Neurosis today; boundary problems.
Keywords:
neurosis, interpretación, verdad, transferencia, epistemologíaAbstract
The paper begins by pointing out toimportance of topresent metapsychological crisis, in which is difficult to find a theoretical or technical concept tat could be accepted by most of to authors. The thinking about tophilosophy and methodologyof science has led some to consider a principle of theoreticalcomplementary in psychoanalisis, admitting that it is neccesaryto call for different theories to organize other groups of data.The problems of the limits are discussed: the limits of the concept of neurosis and the limits of interpretation in neurosis. The criteria for considering a patient as a neurotic is structural and it is based in toinscriptionof the symbolic dispositive which determines two sufficiently different conscious and unconsciousways offunctioningdueto repression. The diagnostic bases are not settled over descriptive elements, but over the nature of the transference that takes place in toanalitical situation, which allows to acceed to dynamicaland structural criteria that differences the neurotic transference of others forms that are not. The Oedipus still mantains its structural place in neurosis and neurosis has not lost importance in the present world. The increase of narcissism is questioned. Is it a real fact or does topsychanalisis development allow a more precise vision of the observation and description of tosame patients? In toconsideration of the limits of interpretation in neurosis two kinds of aspects are studied: the ones referring to the signification and the ones that have to do with the truth. The similarities and differences with the henneneutic interpretation are discussed along with the problems of the truthin the way that is required by natural sciences.Downloads
References
ACEVEDO DE MENDILAHARSU, 8. (1988) -Teoría en Psicoanálisis. Rev.de laAsoc. Psicoanalítica de B. Aires, Vol. X, 3, p. 455.
ACEVEDO DE MENDILAHARSU, 5. (1988) -La identidad. Rev.Psicot. Psicoanalit. II. No. 4, A. p. 317.
ACEVEDO DE MENDILAHARSU, 5. (1991) -Reflexiones sobre la memoria en Psicoanálisis. Temas de Psicoanál. 16, p. 23.
ACEVEDO DE MENDILAHARSU, S. (1982) -¿Qué es neurosis para el Psicoanálisis actual? En prensa.
ACEVEDO DE MENDILAHARSU. 5 (1993) –Interpretación y conocimiento en psicoanálisis. Panel en: Coloquios en Colonia del Sacramento. Colonia, junio 4, 5, 6, 1993.
ASSOUN. P. L. (1988) -Freud et Wittgenstein. Presses Universit.de France, Paris. 1988
BARANGER, M. (1991) -Concepto de cambio psíquico y su evaluación clínica. En 370 Congreso de laAPI. B. Aires, 1991. Rev.Psicoanal. T. XLVIII, N0 2.
BERNARDI, R (1990) -Teorías e investigación en psicoanálisis. Arte y Ciencia. Jornadas de Epistemología y Psicoanálisis. Alianza Francesa, mayo 1990. Montevideo, p. 169.
BION, W. (1963) -Transformations. Londres, Heinemann.
BION, W. (1963) -Elements of Psycho-analysts. Londres, Heinemann.
BOLLAS, C. (1987) -La sombra del objeto. B. Aires. Amorrortu.1991.
ECO, U. (1992) -Los límites de la interpretación. Barcelona, Edit. Lumen, 1992.
FREUD, S. (1925) -Presentación autobiográfica. B. Aires, Amorrortu, vol. 20
FREUD, A. (1972) -Child Analysis as a subspetiality of Psychoanalysis. Int. J. Psychoanal. 53, 151.
Fukuyama, F. (1992) –Elfin de la historia ye! último hombre. B. Aires. Planeta.
GEDO, J. yGOLDBERG,A. (1973)-Modelos de lamente. B. Aires, Amorrortu, 1980.
KERNBERG, 0. (1977) -La teoría de las relaciones objetales y el psicoanálisis clínico. México, Ed. Paidós, 1988.
KOHUT, H. (1984) -Como cura el psicoanálisis. B. Aires, Paidós,1986.
KRISTEVA, J. (1979) -Folle venté. Paris, Ed. du Seuil.
LACAN, J.(1966) -Ecrits. Paris, Ed. du Seuil.
MILES OROTH, H. (1982) -Interpretation for Freud and Heidegger. Int. Rev.Psychoana 9, 67.
MODELL, A. H. (1984) -El psicoanálisis en un contexto nuevo. B. Aires, Amorrortu.
RICOUER, P. (1977) -El problema de laprueba en los escritos psicoanalíticos de Freud. Rev.de Psicoanál. T. XL.. 5-6, p. 1053. 1983.
SCHAF‘ER, R. (1982) -The relevance of the “Here and now” transference interpretation to the reconstruction of early development Int. J. Psychoanal, 63. 77.
SILVER, A. S. (1981) -Psycho-semiotic structures. An interdisciplinary study of the relationship between psychoanalysis and the semiotic of Ch.S. Peirce. En ¿Do Idare disturb the Universe? Ed. Grotstein, J. Beverly Hills, Caesura Press, p. 270.
THÖMA., H. y KÄCHELE, H. (1985) -Teoría y Práctica del psicoanálisis. Barcelona, Herder, 1989.
TODOROW, T. (1981) -Symbolisme etInterpretation. Paris. Ed. du Seuil.
VATTIMO, G. (1985) -El fin de la modernidad. Nihilismo y Hermenéutica en la cultura postmoderna. 1986. México, ed. Gedisa.
VIÑAR, M. (1991)-De la Torre de Babela los senderos fundadores. Rev.Urug. de Psicoanal. No. 72-73, p. 37.
WINNICOTT, D. (1954) –Metapsyschologicalandclinical aspects of regression within the psychoanalytical set-up. En Collected Papers. New York, Basic Books, 1958.
WITTGENSTEIN, L. (1953) Philosophical Investigations. Oxford, Blackwell
This work is licensed under a 