The term 'transference' (''{{Top}}[[transfert'') first emerged in Freud's work as simply another term for the displacement of affect from one idea to another.<ref>see Freud, 1900a: SE V, 562</ref>Later on, however, it came to refer to the patient's relationship to the analyst as it develops in the treatment. This soon became the central meaning of the term, and is the sense in which it is usually understood in psychoanalytic theory today.]]{{Bottom}}
==Sigmund Freud=====Definition===The use of a special term to denote the patient's relationship to the analyst is justified by the peculiar character of this relationship. "[[transference]]" first emerged in [[Freud was first struck by the intensity of the patient]]'s affective reactions to [[work]] as simply [[another]] term for the doctor in Breuer's treatment [[displacement]] of Anna O in 1882, which he argued was due [[affect]] from one [[idea]] to the patient transferring unconscious ideas onto the doctoranother.<ref>Freud, 1895d</ref>As he developed the psychoanalytic method, Freud first regarded the transference exclusively as a {{F}} ''[[resistanceThe Interpretation of Dreams]] which impedes the recall of repressed memories, an obstacle to the treatment which must be 'destroyed'.<ref>Freud, 1905e1900a: [[SE VII]] V, 116562</ref>
GraduallyLater on, however, he modified this view, coming it came to see the transference also as a positive factor which helps the treatment refer to progress. The positive value of transference lies in the fact that it provides a way for the analysand[[patient]]'s history to be confronted in the immediacy of the present [[relationship with the analyst; in the way he relates ]] to the [[analyst, the analysand inevitably repeats earlier relationships with other figures (especially those with the parents). This paradoxical nature of transference, ]] as both an obstacle to the treatment and that which drives it develops in the [[treatment forward, perhaps helps to explain why there are so many different and opposing views of transference in psychoanalytic theory today]].
Lacan's thinking about transference goes through several stages. His first work to deal with the subject in any detail is '''An Intervention on the Transference'','<ref>Lacan, 1951</ref> in which he describes This soon became the transference in dialectical terms borrowed from Hegel. He criticises ego-psychology for defming the transference in terms of central [[affectmeaning]]s; "Transference does not refer to any mysterious property of affectthe term, and even when it reveals itself under is the appearance of emotion, it only acquires meaning by virtue of the dialectical moment [[sense]] in which it is producedusually [[understood]] in [[psychoanalytic theory]] today."<ref>Ec, 225</ref>
In other words, Lacan argues that although transference often manifests itself in The use of a special term to denote the guise of particularly strong affects, such as [[lovepatient]] and hate, it does not consist of such emotions but in the structure of an intersubjective relationship. This structural definition of transference remains a constant theme throughout the rest of Lacan's work; he consistently locates relationship to the essence of transference in the symbolic and not in the imaginary, although it clearly has powerful imaginary effects. Later on, Lacan will remark that if transference often manifests itself under the appearance of love, it [[analyst]] is first and foremost justified by the love peculiar [[character]] of knowledge (''savoir'') that is concernedthis relationship.
