22-5 The Dialectic Relationship between Psychoanalytic Psychotherapy and Hermeneutic Phenomenology: Dilemmas and Solutions in Psychoanalytical Clinical Research
| Ya-Chin Hung | Wei-Lun Lee |
| Naya Institute of Technology | National Dong Hwa University |
This article explores the dilemmas of psychoanalytical clinical research and also intends to propose a method which is differentiated from that based on clinical experiences with the help of hermeneutic phenomenology. Psychoanalysis structures its theory by clinical research; however, it cannot meet the requirements of verification and deduction in te ns of empirical science. In addition, the practice traits of psychoanalysis make verifying empirical evidence difficult. For these reasons, psychoanalysis is not easy understood and accepted within the scope of academic research. In order to shed the impression of “simple logical thinking”, this article attempts to provide a platform for examining psychoanalytical theory through hermeneutic phenomenology. In the empirical discussion, this article focuses on bridging psychoanalysis and phenomenology based on “ co-constitution’,. This article suggests that “projective identification" of psychoanalysis and “co-consti tu ti on’, of phenomenology are refering to how people co-constitute a certain relationship. The difference is that the “co-constitution’, of phenomenology believes the existence of human beings' inner thoughts but it does not address those. In the last part, the problem of dual roles of a researcher and a therapist is discussed as well in order to clarify how the researcher controls keys and rules of her role positioning so that it is not trapped in the research dilemma of“simple logical thinking’,.
Keywords
co-constituting, hermeneutic phenomenology, projective identification, psychoanalysis
Reference
于而彥譯(2000)。佛洛伊依德一精神分析之父。台北: 生命潛能文化。Jacobs, M. (1992). Sigmund Freud.
李幼蒸譯 (1994)。純粹現象學通論。台北: 桂冠。Husserl, E. (1976). ldeen zu einer phanomenologie und phanomenologischen philosophie.
李郁芬、謝隆儀、黃世明、楊明敏、吳建芝、林雨芳譯(2006)。愛是完美的犯罪。台北: 五南。Lavie, J. C. (1997). L ’。mour est un crime parfait.
李維倫(2004)。以置身所在作為心理學研究的 目標現象及其相關之方法論。應用心理學研究，22，157-200。
李維倫譯 (2004)。現象學十四講。台北: 心靈工坊。Sokolowski, R. (2000). Introduction to phenomenology.
林玉華、獎雪梅譯 (1999)。當代精神分析導論理論與實務。台北 :五南。Bateman, A., & Holmes, J. (1995). Introduction to psychoanalysis contemporary theory and practice.
林宏濤譯(1995)。詮釋的衝突。台北: 桂冠。Ricoeur,P.(1969).Leconflictdes interpretαtions.
洪雅琴(2005)。受保護管束犯罪少年心理分析治療的詮釋現象學研究。國立台灣師範大學教育心理與輔導研究所博士論文，未出版， 台北市。
洪雅琴、李維倫 (付梓中)。一個犯罪少女的置身所在:家的錯落與回返。劉佳昌(付梓中)。精神分析的科學地位與研究方法:爭議與省思。
潘德榮(2002)。詮釋學導論。台北 : 五南。嚴平譯(1992)。詮釋學。台北:桂冠。Palmer, R. E (1969). Hermeneutics:Interpretation theory in Schleiermacher; Dilthey, Heidegger, and Gadamer. Evanston: Northwestern University Press.
Alvesson, M., & Skoldberg, K. (2000). Reflective methodology: New vistas for qualitative research. London: Sage.
Bachrach，H， Weber, J., & Solomon, M. (1985). Factors associated with the outcome of
psychoanalysis. International Review o fPsychoanalysis, 31, 196-199.
Breuer, J., & Freud, S. (1895). Studies in hysteria. London: Hogarth.
Fonagy, P. (2002). An open door review of outcome studies in psychoanalysis (2nd ed.). London: International Psychoanalytical Association.
Freud, S. (1900). The interpretation of dreams. London: Hoga.
Freud, S. (1911). Formulations of the two principles of mental unction. London: Hogarth. Freud, S. (1914). Remembering, repeating, and working through. London: Hogarth. Gadamer, H. G. (1989). Truth and method (2nd revised ed.). London: Sheed & Ward.
Gedo, J. (1999). The evolution of psychoanalysis: Contemporary theory。practice. New
York: Other Press.
Green, A. (2000). What kind of research for psychoanalysis? In J. Sandler, A. M. Sandler
& R. Davies (Eds.), Clinical and observational psychoanalytic research: Roots of a controversy (pp. 21-26). London: Kamac.
Habermas, J. (1972). Knowledge and human interests. London: Heinemann.
Heidegger, M. (1977). On the essence of truth. In D. F. Krell (Ed.), Basic writings (pp.
113-141). New York: Harper and Row.
Heimann, P. (1950). On counter-transference. International Journal of Psychoanalysis, 31, 81-84.
Home, J. (1966). The concept of mind. International Journal of Psychoanalysis, 47, 42-49.
Klein, M. (1946). Notes on some schizoid mechanisms. International Journal of Psychoanalysis analysis, 27, 99-110.
Laplanche, J. (1989). New foundations for psychoanalysis. Oxford: Blackwell.
Malan, D. (1976). They frontier of brief psychotherapy. New York: Plenum.
Modell, A. (1978). The nature of psychoanalytic knowledge. Journal of American
Psychoana{ysis Association, 26, 641-658.
Perron, R. (2002). Reflections on psychoanalytic research problems-a French speaking view. In P. Fonagy (Ed.), An open door review of out come studies in psychoanalysis (2nd revised ed.)。p. 3-9). London: International Psychoanalytical Association.
Popper, K. (1959). The logic ofscientific discovery. London: Routledge.
Ricoeur, P. (1976). Interpretation theory. Fort Worth: Texas Christian University Press.
Ricoeur, P. (1981). Hermeneutics and the human sciences. New York: Cambridge University Press.
Ricoeur, P. (1991). The hermeneutical function of distanciation. In P. Ricoeur From text to action: Essays in hermeneutics, II (K. Blarney & J.B. Thompson, Trans., pp. 75-88). Evanston, IL: Northwestern University.
Rycroft， C. (1985). Psychoanalysis and beyond. London: Chatto.
Sandler, J., & Sandler, A. M. (1984). The past unconscious, the present unconscious, and interpretation of transference. Psychoanalysis inquiry, 4, 367-399.
Spence, D. (1982). Narrative truth and historical truth: Meaning and interpretation in psychoanalysis. New York: Norton.
Strenger，C. (1991). Between hermeneutics and science. Madison: International University Press.
Wallerstein, R. (1986). For-Two live in treatment: A study of psychoanalysis and psychotherapy. New York: Guilford.
Download