Back to Table of Contents
such as a drive, and the idea that the drive can be something that can exist apart from what it is directed at. Wittgenstein pointed out that one can talk about the mind only if one does not understand the mind as a mysterious entity, conceptually independent from personal circumstances. Similarly, one cannot see or have an intuition of the ‘desire’ either, without perceiving what is desired at the same time. Least of all, one can consider ‘impulses’ or ‘drives’ as entities that do not depend conceptually on the contexts in which they find existence. Among psychoanalytic theoreticians of drives who come close to Sartre and Merleau- Ponty’s philosophical perspectives, De la Puente references Fairbairn, Kernberg, Lorenzer, Winnicott, Loewald and Marcia Cavell. For Kernberg, affective states activate impulses, in the presence of the subject’s own presentations and of an ‘object’. Here, an impulse cannot be conceived of outside of an intersubjective drama, which coincides with Sartre’s ad Merleau- Ponty’s view that the “impulse” cannot be conceptually distinguished from either the interactions or the relations between people. In De la Puente’s view, there is a crucial element in Kernberg’s theory that brings him even closer to the existentialist writers, which is that this “dyad”: image of the self-image of the object, united by a bond between impulse and affect (self-affect-object unit) can be used defensively by the ego.” (See the specific explication of Kernberg’s theory above in the North Anerican section, IV. Faa) De la Puente also asserts that Alfred Lorenzer comes close to Sartre’s and Merleau-Ponty’s ideas because, like them, he does not think it is possible to experience a “drive” outside the intersubjective environment. “Drives can only be experienced in object relations (staged in reality or in phantasy), that is, in an interaction with the object, whether it is real or phantasized. […] As far as the needs of psychoanalysis are concerned, neither ego structures nor the id impulses can be conceived of other than as ‘presentations’’, contexts of meaning that are understood as interaction.” (Lorenzer 1977, p. 127). De la Puente suggests that Lorenzer has also taken a step in the direction of conciliating the psychoanalytic explanation and an explanation that can highlight the dialectical relation that exists between the world and the mind. He concludes, “My proposal is that psychoanalysis must gradually overcome Cartesianism, in a path that has been followed by, among others, Fairbairn, Kernberg, Lorenzer, Winnicott, Loewald and more recently Marcia Cavell (2006), who claims that any theory about self-knowledge must consider that the external world is part of the manufacture of our internal world and that ‘internal world’ is something that develops necessarily through interaction” (De la Puente 2011, p. 184). Overall, De la Puente brings the psychoanalytic concept of drive into the intersubjective context. VI. G. DEVELOPMENTS IN CHILEAN PSYCHOANALYSIS In Chile , Marcela Fuentes and Marie France Brunet have explored the concept of the death drive, mostly through European authors. (Another Chilean author Pilar Cubillos is included in the interdisciplinary section VII B.) VI. Ga. Marie France Brunet Marie France Brunet , (2002, 2013, 2019) explores various aspects of the concept drive in two articles and one book:
197
Made with FlippingBook - professional solution for displaying marketing and sales documents online