The interface between psychoanalytic theory and the practice of psychoanalysis.
In my opinion there is invariably an element of contamination in tandem with elucidation. The complex interface between the theoretical and practical sides of the analytic process requires a kind of "double bookkeeping." This results from our need to put our theoretical game plan or strategy on hold when the patient has the floor. This holding pattern prevails when we respond to the patient within the clinical interactional field. Once we take the lead for an exploration, or interpretation, our attention is focused on the impact of our question or comment on the patient. In turn, we need to respond to the patient's data without pigeonholing. As practicing analysts, we function as professionals without wearing a particular persona akin to the masks of antiquity. We are who we are and we operate in an ambience of resonance with the patient. Self-monitoring is a basic requirement for our work. None of us is free of foibles and peculiarities that the patient notices sooner or later. A degree of pluralism does not prevent us from using a theoretical frame of reference to enable us to have a flexible strategy geared to the individual patient. As noted earlier, in the quest for knowledge our assumptions regarding reality are constantly challenged. In that respect, psychoanalytic and scientific theories are more alike than different when we use them as bases for knowledge; they make it harder to tolerate those occasions when we somehow come to know what works without knowing factually why it works the way it does.(ABSTRACT TRUNCATED AT 250 WORDS)
Chrzanowski
G
G
D001288:Attention; D006801:Humans; D011369:Professional-Patient Relations; D011572:Psychoanalysis / Q000193:education; D011574:Psychoanalytic Theory; D011575:Psychoanalytic Therapy; D014167:Transference, Psychology