The art of psychoanalysis In the more than interesting blog
Jony Benítez (
Things your psychiatrist never told you, what title fabulous) we read and discussed a few weeks ago asking
entry discussion and suggestions about psychoanalysis. Returning to the comment that there did, we say that our relationship with psychoanalysis is somewhat ambiguous. We have been very interested, we have studied something and we have experienced as a patient, a little. As Freud said (because to speak of psychoanalysis is to cite the Father), we find both a
method, a theory
and
psychotherapeutic technique. And we believe it is important to note what aspect we are referring when we speak of psychoanalysis.
The psychoanalytic theory, Freud's first, then completed / updated / Distorted by different currents (which stands, at least in our environment, Lacanian psychoanalysis) seems very interesting. An impressive theoretical construction of great brilliance, but we believe suffers from certain problems. As noted
and
Villagrán Luque in his essential book descriptive psychopathology: new trends , psychoanalytic theory can not be considered scientific because, following Popper's thesis is not falsifiable
. That is, I can not point an experiment in which some of its possible results contradict the theory and prove false. The theory of gravitation is scientific because it is falsifiable, that is, if the weight pulling Galileo from the Tower of Pisa fall rather than stay afloat, the theory of gravitational collapse. Psychoanalysis, however, attribute the result to some unconscious resistance
weight. Psychoanalysis is able to interpret any result (and its opposite) within their own parameters, in addition tends to treat the same epistemological level facts and interpretations of events, leading, we may say so, to build castles
(theoretical)
in the air.
Still, that does not meet the parameters of positive science does not mean that a theory is not interesting or useful. Neither anthropology and sociology are positive sciences (psychology possibly not when it fails to observe rats and is engaged in human subjects). Psychoanalytic theory is not predictive (as it should be science), but postdictiva . Predicts nothing but explains everything. And this is not a vice but a virtue. Although originally emerged within psychoanalysis objectivist philosophy , valued from a constructivist more consonant with the philosophical issues associated with postmodernism, it becomes extremely useful to provide potential narratives about the patient's discomfort, which may be potentially useful in relieving the discomfort (or maybe not.)
As method of interpretation, their validity is also in our opinion, incalculable. His performances (not understood in terms of true / false but, in postmodern parameters that we mentioned before, useful / useless) can be of great value to understand different phenomena, to provide any stories, any stories about the very issues diverse, ranging from the discomfort of a subject, the message of a work of art, the development of a civilization or the intricacies of a sociocultural system ... It's funny to hear a professional guild enfáticamete comment about the death of psychoanalysis, as this is a prime tool in much of the so-called social sciences (with limiting psychiatry as well as with the neurology, so dear to many of our peers). Quoting Mark Twain, psychoanalysis might say apparently the news of my death were slightly exaggerated ...
And thirdly, psychoanalysis is a technique
psychotherapy. One technique that has had enormous and varied developments, up to pervade many different types of psychotherapies: expressive, supportive, brief, etc., Etc. But we would stop in the classical model: the
orthodox psychoanalysis, as conceived by Freud, Lacan and slightly modified it is done today in various fields private. We believe in its usefulness for self-knowledge (of course in years talking about you, for you and you, no one knew more), with the question of whether a therapy is only for narcissistic or if one becomes narcissistic during development. But we do not have much faith on their effectiveness (although is true that at this point in our life, we have no clear efficacy of psychotherapy in general, not individual cases where something makes sure, but its reason for being social
patch, as he claims, or so we understand ourselves, Guillermo Rendueles in a very interesting interview
).
Jay Haley, in his landmark book (which any professional should know) entitled
power tactics Jesus Christ, devoted a chapter to the art of psychoanalysis, and it has always seemed very revealing (ironically and incisive, but telling). We turn to summarize below:
Haley says that in any human relationship, each person is constantly maneuvering to move into top position on the other person in the relationship, to be above . This "top position" does not necessarily refer to the social, economic or intellectual, but is a relative term that is defined and redefined continuously throughout the process of a relationship.