Lacan returns to ===Treatment===[[Freud]] was first struck by the subject intensity of the transference [[patient]]'s [[affect]]ive reactions to the doctor in the seminar [[Breuer]]'s [[treatment]] of 1953-4. This time [[Anna O]] in 1882, which he conceives it not in terms borrowed from Hegelian dialectics but in terms borrowed from argued was due to the [[patient]] transferring [[unconscious]] [[ideas]] onto the anthropology of exchangedoctor.<ref>Mauss, LÈvi-Strauss{{F}} (1895d) With Josef Breuer. ''[[Sigmund Freud|Bibliography|Studies on Hysteria]]''. [[SE]] II.</ref>
Transference is implicit in ====Resistance====As he developed the speech act[[psychoanalytic]] method, which involves an exchange of signs that transforms [[Freud]] first regarded the speaker and listener: In its essence, the efficacious [[transference ]] exclusively as a [[resistance]] which we're considering is quite simply impedes the speech act. Each time a man speaks [[recall]] of [[repression|repressed]] [[memories]], an obstacle to another in an authentic and full manner, there is, in the true sense, transference, symbolic transference - something which takes place [[treatment]] which changes the nature of the two beings presentmust be "destroyed".<ref>Sl{{F}} (1905e [1901]) "[[Sigmund Freud:Bibliography|Fragment of an Analysis of a Case of Hysteria]]." [[SE]] VII, 1093: 116</ref>
In the seminar of the following yearGradually, he continues to elaborate on the symbolic nature of transferencehowever, which he identifies with the compulsion to repeat, the insistence of the symbolic determinants of the subject.<ref>S2modified this view, 210-11</ref>This is coming to be distinguished from see the imaginary aspect of [[transference, namely, the affective reactions of love and aggressivity. In this distinction between the symbolic and imaginary aspects of transference, Lacan provides ]] also as a useful way of understanding positive factor which helps the paradoxical function of the transference in psychoanalytic [[treatment; in its symbolic aspect (]] to [[repetitionprogress]]) it helps the treatment progress by revealing the signifiers of the subject's history, while in its imaginary aspect (love and hate) it acts as a resistance.<ref>see S4, 135; S8, 204</ref>
Lacan's next approach to the subject ====Progress====The positive [[value]] of [[transference is ]] lies in the eighth year of his seminar,<ref>Lacan, 1960-1</ref> entitled simply 'The Transference'. Here he uses Platofact that it provides a way for the [[analysand]]'s Symposium history to illustrate be confronted in the immediacy of the [[present]] relationship between the analysand and with the [[analyst. Alcibiades compares Socrates to a plain box which encloses a precious object (Grk ''agalma'')]]; just as Alcibiades attributes a hidden treasure in the way he relates to Socratesthe [[analyst]], so the [[analysand sees his object of desire in ]] inevitably repeats earlier relationships with other [[figures]] (especially those with the analyst (see [[objet petit aparents]]).
In 1964, Lacan articulates the concept This paradoxical [[nature]] of [[transference with his concept of ]], as both an obstacle to the [[subject supposed to knowtreatment]], and that which remains central to Lacan's view of [[drives]] the transference from then on; indeed[[treatment]] forward, it is this view perhaps helps to explain why there are so many different and opposing views of the [[transference which has come to be seen as Lacan's most complete attempt to theorise the matter]] in [[psychoanalytic theory]] today.
According to this view, transference is the attribution of knowledge to the Other, the supposition that the Other is a subject who knows; ==Jacques Lacan==[[Lacan]]'As soon as the subject who is supposed to know exists somewhere . . . there is s [[thinking]] [[about]] [[transference]] goes through several [[development|stages]]."<ref>Sll, 232</ref>
Although ===Dialectic===His first work to deal with the existence of the transference is a necessary condition of psychoanalytic treatment, it is not sufficient subject in itself; it any detail is also necessary that '''[[Jacques Lacan:Bibliography|An Intervention on the analyst deal with Transference]]'',<ref>{{L}} (1951) "[[Intervention sur le transfert]]." ''[[Écrits]]''. [[Paris]]: Seuil, 1966: 215-26 ["[[Intervention sur le transfert|Intervention on the transference in a unique way]]." Trans. [[Jacqueline Rose]]. Eds. Juliet Mitchell and Jacqueline Rose. It is this that differentiates psychoanalysis from ''[[Feminine]] [[Sexuality]]: [[suggestionJacques Lacan]]; although both are based on and the transferenceécole freudienne''. [[London]]: Macmillan, psychoanalysis differs from suggestion because the analyst refuses to use the power given to him by the transference1982; New York: W.W. Norton & Co.<ref>see E, 2361982: 61-73].</ref>in which he describes the [[transference]] in [[dialectic]]al [[terms]] borrowed from [[Hegel]].
