24,656
edits
Changes
no edit summary
{{Top}}théorie du relation d'objet{{Bottom}}
=====Sigmund Freud=====
=====Object and Object Relation=====
[[Freud]] defined the [[object]] as that in which and through which the [[drive]] attains its aim.
In the years following [[Freud]]'s [[death]], the twin concepts of the "[[object]]" and the "object relation" attained a growing imporance importance in [[psychoanalytic theory]], and eventually a whole [[school]] of [[psychoanalytic theory]] came to be known as "[[object-relations theory]].
=====Object-Relations Theory=====(The main proponents of [[object-relations theory ]] were Ronald Faibairn, D.W. Winnicott and Michael Balint, all of whom were members of the Middle Group of the British Psycho-Analytical Society.) These analysts differed on many points, and hence [[object-relations theory]] covers a wide range of theoretical points of view. ---
These [[analyst]]s differed on many points, and hence [[object-relations theory]] covers a wide range of theoretical points of view.
=====Ego-Psychology=====
However, despite its lack of precise definition, [[object-relations theory]] can be contrasted with [[ego-psychology]] on account of its focus on [[object]] rather than on the [[drive]]s in themselves.
This focus on [[object]]s means that [[object-relations theory]] pays more attention to the [[intersubjective]] constitution of the [[psyche]], in contrast to the more atomistic approach of [[ego-psychology]].
=====Relation of Subject and Subject=====
His criticisms focus most on the way in which [[object-relations theory]] envisions the possibility of a complete and perfectly satisfying relation between the [[subject]] and the [[object]].
[[Lacan]] is opposed to such a view, arguing that for [[human]] [[being]]s there is no such thing as a "pre-established harmony" betrween "a need and an object that satisfies it."<ref>{{S1}} p.209</ref>
The root of the error is, argues [[Lacan]], that in [[object-relations theory]], "the object is first and foremost an object of satisfaction."<ref>{{S1}} p.209</ref>
=====Symbolic Desire=====In other words, by locating the [[object]] in the [[register]] of [[satisfaction]] and [[need]], [[object-relations theory]] confuses the [[object ]] of [[psychoanalysis]] with the [[object]] of [[biology]] and neglects the [[symbolic]] dimension of [[desire]].
One dire consequence that follows from this is that the specific difficulties which arise from the [[symbolic]] constitution of [[desire]] are neglected, with the result that '"mature object relations' " and ideals of '"[[genital|genital love]]' " are proposed as the goal of [[treatment]].
Thus [[object-relations theory]] becomes the site of a "delirious moralism."<ref>{{Ec}} p.716</ref>
=====Mother-Child Relation=====A closely related aspect of [[object-relations theory]] which [[Lacan]] also criticizes is its shift of emphasis from the [[Oedipal]] [[structure|triangle]] onto the [[mother]]-[[child]] [[dual relation|relation]], with the latter conceived of as a perfectly symmetrical, reciprocal relation.
In the fourth year of the [[seminar]], entitled "[[Object Relations]]," [[Lacan]] discusses not the British school of [[object---relations theory]] but the French school.
=====See Also====={{See}}* [[LacanBiology]]'s cricism of British * [[objectDesire]]* [[Drive]]||* [[Dual relation]]* [[Ego-relations theorypsychology]] is one of the main themes of the first year of his public * [[seminarFather]] (1953-4).||* [[Intersubjectivity]]* [[Kleinian psychoanalysis]]* [[Mother]]||* [[Oedipus complex]]* [[Psychoanalysis]]* [[School]]||* [[Structure]]* [[Subject]]* [[Symbolic]]{{Also}}
[[Category:Schools]]