Back to Table of Contents
meaning, no longer as an element of the conflict, but rather it becomes the principle itself, founding and explanatory, of the conflict”, does not show the force of Freud’s complex thought. He points out a certain simplifying distortion of Freud’s thinking by doing without “the Freudian notions of multidimensionality, complemental series, identifications, etc.” In his criticism of Gioia’s paper, Paz shows how the linear and direct use Gioia makes of some Freudian concepts, leads to a simplification that disregards the complexity Freud’s thought, specifically in regard to the relations between the Superego, the identifications, and the death drive. Paz formulates two questions, relevant to evaluations of Freud’s drive theory: 1) At which point in Freudian drive theory can one find support for what one’s statement suggests? 2) Or, in case of modifications, what are they exactly modifications of? (Paz 1977, p.318-321). VI. Be. Benzoin Winograd Benzoin Winograd (1977) considers that in Freudian drive theory, there are different phases and levels, but altogether it shows an essential homogeneity and lack of conceptual contradiction, and therefore, one should talk about a single theorization. He considers the Freudian theory of the death drive as the one on the highest theoretical level, and the most comprehensive, as it could explain phenomena that the two previous theories could not properly account for. Unlike Gioia, Winograd thinks that Freud did not consider the death instinct to be an autonomous source, necessary and sufficient, of aggression and destructiveness. Winograd finally indicates, based on the inter-disciplinary thinking of Eduardo Issaharoff (2001), that certain Freudian concepts of great explanatory importance, work, as far as their structuring process is concerned, in a probabilistic, and not determinist form (in the sense of being open to events, not a priori fixed). The configuration Eros – Thanatos is conceived of to work in such complex not-predetermined way. VI. Bf. Gustavo M. Jarast In 2006, G. Jarast received the Premio Fepal for his article “ En contra de la pulsión de muerte ” [Against the death drive]. There he theorizes that, as per Freud (1895), drives are born in the bond of a relation with an ‘other’. When Eros falters, the death drive gradually takes over the psyche, which can lead to death. In the face of pain, the energy in reserve is drained and the principle of neurotic inertia becomes privileged over the regulator of constancy. The preservation drive tends to return to its previous, inanimate, state, but the sexual drives boost life and this is achieved by the parental presence that satisfies the love needs. These ideas find theoretical support also in Winnicott’s and Bion’s thought. Maternal reverie leads to primary identifications, the first affective bond with another person. The protective barrier, regulator of stimuli, develops. If this is not achieved, there is no subject who can experience pain or wonder about his anxiety and the crystallization of character disorders, addictions, or psychosomatic disturbances are produced, exposed to a silent death drive, and
188
Made with FlippingBook - professional solution for displaying marketing and sales documents online