Psychoanalysis is a psychological dynamic process that involves a patient and a psychoanalyst. During this process, the patient apparently assumes that the analyst is above, but tries desperately to put below, while the psychoanalyst, for his part, insists that the patient remain below to supposedly help you learn to stand above . The frame of psychoanalytic therapy get the top position of the analyst is almost unbeatable: it is the patient who voluntarily go for help and also paid for it. But throughout the therapy, patients can become very skillful plays to develop ingenious placed on top.
position behind the couch the analyst that makes everything he acquired an exaggerated importance, since the patient has no way to determine the effects produced on it. The weapon of silence belongs to the moves of neglect or refuse to battle ": the analyst does not return the blows of the patient, who only feel guilt for having beaten, along with the uncomfortable suspicion that homelessness is calculated. Often a patient discover the effectiveness of the play of silence and try to use it, try immediately ends when you realize you're paying a large sum of money to be silent on the couch. There are also exercises designed to bring the analyst doubts the patient, which prompted to the position below. These maneuvers are based on responses as simple as "uh?" or "I wonder if you really feel that ...". The question is linked to "the play of the unconscious" which is the most effective way to make the patient feel unsafe. The analyst notes that unconscious processes operating in it and that is deceived if you think you really know what it says. When the patient accepts this idea, you can only trust that the analyst "to help discover" what they really mean, being in the position below.
The analyst notes the importance of free association and dreams, leaving back to patients in the lowest position since it is not possible to maneuver to be above when combined freely or have dreams, and that inevitably appear more absurd comments. All attempts to lower the analyst are interpreted as resistance to treatment: If it fails, the fault lies with the patient. When the patient begins to be critical of the analyst and threatens to open confrontation, other moves into action, and focus on his past. Immediately, will be devoted to examining the patient's childhood, it Sinque have noticed that the issue has changed.
One of the limitations of the psychoanalytic play appears with psychotic patients. They do not go willingly, not interested in money, do not accept the couch and structure of the analytic situation can become irritated. When used in analytical moves against you, it is possible that psychotic-office smash and kick the psychoanalyst in the genitals (this is called "failure to establish transfer"). Psychotic plays this bother the current analyst, who usually avoided in these patients.
This ability of analysts in the stand-by- above brings with it special problems when competing analysts in meetings of associations. In no other group of persons are displayed as complicated forms to obtain superiority. Most of the fighting takes place in a rather personal level, but the manifest content reveals repeated attempts to prove who was closest to Freud and can cite more often, and who can confuse as many people with bold extension of the Freudian terminology.
The moves of the analyst and patient appear to shape the course of a typical treatment, although individual cases vary with the maneuvers used by each patient (called " symptoms" by the analyst when they are plays that no sane person would use). The patient begins its analysis by asking for help (position below) and immediately try to place below the analyst by showing his admiration. When the patient is placed continuously below shows malicious, insulting and threatening to leave the analysis. The analyst remains silent or react impassive and impersonal. Frustrated at seeing their aggression, the patient gives up and returns to the analyst control of the situation. The analysis will oscillate between praise and challenges to the analyst and patient is improving in the implementation of its moves. Still, if the analyst knows his job can get a position advantageous over many years. Finally, something remarkable happens: the patient tries to stand above once more and the analyst puts it below, but this time cares . No longer interested in which of the two control the situation, ie cured. The analyst then fires him, anticipating that the patient announces his withdrawal. And this is done the difficult art of psychoanalysis.
And here the summary of the text of Haley. Anyway, when attacking psychoanalysis from other psychotherapeutic approaches, vaguely recalls a few words of Javier Krahe referring to Catholicism, we might paraphrase as follows: Man, do not create one in psychoanalysis, which is the true religion, to believe in a false.
As Haley himself said in another chapter of the book, about the farmacologicismo that dominated with an iron fist (and no velvet glove) a few years after writing the work we have summarized (and to this day): now I miss those psychoanalysts, at least listen to their patients ...
With family 
Mural 
