Slices & Articles Get by the slice or add to your own ebook
Attachment and psychoanalysis: Is
The split between attachment theory and metapsychology has undoubtedly proved very costly for our respective approaches to theoretical-clinical modelling in the field of child psycho-pathology over the last few decades.
Indeed, we are all aware of the three successive major controversies that have marked the history of attachment theory:
• Does the attachment concept evacuate the issue of mental representation?
• Is the attachment concept wholly linked to the issue of object presence, or by contrast, is it possible, between object presence and absence, to make room for the gap, in other words for the difference between what is expected of the object and what is actually received?
• Is the attachment concept incompatible with the sexual dimension or with child sexuality?
Before looking at the apparently heretical but highly heuristic concept of “attachment drive”, which will undoubtedly take us into the realms of aporia, I shall attempt to show how attachment can enable us to bridge the gap between drive theory and object relations theory.See All Chapters
|John W. M. Krummel||Indiana University Press||ePub|
ON THE BASIS of the previous two chapters one might surmise the inadequacy of Nishida’s appropriation of Hegelian (and, in general, nineteenth-century German philosophical) terminology to capture the content of what he strove to express. The matter that he attempted to expound through the language of dialectical philosophy slips away from its structure, ex-ploding beyond any bounds erected to systematize it. But neither would simply repeating the paradoxical and parabolic modes of traditional Zen discourse be satisfying philosophically. The two aspects of Nishida’s thinking that I think confound traditional metaphysical discourse despite the fact that they are essential to his mature philosophy are what I call the “chiasmatic” aspect of, or implied in, his so-called dialectic (benshōhō ) on the one hand, and the chōra that embraces or enfolds it while expressing itself in it, on the other. Combining these two terms, I will take the liberty in the following of presenting Nishida’s mature philosophy, what he calls his “absolute dialectic” (zettai benshōhō ), as a “chiasmatic chorology” in an attempt to better characterize the real matter of his thinking and to suggest that therein lies Nishida’s philosophical contribution that makes his work more than a mere appropriation or development of Hegelian dialectics or Mahāyāna non-dualism. I argue that it is because of its chiasmatic and chōratic nature that the Sache he strove to capture and express through the language of dialectical philosophy perpetually slips away from any systemic bounds.1See All Chapters
In this chapter, I describe a project that took place in a nursery school in an impoverished district of Naples in southern Italy. This was an extremely deprived area characterized by high levels of poverty, unemployment, and social breakdown, where drug trafficking and organized crime [camorra] were rife. In the period immediately prior to the project, a “war” had erupted between various gangs in the area, resulting in a number of deaths in the local community. Seeking to do something about the climate of terror that prevailed, a group of teachers and heads of local nursery schools approached the city council’s “Early Years” service. The university where I am employed became involved, and “Fox’s Earth”—a project that took place over three years—was born.
The principal idea was to offer children, families, and teachers the experience of a stable, safe space in which ordinary, everyday activities—play, conversation, meetings—could be re-established in a climate of care, understanding, and shared concern for life.See All Chapters
|Ace Academics||Ace Academics||ePub|
Business & Economics