From quite early on in ===Affect===He criticises [[ego-psychology]] for defining the history of psychoanalysis it became common to distinguish between those aspects of the patient's relationship to the analyst which were 'adapted to reality' and those which were not. In the latter category fell all the patient's reactions which were caused by 'perceiving the analyst [[transference]] in a distorted way'. Some analysts used the term 'transference' to refer to all aspects terms of the analysand'[[affect]]s relationship to the analyst, in which case they distinguished the distorted 'neurotic transference' or 'transference neurosis' from the 'unobjectionable part of the transference' or 'therapeutic alliance."<ref>Edward Bibring, Elizabeth Zeztel</ref>:
Other analysts argued that the term 'transference' should be restricted <blockquote>"Transference does not refer to the 'unrealistic' or 'irrational' reactions any mysterious property of the analysand (William Silverbergaffect, Franz Alexander). However, the common assumption underlying both of these positions was that the analyst could tell and even when it reveals itself under the patient was not reacting to him on the basis [[appearance]] of who he really was but rather on the basis of previous relationships with other people. The analyst was credited with this ability because he was supposed to be better 'adapted to reality' than the patient. Informed [[emotion]], it only acquires meaning by his own correct perception virtue of reality, the analyst could offer 'transference interpretations'; that [[dialectical]] [[moment]] in which it is, he could point out the discrepancy between the real situation and the irrational way that the patient was reacting to itproduced. It was argued that such transference interpretations helped the analysand to gain 'insight' into his own neurotic transference and thereby resolve it or 'liquidate' it"<ref>{{Ec}} p.225</ref></blockquote>
Some In other [[words]], [[Lacan]] argues that although [[transference]] often manifests itself in the guise of Lacan'particularly strong [[affect]]s most incisive criticisms are directed at this way , such as [[love]] and [[hate]], it does not consist of such emotions but in the [[structure]] of representing psychoanalytic treatmentan [[intersubjectivity|intersubjective relationship]]. These criticisms are based on the following arguinents:
1.The whole idea This [[structural]] definition of adaptation to reality is based on [[transference]] remains a naive empiricist epistemology, involving an appeal to an unproblematic notion constant theme throughout the rest of [[Lacan]]'reality' as an objective and self-evident given. This entirely neglects what psychoanalysis has discovered about s work; he consistently locates the construction [[essence]] of reality by [[transference]] in the ego on [[symbolic]] and not in the basis of its own mÈconnaissance[[imaginary]], although it clearly has powerful imaginary effects. Hence when the analyst assumes Later on, Lacan will remark that he is better adapted to reality than the patient he has no other recourse than 'to fall back on his own ego' since this is if [[transference]] often manifests itself under the only 'bit appearance of reality he knows'.<ref>E[[love]], 231</ref> The healthy part of the patient's ego it is then defmed simply as 'first and foremost the part that thinks as we do'.<ref>E, 232</ref> This reduces psychoanalytic treatment to a form [[love]] of suggestion in which the analyst simply [[knowledge]] ('imposes his own idea of reality' on the analysand.<ref>E, 232</ref> Thus 'the inability [of the analyst[savoir]] to sustain a praxis in an authentic manner results, as '') that is usually the case with mankind, in the exercise of powerconcerned."<ref>E, 226</ref>
2.The idea that the analysand's 'distorted perception ===Seminar of 1953-54===[[Lacan]] returns to the analyst' could be liquidated by means subject of interpretations is a logical fallacy, since the [[transference is interpreted on the basis of, and with the instrument of, ]] in the transference itself.<ref>S8, 206</ref> In other words, there is no [[metalanguageseminar]] of the transference, no vantage point outside the transference from which the analyst could offer an interpretation, since any interpretation he offers "will be received as coming from the person that the transference imputes him to be1953-4."<ref>E, 231</ref>
Thus This [[time]] he conceives it is contradictory to claim that the transference can be dissolved by means of an interpretation when it is the transference itself which conditions the analysand'not in terms borrowed from [[dialectic|Hegelian dialectic]]s acceptance of that interpretation; "but in terms borrowed from the emergence [[anthropology]] of the subject from the transference is thus postponed ad infinitum[[exchange]]."<ref>E, 231</ref>
Does this mean that Lacanian analysts never interpret the transference? Certainly not; Lacan affirms that "it [[Transference]] is natural to interpret implicit in the transference[[speech act]],"<ref>E, 271</ref> but at the same time he harbours no illusions about the power which involves an exchange of such interpretations to dissolve [[sign]]s that transforms the transference. Like any other interpretation, the analyst must use all his art in deciding if [[speaker]] and when to interpret the transferencelistener: In its essence, and above all must avoid gearing his interpretations exclusively to interpreting the efficacious [[transference. He must also know exactly what he ]] which we're considering is seeking to achieve by such an interpretation; not to rectify the patient's relationship to reality, but to maintain the analytic dialogue. "What does it mean, to interpret quite simply the transference? Nothing else than to fill the void of this deadlock with a lure[[speech]] [[act]]. But while it may be deceptive, this lure serves a purpose by setting off the whole process again."<ref>Ec, 225</ref>
When describing Each time a man speaks to another in an authentic and [[full]] manner, there is, in the [[true]] sense, [[transference as 'positive' or 'negative']], Lacan [[symbolic]] [[transference]] - something which takes two different approaches. Following Freud, Lacan sometimes uses these adjectives to refer to [[place]] which changes the nature of the affects, 'positive transference' referring to loving affects and 'negative transference' referring to aggressive affectstwo beings present.<ref>Ec, 222{{S1}} p. 109</ref>
SometimesIn the [[seminar]] of the following year, howeverhe continues to elaborate on the [[symbolic]] nature of [[transference]], Lacan takes which he [[identifies]] with the terms 'positive' and 'negative' to refer [[compulsion to repeat]], the favourable or unfavourable effects [[insistence]] of [[the transference on symbolic]] determinants of the treatment[[subject]].<ref>see E, 271{{S2}} p. 210-11</ref> (where Lacan argues that when the analysand's resistance opposes suggestion, this resistance must be 'placed in the ranks of the positive transference' on the grounds that it maintains the direction of the analysis).
