RESUMO
In psychoanalysis own speciality language and its history, there has been a certain maniac delusion around the creation of new concepts and new words. Among the first psychoanalysts, this was relatively normal. I say normal because the concept of introjection invention, by Ferenczi, is the object of a great confusion, and it needs Karl Abraham´s intervention for the stabilization of this concept and world. From the 1950´s on, with the spraying of psychoanalysis, it seems no analyst can feel him or herself to be a creator without bringing its stone to a conceptual and lexical construction wich is more and more alike that of a babel tower. Nowadays, the concept of foreclusion has entered the everyday life of french psychoanalysts, and of cultural life. Freud refuses even a first draft of this concept, but nothing can be done: based on major faults of translation, Lacan establishes his new concept pretending it constitutes a hallmark between psychosis, neurosis and perversions, wich in itself would seem bizarre for other clinicians around the world, not to mention Freud and the first psychoanalysts(AU)
Assuntos
Psicanálise , Psicopatologia , Transtornos PsicóticosRESUMO
In psychoanalysis own speciality language and its history, there has been a certain maniac delusion around the creation of new concepts and new words. Among the first psychoanalysts, this was relatively normal. I say normal because the concept of introjection invention, by Ferenczi, is the object of a great confusion, and it needs Karl Abraham´s intervention for the stabilization of this concept and world. From the 1950´s on, with the spraying of psychoanalysis, it seems no analyst can feel him or herself to be a creator without bringing its stone to a conceptual and lexical construction wich is more and more alike that of a babel tower. Nowadays, the concept of foreclusion has entered the everyday life of french psychoanalysts, and of cultural life. Freud refuses even a first draft of this concept, but nothing can be done: based on major faults of translation, Lacan establishes his new concept pretending it constitutes a hallmark between psychosis, neurosis and perversions, wich in itself would seem bizarre for other clinicians around the world, not to mention Freud and the first psychoanalysts
n psychoanalysis own speciality language and in its history, there has been a certain maniac delusionaround the creation of new concepts and new words. Among the first psychoanalysts, this was relativelynormal. I say "normal" because the concept of "introjection" invention, by Ferenczi, is the object of a greatconfusion and it needs Karl Abraham's intervention for the stabilization of this concept and world. Fromthe 1950's on, with the spraying of psychoanalysis, it seems no analyst can feel him or herself to be a creatorwithout bringing its stone to a conceptual and lexical construction which is more and more alike that of aBabel tower. Nowadays, the concept of foreclusion has entered the everyday life of French psychoanalystsand of cultural life. The creation of this concept and the recuperation of this word from a law vocabularyand its implantation in psychiatry, in clinical psychology and in psychoanalysis bring serious problems.Completely alien to Freud's vocabulary as the indication of an specific psychic mode of working, the wordof foreclusion appears as a symptom of abyssal differences between German or English speaking psychiatry,clinical psychology or psychoanalysis, and French ones, with their passion addressed to large nosographicpictures and structures where no dynamics is to be considered. Freud refuses even a first draft of thisconcept, but nothing can be done: based on major faults of translation, Lacan establishes his new conceptpretending it constitutes a hallmark between psychosis, neurosis and perversions, which in itself wouldseem bizarre for other clinicians around the world, not to mention Freud and the first psychoanalysts
