首页> 外文期刊>Indo-Pacific Journal of Phenomenology >Phenomenology, Psychotherapy and the Quest for Intersubjectivity
【24h】

Phenomenology, Psychotherapy and the Quest for Intersubjectivity

机译:现象学,心理治疗与主体间性的追求

获取原文
       

摘要

Intersubjectivity is a key concept in phenomenology as well as in psychology and especially in psychotherapy, given the reliance of the therapeutic process on its location in relationship. While psychotherapy encompasses a range of what Owen (2006) terms “talking therapies”, this paper focuses mainly on the Freudian model of psychoanalysis and its connection with Husserlian and Heideggerian phenomenology respectively. Freud’s recognition that symptoms have meaning, and that the methodical disclosing of their meaning needs to be guided by the experience of the patient, accords with the emphasis of phenomenology on empathic attunement to the lived experience of the other. Insofar as the orientation of psychoanalysis towards methodically disclosing meaning gives it a hermeneutic dimension, it is also compatible methodologically with the interpretative mode of phenomenology. While Karlsson (2010, p. 13) identifies seven centrally significant “points of connection” between psychoanalysis and phenomenology, Thompson (2005, p. 40) suggests that “psychoanalysis is already phenomenological in its latency … . Indeed, Freud’s principles of technique make little sense outside a phenomenological context”.Can it thus be claimed that, in the quest for intersubjectivity, sufficient common ground exists for meaningful dialogue between psychotherapy, psychoanalysis and phenomenology in general, and between Sigmund Freud, Edmund Husserl and Martin Heidegger in particular? That is what this paper seeks to explore.The paper proceeds from pointing to the ambiguity of the Freudian mode as simultaneously natural scientific and hermeneutic to exploring the fundamental points of difference and commonality between psychoanalysis and phenomenology, and in particular the significance of the role of the unconscious and intentionality in psychoanalysis and phenomenology respectively, as well as the orientation of both towards greater understanding of one’s being in the world. Ultimately, however, the authors conclude that, while the points of commonality would seem conducive to dialogue between the Freudian and the phenomenological in the psychotherapeutic domain, their differences in aims and approach, each shaped by a different view of humankind, continue to obstruct it. The quest for it nevertheless remains ongoing, as demonstrated not only by the academic endeavours of theoreticians such as Owen and Karlsson, but by the contemporary urge of second century psychoanalysis for a theoretically coherent turn away from the Cartesian and towards the authentically intersubjectively relational.
机译:主体间性是现象学以及心理学,尤其是心理治疗学中的关键概念,因为治疗过程依赖于其在关系中的位置。尽管心理治疗涵盖了Owen(2006)所说的“谈话疗法”,但本文主要关注弗洛伊德的心理分析模型及其分别与侯赛尔和海德格尔现象学的联系。弗洛伊德认识到,症状具有意义,并且有条理地揭示其含义需要以患者的经验为指导,这与现象学在共情调和上强调他人的经验是一致的。就心理分析朝着系统地揭示意义的方向赋予它一种解释学意义的范围而言,它在方法论上也与现象学的解释模式相兼容。 Karlsson(2010,p。13)指出了精神分析和现象学之间的七个重要的“联系点”,而Thompson(2005,p。40)提出“精神分析在潜伏期已经是现象学的……”。的确,弗洛伊德的技术原理在现象学背景之外毫无意义。”因此可以声称,在寻求主体间性的过程中,心理治疗,心理分析和现象学之间以及在西格蒙德·弗洛伊德,埃德蒙之间之间的有意义的对话存在足够的共识。侯赛尔和马丁·海德格尔尤其如此?这就是本文要探索的内容。本文从指出弗洛伊德模式既是自然科学又是诠释学的含糊之处出发,探索了精神分析学与现象学之间的区别和共性的基本点,特别是心理学的作用的重要性。心理分析和现象学中的无意识和意向性,以及两者对更好地了解自己的世界的方向。然而,最终,作者得出结论,尽管共同点似乎有助于弗洛伊德主义和心理治疗领域的现象学之间的对话,但它们在目的和方法上的差异(分别由不同的人类观塑造)继续阻碍着它。 。尽管如此,对它的追求仍在继续,不仅如欧文和卡尔森等理论家的学术努力所证明,而且由于第二世纪精神分析学在当代的敦促,从理论上一致地转向远离笛卡尔,并转向真正的主体间关系。

著录项

相似文献

  • 外文文献
  • 中文文献
  • 专利
获取原文

客服邮箱:kefu@zhangqiaokeyan.com

京公网安备:11010802029741号 ICP备案号:京ICP备15016152号-6 六维联合信息科技 (北京) 有限公司©版权所有
  • 客服微信

  • 服务号