Although Lacan does speak occasionally This is to be distinguished from the [[imaginary]] aspect of [[countertransferencetransference]], he generally prefers not to use this termnamely, the [[affect]]ive reactions of [[love]] and [[aggressivity]].
== def ==In this [[distinction]] between the [[symbolic]] and [[imaginary]] aspects of [[transference]], [[Lacan]] provides a useful way of [[understanding]] the paradoxical function of the [[transference]] in [[psychoanalytic treatment]]; in its symbolic aspect ([[repetition]]) it helps the [[treatment]] [[progress]] by revealing the [[signifiers]] of the subject's [[history]], while in its [[imaginary]] aspect ([[love]] and [[hate]]) it [[acts]] as a [[resistance]].<ref>{{S4}} p. 135; {{S8}} p. 204</ref>
The displacement of one[[Lacan]]'s unresolved conflicts, dependencies, and aggressions onto a substitute object (e.g. substituting a lover, spouse, etc. for one's parent). This operation can also occur in next approach to the psychoanalytical cure, when a patient transfers onto the analyst feelings that were previously directed to another object. By working through this subject of [[transference of feelings onto the analyst, the patient can come to grips with ]] is in the actual cause eighth year of his or her feelings[[seminar]],<ref>Lacan, 1960-1</ref> entitled simply "[[The Transference]]".
==def=='''Transference''Here he uses [[Plato]]' is a phenomenon in s [[psychologySymposium]] characterized by unconscious redirection of feelings of one person to another. For instance, one could mistrust somebody who resembles an ex-spouse in manners, voice or external appearance; or be overly compliant to someone who resembles a childhood friendillustrate the relationship between the [[analysand]] and the [[analyst]].
In a therapy context, '''transference''' refers [[Alcibiades]] compares [[Socrates]] to redirection of a client's feelings from a significant person to plain box which encloses a therapist. ''precious [[object]] (Grk 'Counter-transference'[[agalma]]'' is defined ); just as redirection of Alcibiades attributes a therapist's feelings toward a clienthidden treasure to Socrates, or more generally as a therapist's emotional entanglement with so the [[analysand]] sees his object of [[desire]] in the [[analyst]] (see [[objet petit a client]]).
Transference was first described by In 1964, [[Lacan]] articulates the [[Sigmund Freud|Freudconcept]], who acknowledged its importance for of [[psychoanalysistransference]] for better understanding with his concept of the patient[[subject supposed to know]], which remains central to [[Lacan]]'s feelings. Transference view of the [[transference]] from then on; indeed, it is often manifested this view of the [[transference]] which has come to be seen as an erotic attraction towards a therapist. It[[Lacan]]'s also common for people most [[complete]] attempt to transfer feelings from their parents to their partners (emotional incest) or to children (cross-generational entanglements)theorise the matter.
