Bas-relief, copyright Patrick Jelin By Philippe Réfabert *
All discoverer may shrink the novelty it was produced and " prefer "A reassuring development for the hard consistency of his approach. Freud saw the instinctual monism in 1919, evoking the struggle ent re a single drive and external influences that divert the lifetime of its purpose - to escape the tension in life - but as soon renounces to substitute this figure the more consistent "common sense" of two instincts, Eros and death in conflict. Such a substitution - the struggle between two impulses instead of a fight between a drive and context - would not be without consequence on the clinical psychoanalytic ...
... In other words, it "requires" a new paradigm ...
In this perspective the first part of the device to change is the fundamental concept of the drive. For the reason that Freud with the proposal of the drive - self-referential concept that involves the value of the limit - was in fact for granted at birth to the child the opportunity to establish itself a boundary between inside and outside. C is the concept of instinct in fact implies discontinuity, it is this value from the outset. Therefore the question was originally supposed resolved once and for all, as is the question of sacrifice in the Catholic dogma - as it was bound u once and for all.
Oedipus pays the price for my transgression jeure he is doing when it comes into interlocution with the monster instead of killing him, offering to his question and thus ignoring the fact that economy of murder , death, the fundamental discontinuity. - Freud, Totem and Taboo when he concludes by quoting Goethe, "In the beginning was the deed" is a welcome counter his own choice of Oedipus as a hero concept.
The blind spot of where I was able to think the ego, this is the suspense of thinking, then "laundered" and everything can be explained. The hubris of Oedipus culminates in his reply when he puts words where there is no word of any value. If the answer is true, the Sphinx disappears from the scene, if it is wrong, the monster kills the visitor. The answer of Oedipus is an affront to the unrepresentable that guarantees representable. Oedipus profane, abolished the discontinuity that the rite commemorated.
When he thinks instead of acting, it allows the deadlock on the o riginaire. He then, as Hölderlin says, "an eye too" and invited the singers of the Enlightenment, from Voltaire to Hegel, to believe - belief pegged to facts that their experience confirms - that man can do without Darkness; addition, there is nothing between them and the Clarity.
The hubris of modern man is inaugurated by a mythical hero and sees renewed by a god. Oedipus, a scientific mind, paid for all. Jesus Christ, is deemed to be a god by Paul incarnate, through his sacrifice has redeemed all men. For the price paid by a tyrant and a divine being all men have been freed of debt initially incurred.
The loss of reason and no longer required, with Oedipus, it could keep its head. With Jesus Christ, the indecision was over formatting : death and resurrection, the true God was manifested in His Truth, and the name of this truth, we could enslave, convert, or kill other men. Uncertainty in the revealed text was erased and the renewal and enrich the interpretation of each generation as deployment of Revelation, which is Jewish tradition, were no longer allowed, but rather condemned because the truth was established, once and for all, and the Study and renewal of the Act relegated to a neurotic activity.
He followed that work on the origin s e silent stored and forgotten. The weather could finally pick up and deliberately off progress without sacrificing the celebration ritual of the unrepresentable, a celebration so expensive in resources of all kinds.
Corrida, copyright Alain Rothstein
This inclusion, once and for all, the discontinuity in the concept of drive has very important consequences in the clinic. The first is that it promotes the belief that we can explain everything, we can always trace the effect to the cause and think that the curve of any phenomenon is differentiable. Freud, who is the guardian of the concept of discontinuity cons Fliess and Jung and includes it in its basic concept, the drive, rules out, for inclusion of this principle, the discontinuity of any problem. He retired from full dynamic as it is originally acquired. The concept of drive focuses on intrapsychic and promotes forgetfulness of the inter-psychic. Thus the pathology of borderline has been put down to an archaic instinctual rather than being thought of as the effect of early default port and holding. Winnicott with the concepts of holding and handling, Lacan with those of symbolic and imaginary, have provided the tools to "working" figures that Freud had not distinguished and had, in her haste, similar to figures within the discharge.
When the figure of the discontinuity was sealed in the foundations of Freud's theory, hidden in the definition of Grundbegriffe, the basic concept, it could claim to hold the clinic and practice. But this practice could not be therapeutic when she was still marked by a thought which involved resolved the issue of separation of parent and child and did not account for intersubjectivity, "properties" that remained undivided between parent and child.
Invitation to renunciation of instinctual satisfaction (the term "waiver" is a word that appears most often in Freud's work) was one of the clinical consequences of this begs the question that gave the child From the outset, the ability to build itself a field originally open and closed, who saw him as a field where the ego instincts, guardians of life, challenged the seducer internal sexual drive what the preeminence he claimed.
In this perspective, the analyst gave up ... exhorted and analyze the patient to pay its outstanding account of a lack of repression of incestuous and murderous impulses of which he was convicted; invited him basically assuming the problem solved.
A second notable result was the fact that such a theory which assumed resolved once and for all, the question of the boundary between outside and inside, left outside its jurisdiction, banished from his empire, all those for which this limit was problematic. The figure of psychosis was pushed out the walls and not only that which is crazy, but the psychotic core in all of us.
One consequence of this petition in principle be observed even today in speeches qu'avalisent Institutions claiming to guardians of orthodoxy. To maintain the idealization of Freud and respect the letter of his teaching, the heralds of the Institution of psychopathology observed in contemporary figures differ from those described by Freud. These observers say
in effect to the environment that they no longer matter, or very rarely, as with hysteria or Emma Dora the present (cf. S. Freud & J. Breuer, Studies on Hysteria ) but the majority of cases they see falls of pathology narcissistic pathology of the limit.
Another way of looking at things is that the initial speech of Freud was struck by a pathology of continuity, ie that the discharge of the original, which carried out an inclusion of the term, an amalgam of normal and pathological, a frenzy to explain, was the childhood disease of psychoanalysis in its various forms. If
practitioners today observe so many cases that show such a boundary condition is that the concepts and notions that researchers such as Dr. Balint, D. Winnicott, J. Lacan, N. Abraham H. Searles and others have developed, have transformed the look and practitioners relate to the clinic. For the contemporary clinical and theory are in agreement, it was necessary to recognize that the drive dualism was now almost an epistemological interest.
instinctual monism as Freud once glimpsed for divorce for "reasons of common sense" in 1919 in Beyond the Pleasure Principle is the theoretical revolution he left to his successors to do not.
* Philippe Réfabert, psychoanalyst, is the author of From Freud to Kafka Calmann-Lévy, Paris, 2001.
