Difference between revisions of "Defence"
(The LinkTitles extension automatically added links to existing pages (https://github.com/bovender/LinkTitles).) |
|||
| (13 intermediate revisions by 2 users not shown) | |||
| Line 1: | Line 1: | ||
| − | + | {{Topp}}défense{{Bottom}} | |
| − | defence at the heart of his theory of neurosis. | + | ==Sigmund Freud== |
| + | From his earliest works, [[Freud]] situated the [[concept]] of [[defence]] at the heart of his [[theory]] of [[neurosis]]. | ||
| − | the ego to certain interior stimuli which the ego perceives | + | [[Defence]] refers to the reaction of the [[ego]] to certain interior stimuli which the [[ego]] perceives as dangerous. |
| − | Although Freud later came to argue that there were different ' | + | ==Defense Mechanisms== |
| + | Although [[Freud]] later came to argue that there were different "mechanisms of defence" in addition to [[repression]],<ref>{{F}} ''[[Works of Sigmund Freud|The Question of Lay-Analysis]]'', 1926d. [[SE]] XX, 179</ref> he makes it clear that [[repression]] is unique in the [[sense]] that it is constitutive of the [[unconscious]]. | ||
| − | of | + | [[Anna Freud]] attempted to classify some of these mechanisms in her book ''[[Anna Freud|The Ego and the Mechanisms of Defence]]'' (1936). |
| − | + | ==Jacques Lacan== | |
| + | [[Lacan]] is very critical of the way in which [[Anna Freud]] and [[ego-psychology]] [[interpret]] the concept of [[defence]]. | ||
| − | + | He argues that they confuse the concept of [[defence]] with the concept of [[resistance]].<ref>{{Ec}} p. 335</ref> | |
| − | and | + | For this [[reason]], [[Lacan]] urges caution when discussing the concept of [[defence]], and prefers not to center his concept of [[psychoanalytic treatment]] around it. |
| − | + | ==Resistance== | |
| + | When he does discuss [[defence]], he opposes it to [[resistance]]; whereas [[resistances]] are transitory [[imaginary]] responses to intrusions of the [[symbolic]] and are on the side of the [[object]], defences are more permanent [[symbolic]] [[structure]]s of [[subjectivity]] (which [[Lacan]] usually calls [[fantasy]] rather than [[defence]]). | ||
| − | + | This way of distinguishing between [[resistance]] and [[defence]] is quite different from that of [[other]] [[school]]s of [[psychoanalysis]], which, if they have distinguished between [[defence]] and [[resistance]] at all, have generally tended to [[regard]] [[defence]]s as transitory phenomena and [[resistance]]s as more [[stable]]. | |
| − | defence | + | ==Desire and Defence== |
| + | The opposition between [[desire]] and [[defence]] is, for [[Lacan]], a [[dialectic]]al one. | ||
| − | + | Thus he argues in 1960 that, like the [[neurotic]], the [[pervert]] "[[defends]] himself in his [[desire,]]" since "desire is a defence (''défense''), a [[prohibition]] (''défense'') against going beyond a certain [[limit]] in ''[[jouissance]]''.<ref>{{E}} p. 322</ref> | |
| − | + | In 1964 he goes on to argue: | |
| + | <blockquote>"To desire involves a defensive [[phase]] that makes it identical with not wanting to desire."<ref>{{S11}} p.235</ref></blockquote> | ||
| − | + | ==See Also== | |
| + | {{See}} | ||
| + | * [[Ego-psychology]] | ||
| + | * [[Fantasy]] | ||
| + | || | ||
| + | * [[Neurosis]] | ||
| + | * [[Perversion]] | ||
| + | || | ||
| + | * [[Repression]] | ||
| + | * [[Resistance]] | ||
| + | || | ||
| + | * [[Structure]] | ||
| + | * [[Subject]] | ||
| + | || | ||
| + | * [[Treatment]] | ||
| + | * [[Unconscious]] | ||
| + | {{Also}} | ||
| − | |||
| − | + | ==References== | |
| + | <div style="font-size:11px" class="references-small"> | ||
| + | <references/> | ||
| + | </div> | ||
| − | + | [[Category:Freudian psychology]] | |
| + | [[Category:Psychoanalysis]] | ||
| + | [[Category:Treatment]] | ||
| + | [[Category:Practice]] | ||
| + | {{OK}} | ||
| − | + | __NOTOC__ | |
| − | |||
| − | |||
| − | |||
| − | |||
| − | |||
| − | |||
| − | |||
| − | |||
| − | |||
| − | |||
| − | |||
| − | |||
| − | |||
| − | |||
| − | |||
| − | |||
| − | |||
| − | |||
Latest revision as of 05:14, 24 May 2019
| French: défense |
Sigmund Freud
From his earliest works, Freud situated the concept of defence at the heart of his theory of neurosis.
Defence refers to the reaction of the ego to certain interior stimuli which the ego perceives as dangerous.
Defense Mechanisms
Although Freud later came to argue that there were different "mechanisms of defence" in addition to repression,[1] he makes it clear that repression is unique in the sense that it is constitutive of the unconscious.
Anna Freud attempted to classify some of these mechanisms in her book The Ego and the Mechanisms of Defence (1936).
Jacques Lacan
Lacan is very critical of the way in which Anna Freud and ego-psychology interpret the concept of defence.
He argues that they confuse the concept of defence with the concept of resistance.[2]
For this reason, Lacan urges caution when discussing the concept of defence, and prefers not to center his concept of psychoanalytic treatment around it.
Resistance
When he does discuss defence, he opposes it to resistance; whereas resistances are transitory imaginary responses to intrusions of the symbolic and are on the side of the object, defences are more permanent symbolic structures of subjectivity (which Lacan usually calls fantasy rather than defence).
This way of distinguishing between resistance and defence is quite different from that of other schools of psychoanalysis, which, if they have distinguished between defence and resistance at all, have generally tended to regard defences as transitory phenomena and resistances as more stable.
Desire and Defence
The opposition between desire and defence is, for Lacan, a dialectical one.
Thus he argues in 1960 that, like the neurotic, the pervert "defends himself in his desire," since "desire is a defence (défense), a prohibition (défense) against going beyond a certain limit in jouissance.[3]
In 1964 he goes on to argue:
"To desire involves a defensive phase that makes it identical with not wanting to desire."[4]
See Also
References
- ↑ Freud, Sigmund. The Question of Lay-Analysis, 1926d. SE XX, 179
- ↑ Lacan, Jacques. Écrits. Paris: Seuil, 1966. p. 335
- ↑ Lacan, Jacques. Écrits: A Selection. Trans. Alan Sheridan. London: Tavistock Publications, 1977. p. 322
- ↑ Lacan, Jacques. The Seminar. Book XI. The Four Fundamental Concepts of Psychoanalysis, 1964. Trans. Alan Sheridan. London: Hogarth Press and Institute of Psycho-Analysis, 1977. p.235