Although According to this view, [[transference ]] is the [[attribution]] of [[knowledge]] to the [[Other]], the supposition that the [[Other]] is often characterized as a useful tool for building trust between a client and a therapist; transference can also interfere with a therapist’s ability [[subject supposed to help a client. Some therapists become confused between clients and intimate partners.know|subject who knows]]:
In ''The Psychology of <blockquote>"As soon as the Transference'', subject who is supposed to [[Carl Jungknow]] states that within the transference [[dyadexists]] both participants typically experience a variety of opposites, and that in [[love]] and in psychological growth, the key to success somewhere . . . there is the ability to endure the tension of the opposites without abandoning the process; and that in essence it is that tension that allows one to grow and to transformtransference."<ref>[[Carl Jung|Jung, Carl C{{S11}} p.]] ''The Psychology of the Transference'', Princeton University Press, ISBN 0-691-0175-22232</ref></blockquote>
Transference is common. Only in a personally or socially harmful context can transference be described as a pathological issue, however, there is an experimental new theory of tranference known as AMT (Abusive Multiple Tranference), put forth by Although the [[David W. Bernsteinexistence]], in which the abuser not only transfers negative feelings directed towards their abuser to the victim, but also transfers the power and dominance of their own abuser to themselves. This is often the case with murderers, for example the serial killer [[Carroll Coletransference]]. While his father was away in is a necessary condition of [[WWIIpsychoanalytic treatment]], Cole's mother engaged in several extra-marital affairs, forcing Cole to watch, and later beat him to ensure that he would it is not alert his father. Cole would later come to murder many women whom he considered "loose", and those sufficient in general who reminded him of his mother. AMT itself; it is also ties in very closely necessary that the analyst deal with Power/Control Killers, as the feeling and view of control is passed from one abuser to those proceeding him or her[[transference]] in a unique way.
It is this that differentiates [[psychoanalysis]] from [[suggestion]]; although both are based on the [[transference]], [[psychoanalysis]] differs from [[suggestion]] because the [[analyst]] refuses to use the [[power]] given to him by the [[transference]].<ref>{{E}} p. 236</ref> --- From quite early on in the history of [[psychoanalysis]] it became common to distinguish between those aspects of the [[patient]]'s relationship to the [[analyst]] which were "adapted to reality" and those which were not. In the latter [[category]] fell all the [[patient]]'s reactions which were caused by "perceiving the analyst in a distorted way". Some [[analyst]]s used the term "[[transference]]" to refer to all aspects of the [[analysand]]'s relationship to the [[analyst]], in which [[case]] they distinguished the distorted "[[transference|neurotic transference]]" or "[[transference|transference neurosis]]" from the "unobjectionable part of the transference" or "therapeutic alliance."<ref>Edward Bibring, Elizabeth Zeztel</ref> --- Other [[analysts]] argued that the term "[[transference]]" should be restricted to the "unrealistic" or "[[irrational]]" reactions of the [[analysand]] (William Silverberg, Franz Alexander). However, the common assumption underlying both of these positions was that the [[analyst]] could tell when the [[patient]] was not reacting to him on the basis of who he really was but rather on the basis of previous relationships with other [[people]]. The [[analyst]] was credited with this ability because he was supposed to be better "adapted to reality" than the [[patient]]. Informed by his own correct [[perception]] of [[reality]], the [[analyst]] could offer "transference [[interpretations]]"; that is, he could point out the discrepancy between the [[real]] [[situation]] and the irrational way that the [[patient]] was reacting to it. It was argued that such [[transference|transference interpretation]]s helped the analysand to gain "insight" into his own [[transference|neurotic transference]] and thereby resolve it or "liquidate" it. --- Some of [[Lacan]]'s most incisive criticisms are directed at this way of representing [[psychoanalytic treatment]]. These criticisms are based on the following arguments: --- 1. The [[whole]] idea of [[adaptation]] to [[reality]] is based on a naive empiricist [[epistemology]], involving an appeal to an unproblematic [[notion]] of "[[reality]]" as an [[objective]] and [[self]]-evident given. This entirely neglects what [[psychoanalysis]] has discovered about the [[construction]] of [[reality]] by the [[ego]] on the basis of its own [[méconnaissance]]. Hence when the [[analyst]] assumes that he is better adapted to [[reality]] than the [[patient]] he has no other recourse than "to fall back on his own ego" since this is the only "bit of reality he [[knows]]".