Betatt..

[Gjest Gjest_gjest_*]

Hvor dumt er det å bli en smule betatt av psykologen sin? Det kompliserer det litt i mitt eget hode.

Hører gjerne om andres erfaringer!

[Langt mot Nord]

Ikke bra..

One of Freud’s early disciples, Melanie Klein, took up the task of applying the techniques of psychoanalysis to children. She considered her work a natural extension of Freud’s theories, rather than any sort of innovation in psychoanalysis; still, she met considerable criticism from her psychoanalytic colleagues. And rightly so, for her work is characterized by speculative and fantastic explanations of, well, infant fantasy.

Nevertheless, Klein did bring to light the “ugly” side of infant development, for she saw in infants a mass of angry and hostile impulses toward the mother when the infant did not get its needs met. In essence, the infant constantly flip-flops between love and hate: love when its needs are met, and hate when its needs are ignored or frustrated. In her work, Klein tried to explain the process by which the infant seeks to repair the damage of its hostility to its mother. In fact, the titles of two of her most significant collections of works, Envy and Gratitude and Love, Guilt, and Reparation, tell the story almost as well as the writings themselves.

Ultimately, though, Klein’s theories—through their influence on the subsequent psychoanalytic theory called object relations—can lead to a grave error in psychological treatment, for they tend to make the psychotherapeutic process a dyadic process between the psychotherapist and client. At its worst, this makes psychotherapy into a mothering process of caring for the needs of the client, and it reduces the “therapist” to a paid friend—or nanny.

Lacan saw through these errors and taught that psychoanalysis must involve three persons: the client, the analyst, and the unconscious. Just as healthy emotional development depends on a father coming between the mother and child, to sever the child’s emotional enmeshment with the mother, good psychotherapeutic work must let the unconscious come between the client and psychotherapist. This means that the psychotherapeutic process must always involve a symbolic fathering by which clients are led to recognize and overcome the illusions of their unconscious identifications with others and, in the process, to heal the aggression and hostility that underlie those identifications.

This explains why “lovers,” friends, and blog readers, with all their personal needs and desires, cannot function psychotherapeutically. And it explains philosophically—above and beyond any laws or professional ethics—why psychotherapists cannot be friends or “lovers” to their clients. If they try, it will lead to psychological disaster, for without the third person of the unconscious in the consulting room the psychotherapy can degenerate into all sorts of perversions.

And, of course, this all explains the ultimate “kink” in human sexuality: the love-hate flip-flop.

As unpleasant as it may be to admit it, eroticism is based on infantile needs to be received, accepted, and satisfied. When a person feels intensely received, accepted, and satisfied, then he or she is “in love.” But sooner or later that intensity will be broken. The break doesn’t even have to be the result of malicious neglect; it can simply be the result of a need to attend to other obligations in the world, and, in the person feeling neglected, intense jealousy can flare up.

Often people fear that someone or something they love will be stolen from them by someone else. But in true love there is no jealousy. When you have nothing to lose, and nothing to gain, how can you fear a “rival”?

But, because romance is not based in true love, romance is, in technical psychological terms, a game—and in playing this game, you put yourself in competition with everyone else playing the same game. This explains the essence of jealousy: in your fear of losing what you desperately want, you hate any person who might come between you and what you want.

So, regardless of how it happens, as those primitive needs are not met, then the “love” flip-flops into hatred and aggression. If you don’t believe it, take a look at the ugly process of our divorce courts for a perfect example. The world is cluttered with broken relationships that began in sweet love and ended in bitter anger and hate.

And all of this proves that true love, which is based in giving, not receiving, is pure and eternal, is never fleeting, and can never flip-flop into hate.

It’s just a shame that true love—the only true reparation—is feared by most families and is hardly ever taught to anyone, children or adults.

[Gjest H]

Hvor dumt er det å bli en smule betatt av psykologen sin? Det kompliserer det litt i mitt eget hode.

Hører gjerne om andres erfaringer!

Det er ikke uvanlig overhodet. Stress ned. Og google overføring og motoverføring når det gjelder terapi :-)

[Gjest MikeWaters]

Hvor dumt er det å bli en smule betatt av psykologen sin? Det kompliserer det litt i mitt eget hode.

Hører gjerne om andres erfaringer!

Fryktelig dumt, men ikke uvanlig. Litt Stockholm syndrom må til

[Gjest ts]

Det er ihverfall slitsomt! Prøver å meditere, og så dukker helt "FEIL" tanker opp i hodet. HUFF!

Jeg går til en kjempedyr privat psykolog og burde rett og slett bare slutte.