Aportes a la escucha psicoanalítica de la violencia

Abstract

The paper proposes to distinguish between aggressiveness and violence in psychoanalysis, challenging their frequent conceptual overlap. It argues that violence is not a higher degree of aggressiveness, but rather a qualitative transformation of psychic processing that compromises symbolization, binding, and recognition, potentially leading to subjective destitution. Drawing on Donald Winnicott, Piera Aulagnier, and Moty Benyakar, it shows that aggressiveness can fulfill constitutive functions. In Winnicott, it is linked to vitality and differentiation; in Aulagnier, «primary violence» is structuring. Violence emerges when this negativity ceases to be metabolizable. In Aulagnier, it appears as «secondary violence» that captures representation; in Winnicott, when environmental holding fails; and in Benyakar, as a disruptive effect that erases the signal of danger, disorganizes perception, and generates helplessness. Here, particular emphasis is placed on the «perpetrator of harm,» whose effectiveness lies in disavowing perception and preventing defensive responses. From the perspective of the three-space model and the complexity framework of Edgar Morin, violence is understood as a disarticulation among sensation, affect, and representation. Clinically, it requires a mode of listening that does not limit itself to the narrative but is oriented toward restoring binding processes and symbolization.