로그인 | 클럽홈 | Koreadaily

혁신라이프코칭연수원 ICC

http://club.koreadaily.com/icclifecoach
전체글보기 클럽방명록  공동체 영상 정보   ICC 안내자료   도시와 자연의 영상 
 
  클럽정보
운영자 simonshin
비공개 개설 2016.07.20
인기도 596994
회원 79명
공동체 영상 정보 (82)
ICC 안내자료 (93)
ICP 안내자료 (74)
도시와 자연의 영상 (88)
신현근 박사 영상 강의 
정신분석의핵심개념 (11)
애도와 상실 (10)
Karen Horney의 정신분석 (74)
대인관계 정신분석 2 (35)
자아심리학 2 (34)
고전적 정신분석 (Freud) (168)
병리적 자기애와 공격성 (Kernberg) (60)
자기 심리학 (Kohut) (81)
임상 기법과 임상감독 (12)
인간성장이론 (9)
전이와 저항 (60)
클라인(Klein) 학파의 대상관계 이론과 그 역사 (42)
정신분열증 (1)
상호주관적 관계적 정신분석 (8)
강의안과 발제문 
현대정신분석의핵심개념 (5)
라이프코치양성 (23)
진단과평가 (17)
현대갈등이론 (13)
전인격적라이프코칭 (8)
회원자료 (5)
무의식적환상 (22)
현대정신분석의개입기법 (35)
정서적의사소통 (15)
정신분석기법과정신적 갈등 (23)
정신분석적사례이해 (26)
방어기제 (24)
정신분석의역사 (47)
고전적 정신분석 기법 (19)
신경증이론 (23)
대상관계이론의역사 (14)
자아심리학 (23)
현대정신분석 이론 (25)
페어베언의 성격 이론 (24)
성년기 발달 이론 (13)
위니코트의 대상관계 이론 (19)
ICC의 목표
추천링크
ICC YouTube
ICC 웹사이트
ICP, Seoul Korea
ICC 대표 신현근 박사
ICC의 네이버 블로그
ICC의 Moment 블로그
혁신라이프코칭학회 ICS
ICC의 Facebook Page
ICS의 Facebook Page
HeyKorean ICC
한국일보 블로그
ICP YouTube
 
TODAY : 610명
TOTAL : 962056명
대인관계 정신분석 2
작성자  simonshin 작성일  2018.07.18 09:05 조회수 432 추천 0
제목
 신현근 박사 강의안: 대인관계 정신분석의 탁월한 기여  
 

과목대인관계 정신분석

주제대인관계 정신분석의 탁월한 기여

내용신현근 박사 강의안

교재:

Stern, D. B, (2018). Introduction: Distinguishing features of Interpersonal perspectives in psychoanalysis. In D. B. Stern, & I. Hirsh (eds.) (2018). Further Developments in interpersonal psychoanalysis, 1980s-2010s: Evolving interest in the analyst’s subjectivity. London and New York; Routledge.

 

 

Introduction: Distinguishing features of the Interpersonal perspectives in psychoanalysis

1.       Overview

1.1.    The Interpersonal psychoanalytic literature, present since the writings of Harry Stack Sullivan in the early 1940s, was largely ignored or scorned by then hegemonic classical Freudian and Ego-psychological perspectives in the USA and was unknown to the respective Middle School and Kleinian and Object-Relations traditions.

1.2.    Greenberg and Mitchell (1983), both originally trained Interpersonally, situated Inter personal psychoanalysis under what has been called “the big tent” or the “umbrella” of a newer and more encompassing tradition which they called “Relational.”

 

2.       Development of personality

2.1.    Sullivan’s first most radical departure from the European imported Freudian Ego-psychology of his and later eras was rejection of Freudian drive theory as a way of understanding the essence of human personality development.

2.2.    For Interpersonal psychoanalysts uniquely, there are few universal developmental stages that can predict how anyone will develop.

2.3.    The primary content of the unconscious mind are the unformulated internalizations that motivate each of us to live the way we do, for better and for worse.

2.4.    Though historically internalized patterns may be brought to light through the unwitting and reciprocal nature of the examined transference-countertransference matrix, what actually happened developmentally can never be fully determined.

2.5.    In current times most psychoanalysts recognize that the culture each of us grows up with may have significant impact on psychological development in coordination with key individual relationships.

2.6.    Though interpersonal relationships and their internalization shape personality, we can never predict how this influence might evolve into any given personality structure for any unique individual.

 

3.       Subjectivity

3.1.    Sullivan’s implicit embrace of the models of Heisenberg’s principle of uncertainty and American psychology’s field theory situated the analyst in the position of a subjective co-participant in the analytic dyad.

3.2.    Though Sullivan himself never wrote about the idea of informative countertransference, the belief that the invariably subjectively participating analyst will inevitably and unwittingly influence each patient was articulated and elaborated by a generation of Interpersonalists who followed Sullivan.

3.3.    The concept of countertransference among most Interpersonal analysts evolved from its origins as a perceived problem in need of analytic resolution to a quality that, if embraced, could be used productively to further any analysis.

3.4.    The view that the psychoanalytic relationship is one between two subjectivities is largely accepted by contemporary analysts in the USA at this time.

3.4.1.Nonetheless, the radical field-theoretical notion, articulated most clearly by Stern, that the analyst is always a real actual participant in any analytic interaction holds sway more strongly in Interpersonal circles than even in many fairly like-minded perspectives within the Relational umbrella.

3.4.2.If nothing else, this can encourage Interpersonal analysts to look more carefully and authentically into their own actions and the impact that these have on each unique patient.

3.4.3.As well, it may encourage the prototypical Interpersonal analyst to inquire more readily into patient’s reactions to analyst’s participation.

 

4.       Hierarchy

4.1.     The belief that both analytic partners are wounded and thoroughly subjective led those who followed Sullivan to create an atmosphere of reduced hierarchy, a sharp contrast with what had been medical and/or scientific model of an objective and rational doctor, studying a subjective and irrational patient.

4.2.     Though fewer analyst today, largely for practical and financial reasons work analytically with schizophrenic, hospitalized patients, skepticism about the arrogance of excessive hierarchy still characterizes most Interpersonally identified analysts.

4.3.    Interpersonal value of viewing both analytic partners as full adults, no matter how troubled one partner may be, captures dramatically a view of analytic hierarchy that differs from any other tradition in our field.

 

5.       Conclusion

5.1.    Many of the ways of thinking have in relatively recent years been incorporated into other traditions.

5.1.1.In particular, many analysts who identifies themselves as Relational are not distinguishable from their Interpersonally identified colleagues.

5.1.2.This is often unrecognized because the Interpersonal influence on much of Relational thinking has not been sufficiently referenced.

5.2.    Interpersonal psychoanalysis exists as a tradition in and of itself.

 
 
 
 
 
이전글   다음글이 없습니다.
다음글   이전글이 없습니다.