Changes

Jump to: navigation, search

Object-relations theory

135 bytes removed, 10:22, 1 June 2019
The LinkTitles extension automatically added links to existing pages (<a rel="nofollow" class="external free" href="https://github.com/bovender/LinkTitles">https://github.com/bovender/LinkTitles</a>).
{{Top}}théorie du relation d'[[objet]]{{Bottom}}
=====Sigmund Freud==========Object and Object Relation==History===[[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 importance in [[psychoanalytic theory]], and eventually a [[whole]] [[school]] of [[psychoanalytic theory]] came to be known as "[[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 [[analyst]]s differed on many points, and hence [[object-relations theory]] covers a wide range of [[theoretical]] points of view.
In the years following ===Ego-Psychology===However, despite its [[lack]] of precise definition, [[Freudobject-relations theory]]'s can be contrasted with [[deathego-psychology]], the twin concepts on account of the "its focus on [[object]]" and rather than on the "[[drive]]s in themselves. This focus on [[object relation" attained a growing importance in ]]s means that [[psychoanalytic object-relations theory]], and eventually a whole pays more attention to the [[intersubjective]] [[schoolconstitution]] of the [[psychoanalytic theorypsyche]] came , in contrast to be known as "the more atomistic approach of [[objectego-relations theorypsychology]].
=====Object-Relations Theory==Lacanian Psychoanalysis===(The main proponents of Although [[Lacan]]ian [[psychoanalysis]] has been compared with [[object-relations theory]] were Ronald Faibairnin that both [[school|schools of thought]] [[place]] more emphasis on [[intersubjectivity]], D.W. Winnicott and Michael Balint, all of whom were members of the Middle Group of the British Psycho[[Lacan]] himself criticizes [[object-Analytical Societyrelations theory]] repeatedly.)
These His criticisms focus most on the way in which [[object-relations theory]] envisions the possibility of a [[complete]] and perfectly [[analystsatisfying]] relation between the [[subject]] and the [[object]]. [[Lacan]] is opposed to such a view, arguing that for [[human]] [[being]]s differed on many pointsthere 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]], and hence that in [[object-relations theory]] covers a wide range , "the object is first and foremost an object of theoretical points of viewsatisfaction."<ref>{{S1}} p.209</ref>
=====Ego-Psychology=====HoweverIn [[other]] [[words]], despite its lack by locating the [[object]] in the [[register]] of precise definition[[satisfaction]] and [[need]], [[object-relations theory]] can be contrasted confuses the [[object]] of [[psychoanalysis]] with the [[object]] of [[biology]] and neglects the [[symbolic]] [[dimension]] of [[desire]]. One [[ego-psychologydire]] consequence that follows from this is that the specific difficulties which arise from the [[symbolic]] on account constitution of its focus on [[desire]] are neglected, with the result that "mature [[objectrelations]] rather than on " and ideals of "[[genital|genital love]]" are proposed as the [[drivegoal]] of [[treatment]]s in themselves. Thus [[object-relations theory]] becomes the site of a "delirious moralism."<ref>{{Ec}} p. 716</ref>
===Oedipal Structure===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. One of [[Lacan]]'s fundamental concern is to restore the centrality of the [[Oedipal]] [[structure|triangle]] to [[psychoanalysis]] by re-emphasizing the importance of the [[father]] in contrast to the [[object-relations]] emphasis on the [[mother]]. This focus on concern can be seen in [[Lacan]]'s criticism of the [[object-relations theory|object relation]] as a symmetrical [[dual relation]], and his view that the [[object-relations theory|object relation]] is an [[intersubjective]] relation which involves not two but [[three]] [[terms]].<!--[[Lacan]]'s means that criticism of British [[object-relations theory]] pays more attention to is one of the main themes of the first year of his [[intersubjectivepublic]] [[seminar]] constitution (1953-4). In the fourth year of the [[psycheseminar]], entitled "[[Object Relations]], in contrast to " [[Lacan]] discusses not the more atomistic approach British school of [[egoobject-psychologyrelations theory]]but the [[French]] school.-->
=====Lacanian Psychoanalysis==========Intersubjectivity=====Although [[Lacan]]ian [[psychoanalysis]] has been compared with [[object-relations theory]] in that both [[school|schools of thought]] place more emphasis on [[intersubjectivity]], [[Lacan]] himself criticizes [[object-relations theory]] repeatedly. =====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. =====Oedipal Triangle=====One of [[Lacan]]'s fundamental concern is to restore the centrality of the [[Oedipal]] [[structure|triangle]] to [[psychoanalysis]] by re-emphasizing the importance of the [[father]] in contrast to the [[object-relations]] emphasis on the [[mother]]. This concern can be seen in [[Lacan]]'s criticism of the [[object-relations theory|object relation]] as a symmetrical [[dual relation]], and his view that the [[object-relations theory|object relation]] is an [[intersubjective]] relation which involves not two but three terms. =====Seminar of 1953-54=====[[Lacan]]'s criticism of British [[object-relations theory]] is one of the main themes of the first year of his public [[seminar]] (1953-4). 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}}
* [[Biology]]
{{Also}}
=====References=====
<div style="font-size:11px" class="references-small">
<references/>
Anonymous user
Retrieved from "https://nosubject.com/Special:MobileDiff/21270...46292"

Navigation menu