Customer Service | Help | FAQ | Report a Data Error | About
Tip: To zoom in or out on PEP-Web…

PEP-Web Tip of the Day

Are you having difficulty reading an article due its font size?  In order to make the content on PEP-Web larger (zoom in), press Ctrl (on Windows) or ⌘Command (on the Mac) and the plus sign (+).  Press Ctrl (on Windows) or ⌘Command (on the Mac) and the minus sign (-) to make the content smaller (zoom out).   To go back to 100% size (normal size), press Ctrl (⌘Command  on the Mac) + 0 (the number 0).

Another way on Windows: Hold the Ctrl key and scroll the mouse wheel up or down to zoom in and out (respectively) of the webpage. Laptop users may use two fingers and separate them or bring them together while pressing the mouse track pad.

Safari users: You can also improve the readability of you browser when using Safari, with the Reader Mode: Go to PEP-Web. Right-click the URL box and select Settings for This Website, or go to Safari > Settings for This Website. A large pop-up will appear underneath the URL box. Look for the header that reads, “When visiting this website.” If you want Reader mode to always work on this site, check the box for “Use Reader when available.”

For the complete list of tips, see PEP-Web Tips on the PEP-Web support page.

Thompson, M.G. (1996). Freud's Conception Of Neutrality. Contemp. Psychoanal., 32:25.

(1996). Contemporary Psychoanalysis, 32:25

Freud's Conception Of Neutrality

M. Guy Thompson, Ph.D.

PERHAPS NO TECHNICAL TERM more aptly distinguishes psychoanalytic technique from other forms of psychotherapy than the word "neutrality." Yet, Freud didn't even introduce the term until 1915—some twenty years after his basic theory and treatment philosophy were established. Since its introduction in the last of Freud's six papers on technique, "Observations on Transference-Love" (1915), the application of neutrality has gradually assumed the defining moment in what we now call "classical" technique.

My purpose in this article is to explore how Freud's conception of neutrality informed his treatment of Ernst Lanzer, more familiarly known as "the Rat Man." The case is prominent for two reasons. First, nowhere is there a clearer depiction of Freud's views on the nature of obsessional neurosis; and of Freud's major case studies, the Rat Man was the only one whom Freud actually treated that was successful (the other two—Dora and the Wolf Man—ended in failure). The fact that the Rat Man's analysis was successful offers a unique opportunity to examine the specific elements that account for the treatment's success and the part that Freud's conception of neutrality contributes to it.

In spite of this singular qualification, a mounting controversy has evolved over the last forty years concerning Freud's technical handling of the treatment, published in 1909. The most frequently invoked criticism about the technique Freud employed with the Rat Man concerns the relative absence of neutrality in his analysis. I believe that these criticisms demonstrate just how far analytic technique has evolved over the course of this century and how dramatically it has diverged from Freud's conception of it. The term "classical technique, " as it is conceived today only vaguely depicts Freud's clinical behavior.


0010-7530/96 $2.00 + .05

Copyright © 1996 W. A. W. Institute

20 W. 74th Street, New York, NY 10023

All rights of reproduction in any form reserved.

Contemporary Psychoanalysis, Vol. 32, No. 1 (1996)

1 Earlier versions of this paper were presented at the Fifth Annual Conference of the International Federation for Psychoanalytic Education, October 8, 1994, The Palmer House Hilton, Chicago, and at the Centre for Psychoanalytic Studies, University of Kent, Canterbury, England, October 27, 1994.

- 25 -

[This is a summary or excerpt from the full text of the book or article. The full text of the document is available to subscribers.]

Copyright © 2017, Psychoanalytic Electronic Publishing, ISSN 2472-6982 Customer Service | Help | FAQ | Download PEP Bibliography | Report a Data Error | About

WARNING! This text is printed for personal use. It is copyright to the journal in which it originally appeared. It is illegal to redistribute it in any form.