Customer Service | Help | FAQ | PEP-Easy | Report a Data Error | About
:
Login
Tip: To save articles in ePub format for your eBook reader…

PEP-Web Tip of the Day

To save an article in ePub format, look for the ePub reader icon above all articles for logged in users, and click it to quickly save the article, which is automatically downloaded to your computer or device.  (There may be times when due to font sizes and other original formatting, the page may overflow onto a second page.).

You can also easily save to PDF format, a journal like printed format.

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

Wallerstein, R.S. (2005). Dialogue or illusion? How do we go from here? Response to André Green. Int. J. Psycho-Anal., 86(3):633-638.

(2005). International Journal of Psycho-Analysis, 86(3):633-638

Dialogue or illusion? How do we go from here? Response to André Green

Robert S. Wallerstein

I appreciate very much André Green's spirited and extended rejoinder to my presentation of the place of our current pluralism of theory in worldwide psychoanalysis within the unfolding historical development of our discipline, because it does give me the opportunity both to try to clarify possible misunderstandings between us, and also to outline more comprehensively the basically distinct visions of the nature of psychoanalysis that undergird our differing takes on what the psychoanalytic enterprise is all about. Which accounts for my original suggestion that he, as a long-time friend who has always respectfully disagreed with me on just these issues of what it is that we are both engaged in under the rubric of psychoanalysis, should be invited to write the rejoinder to my presentation.

But, before responding on our more fundamental differences about the nature of psychoanalysis as a discipline, let me reply to specific issues of fact or opinion that Green raises in his text, in the order in which he presents them. First, about the intent of my first presidential address to the International Psychoanalytical Association (IPA) at the 1987 Congress in Montreal (Wallerstein, 1988), entitled ‘One psychoanalysis or many?’ My programmatic intent was to call the psychoanalytical community's attention to a major scientific issue confronting it: what, in the face of our ever-burgeoning diversity of theoretical perspectives, holds us together as shared adherents of a common psychoanalytic enterprise, and then differentiates us from other, non-psychoanalytic perspectives on the nature of mental functioning.

[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 © 2019, 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.