Thursday, January 1, 2015

terminology problem

I realized in a recent discussion that psychoanalytic terminology makes things very confusing for newcomers.

When Klein used object relations she was often talking about internal objects, which are the representations of parental and sibling imagos, in good or bad aspect, that are accompanied with part-object relations (i.e. feces, urine, etc.).

In my work I've tried to show that these aren't contingent or random. Although there are definitely non-universal adaptations they still must fit in the framework that I've classified between perfection and death. Although, the imagos usually only show up in these ways in borderline and psychotic individuals who have foreclosure of the paternal imago. When the paternal imago isn't foreclosed then the egoist's imago of the father is  one who is supposed to lead the workgroup (phallic) or rule civilization (anal), or foster one in the workgroup, or form one for civilization (anal) for the altruist. These are in the ego drive aspect of, course.

All the internal objects relate to imagos that relate to certain ego and object drives whether they function or not (i.e. have been repressed).  


No comments:

Post a Comment