<ref>{{E}} p. 231</ref> The healthy part of the [[patient]]'s [[ego]] is then defmed simply as "the part that thinks as we do".<ref>{{E}} p. 232</ref> This reduces [[psychoanalytic treatment]] to a [[form]] of [[suggestion]] in which the [[analyst]] simply "imposes his own idea of reality" on the [[analysand]].<ref>{{E}} p. 232</ref> <blockquote> Thus "the inability [of the analyst] to sustain a praxis in an authentic manner results, as is usually the case with mankind, in the exercise of power."<ref>{{E}} p. 226</ref></blockquote> --- 2. The idea that the [[analysand]]'s "distorted perception of the analyst" could be liquidated by means of [[interpretation]]s is a [[logical]] fallacy, since the [[transference]] is [[interpretation|interpreted]] on the basis of, and with the [[instrument]] of, the [[transference]] itself.<ref>{{S8}} p. 206</ref> In other words, there is no [[metalanguage]] of the [[transference]], no vantage point [[outside]] the [[transference]] from which the [[analyst]] could offer an [[interpretation]], since any [[interpretation]] he offers "will be received as coming from the person that the transference imputes him to be."<ref>{{E}} p. 231</ref> --- Thus it is contradictory to [[claim]] that the [[transference]] can be dissolved by means of an [[interpretation]] when it is the [[transference]] itself which [[conditions]] the [[analysand]]'s acceptance of that [[interpretation]]: <blockquote>"The emergence of the subject from the transference is thus postponed ad infinitum."<ref>{{E}} p. 231</ref></blockquote> --- Does this mean that [[Lacanian]] [[analyst]]s never interpret the [[transference]]? Certainly not; [[Lacan]] affirms that "it is [[natural]] to interpret the transference,"<ref>{{E}} p. 271</ref> but at the same time he harbours no [[illusion]]s about the power of such [[interpretation]]s to dissolve the [[transference]]. Like any other [[interpretation]], the [[analyst]] must use all his [[art]] in deciding if and when to [[interpret]] the [[transference]], and above all must avoid gearing his [[interpretation]]s exclusively to [[interpreting]] the [[transference]]. He must also know exactly what he is seeking to achieve by such an [[interpretation]]; not to rectify the [[patient]]'s relationship to [[reality]], but to maintain the [[discourse|analytic dialogue]]. <blockquote>"What does it mean, to interpret the transference? [[Nothing]] else than to fill the [[void]] of this deadlock with a [[lure]]. But while it may be deceptive, this lure serves a [[purpose]] by setting off the whole [[process]] again."<ref>{{Ec}} p. 225</ref></blockquote> --- When describing the [[transference]] as "positive" or "[[negative]]", [[Lacan]] takes two different approaches. Following [[Freud]], [[Lacan]] sometimes uses these adjectives to refer to the nature of the [[affect]]s, "[[transference|positive transference]]" referring to loving affects and "[[transference|negative transference]]" referring to [[aggressivity|aggressive]] [[affect]]s.<ref>{{Ec}} p. 222</ref> --- Sometimes, however, [[Lacan]] takes the terms "positive" and "negative" to refer to the favourable or unfavourable effects of the [[transference]] on the [[treatment]]<ref>{{E}} 271</ref> (where [[Lacan]] argues that when the [[analysand]]'s [[resistance]] opposes [[suggestion]], this [[resistance]] must be "placed in the ranks of the positive transference" on the grounds that it maintains the direction of the [[analysis]]). --- Although [[Lacan]] does [[speak]] occasionally of [[countertransference]], he generally prefers not to use this term. ==See Also=={{See}}* [[Affect]]* [[Aggressivity]]* [[Analysand]]||* [[Counter-transference]]* [[Dialectic]]* [[Love]]||* [[Knowledge]]* [[Imaginary]]* [[Interpretation]]||* [[Metalanguage]]* [[Progress]]* [[Repression]]||* [[Resistance]]* [[Subject supposed to know]]* [[Suggestion]]||* [[Symbolic]]* [[Treatment]]* [[Unconscious]]{{Also}} == References ==
<references/>
{{OK}}[[Category:LacanPractice]][[Category:TermsTreatment]][[Category:Concepts]][[Category:Psychoanalysis]]__NOTOC__ {{Encore}} pp. 67, 144
