, the concept of countertransference has been mired in controversy. Psychoanalytic literature is divided on its utility, significance and its clinical value in psychotherapy. While some psychotherapists have advocated for the importance of therapists’ expertise in the comprehension and processing of countertransference dynamics in the treatment of sexually abused children, others see no value in competency in countertransference in trauma treatment of sexually abused children. The purpose of this article is to explore whether countertransference is (...) a useful therapeutic tool, or a hindrance in the treatment of sexually abused children. A qualitative paradigm, particularly interpretative phenomenology, was employed in this research to make meaning of the therapists’ experiences. The analysis of the results revealed the following five main themes that were supported by 18 superordinate themes. These themes reveal that therapists treating sexually abused children experience a myriad of feelings, including a) feeling emotionally overwhelmed, b) anger toward perpetrators and the need to protect and rescue their patients, c) the importance of social support and self-healing, d) feelings of empathy and identification with the client, and e) erotic countertransference. These findings reveal two contradictory findings. Firstly, they tell of variable utilisation of countertransference among participants and, secondly, they highlight a lack of application of countertransference in the treatment of sexually abused children. The implications of the current study are that there is a need to both highlight the importance of countertransference as a therapeutic tool and to incorporate it in the treatment of sexually abused children. (shrink)

Fulke Greville speaks of the will as inevitably divided between reason and passion. Shakespeare takes such a division seriously but, through Hamlet, he recognizes the possibility of reason and passion being united in a man's will and purpose.

Die psychoanalytische Debatte um unrepräsentierte psychische Zustände und die Grenzen der Behandelbarkeit schwerer seelischer Leiden ist theoretisch ebenso wie klinisch für die Psychoanalyse der Gegenwart zentral. Theoretisch gehaltvoll ist sie, weil das Verhältnis von verbalsprachlichen und infralinguistischen »Einschreibungen« sowie zwischen intrapsychischer und interpersonaler Erfahrung neu zu klären ist und einige enorm heterogen verwendete psychoanalytische Kernbegriffe zur Repräsentation neu zu sichten und voneinander abzugrenzen sind. Klinisch entscheidet sich an diesen Fragen, welche Leiden der psychoanalytischen Therapie zugänglich sind. Die vorliegende Arbeit will (...) einen sowohl theoretisch wie klinisch relevanten Beitrag zur Diskussion leisten. Sie geht aus von Sigmund Freuds Konzepten zu den unbewussten Vorstellungen, aus deren Perspektive die weiterführenden Gedanken neu gelesen und überprüft werden. Dabei stehen die Modelle von Green, Levine, Botella & Botella und Kristeva im Mittelpunkt. Sie kommt zu dem Ergebnis, dass es vorschnell ist, infralinguistische oder semiotische Erfahrungsschichten als »nicht repräsentiert« einzustufen. Vielmehr sollen die verschiedenen Darstellungsformen seelischer Zustände gewürdigt und aufeinander bezogen werden, die schließlich sprachlicher Repräsentation und so der Behandlung geöffnet werden. Ein ausführlicher Fallbericht und Hinweise auf die Behandlungsdynamik der Anorexia nervosa erläutern beispielhaft, wie das in der Kur gelingen kann. (shrink)

This paper examines the challenge that psychoanalytic theory cannot be refuted. It does so by considering the theory in its orthodox Freudian form, and in the main branches into which it can be divided ? the theory of Instincts, of Development, of Psychic Structure, of Mental Economics or Defence, and of Symptom Formation. The essential character of the generalizations and concepts of these branches will just be indicated; and we shall ask of each branch whether it is possible to refute (...) it. A considerable amount of scientific enquiry has been done into the concepts and generalizations of psychoanalysis. Relevant examples of these enquiries will be noted; and the question asked whether these scientific studies have in fact done anything to refute or support the various branches of psychoanalytic theory. The general upshot will be that the challenge is both important and a mistake. (shrink)

Angelaki, Volume 18, Issue 4, Page 63-79, December 2013.

Aristotle warned against a 'missing middle' in logic (Gk Mesos – middle; intermediate). This paper submits that one of the reasons why there has been no major breakthrough in macroeconomics since the financial crisis of 2007-08 has been a missing middle in mainstream micro-macro syntheses, constrained by partial and general equilibrium premises. It maintains that transcending this needs recognition that large and dominant multinational corporations between small micro firms and macro outcomes – while also influencing both – merit the conceptual (...) paradigm of mesoeconomics. Drawing on a range of uses of the concept, it relates this to reasons for 'too big to fail' and suggests implications for policies to gain accountability of big business, including how a meso dimension to input-output could yield transparency on risk-prone financial transactions by banks, and of corporations contributing to climate change. It also critiques misrepresentation of Walras and Pareto, as well as suggesting areas for research which could address, and potentially redress, 'missing middles' in mainstream micro-macro syntheses. (shrink)

This paper traces missing links in the history of economic thought. In outlining Hume's concept of 'the reflexive mind' it shows that this opened frontiers between philosophy and psychology which Bertrand Russell denied and which logical positivism in philosophy and positive economics displaced. It relates this to Hume's influence not only on Smith, but also on Schopenhauer and the later Wittgenstein, with parallels in Gestalt psychology and recent findings from neural research and cognitive psychology. It critiques Kant's reaction to Hume's (...) claim that one may assume but cannot prove cause and effect and how Samuelson's Foundations of Economic Analysis has been Kantian but wrong in claims for axioms that are universal truths. It illustrates how Samuelson's presumption that language and mathematics are 'identical' was as mistaken as the logical atomism of Russell and the early Wittgenstein, relates this to Kleinian splitting, denial and projective identification and suggests that recovery of greater realism in economics needs to regain links with such philosophy and psychology. (shrink)