Where is Psychoanalysis Going?
Where is Psychoanalysis Going?
复制标题
精神分析将走向何方？
DOI：
10.1177/014107688507800702
复制
发表时间：
1985
影响因子：
17.3
通讯作者：
C. Rycroft
中科院分区：
文献类型：
--
作者：
C. Rycroft
对于“精神分析向何处去”这个问题，有几种可能的答案。因为精神分析不是，当然，一个单一的东西或对象，只能在一个方向上运动，只能向上或向下，向前或向后或横向，而是一套思想，技术和活动，受到变化，发展，重新制定和重新评估，它不是存在于真空中，而是存在于社会，智力，道德环境中，本身也受到变化的影响-而且，确实，自1896年弗洛伊德首次使用“精神分析”一词来描述他在放弃催眠而赞成“自由联想”后开始发展的心理治疗形式以来，心理学发生了深刻的变化。精神分析开始发展至今已经有89年了，顺便说一句，在弗洛伊德和荣格的争吵之后，或者应该是荣格和弗洛伊德的争吵之后，已经有73年了？它经历了裂变，并开始同时向两个方向发展，任何希望接受分析训练的人都必须事先决定，通常是在证据严重不足的情况下，他是否会成为弗洛伊德主义者或荣格主义者。提到这两个日期，1896年和1912年，是为了引起人们的注意，即精神分析在我们大多数现在从事精神分析的人出生之前就开始了，并经历了第一次重大的分裂，并提出了对“精神分析向何处去？”这个问题的几个可能的答案中的两个。只取决于时间的流逝首先，精神分析，至少按照弗洛伊德的阐述和理解，正在从当代的现在走向历史的过去。如今，学生们想要了解精神分析的起源，弗洛伊德思想的起源，精神分析产生的知识和社会基础，导致弗洛伊德-荣格分裂的个人和哲学上的不相容，不再依赖弗洛伊德和荣格及其忠诚和忠诚的门徒留下的明显的党派性描述，而可以转向专业历史学家和传记作家的工作，他们关心的不是关于理想化英雄的神话和传说的传播，而是正确记录，挖掘丢失或隐藏的文献证据，并将思想和人物置于历史和社会背景中（Clark 1980，Sulloway 1979，雀麦1978，Steele 1982）。第二，既然开国元勋们和他们的直接继承者和门徒们正在进入历史，精神分析开始摆脱它早先的强迫性，重新进行过去的战斗，并摆脱这种倾向。
There are several possible answers to the question 'Where is psychoanalysis going?', since psychoanalysis is not, of course, a single thing or object only capable of movement in one direction of only going up or down, forwards or backwards or sideways but a set of ideas, techniques and activities subject to change, development, reformulation and reassessment, which exists not in a vacuum but in a social, intellectual, moral milieu that is itself subject to change -and which has, indeed, changed profoundly since 1896 when Freud first used the term 'psychoanalysis' to describe the form of psychotherapy he began to develop after he abandoned hypnosis in favour of 'free association'. It is now 89 years since psychoanalysis began to get going and, incidentally, 73 years since, following Freud's quarrel with Jung or should it be Jung's quarrel with Freud? -it underwent fission and started going in two directions at once, and it became necessary for anyone wishing to have a training in analysis to decide in advance, often on grossly inadequate evidence, whether he was going to become a Freudian or a Jungian. These two dates, 1896 and 1912, are mentioned to draw attention to the fact that psychoanalysis began and suffered its first major split before most of us now practising were born, and to suggest that two of the several possible answers to the question 'Where is psychoanalysis going?' hinge quite simply upon the passage of time. First, psychoanalysis, at least as Freud formulated and understood it, is moving out of the contemporary present into the historical past. Nowadays students who wish to know about the origins of psychoanalysis, about the genesis of Freud's ideas, about the intellectual and social matrix out of which psychoanalysis arose, about the personal and philosophical incompatibilities that resulted in the Freud-Jung split, are no longer dependent on the obviously partisan accounts left by Freud and Jung and their loyal and devoted disciples, but can instead turn to the work of professional historians and biographers who are concerned not with the dissemination of myths and legends about idealized heroes, but with getting the record straight, with unearthing lost or hidden documentary evidence, and with putting ideas and people into their historical and social context (Clark 1980, Sulloway 1979, Brome 1978, Steele 1982). Secondly, now that the Founding Fathers and their immediate successors and disciples are passing into history, psychoanalysis is beginning to extricate itself from its earlier compulsion to refight the battles of yesteryear and from the tend-