IPA Inter-Regional Encyclopedic Dictionary of Psychoanalysis

Back to Table of Contents

repertoire. All of us utilize others to join in the construction of our selves; and this is not a stage, which we pass through and overcome, but is a continuing process by which we regulate and maintain ourselves. Seeing others as necessary aspects of ourselves requires a modification of our psychology from a two-person psychology, which focuses upon the relations between objects, to a one-person psychology which examines the relations between the self and its selfobjects. The implications of the selfobject concepts goes far beyond those of object relations posited on drive gratification or drive frustration. They are in accord with Fairbairn’s (1944) definition of object relations theory, which denotes a set of psychoanalytic and structural hypotheses which place the child’s need to relate to others at the center of human motivation. However these “relations” or “relationships” are not interactions which are represented or replicated in the brain but rather are mental processes that are being realized in the world. The sad and unfortunate equation of mind and brain has led to this state of confusion. Although the mind is certainly generated by the brain, it cannot be seen as nothing more than the brain as so many choose to do (Kandel, 2012) as seemingly in the interest of the economy of words. The brain, the mind and the self are three distinct and different entities. The brain is an organ which generates the mind. The mind is a concept of thought and feeling which encompasses the world. The self is the person who exists in the world and with other persons. These three entities should not be collapsed into one. In words of Goldberg (2015b, oral communication with Eva Papiasvili):, “Imagine, if you will, a person who enrolls in the business school at Harvard. He or she is in the business school but may rarely be physically present in the building that houses the school of business. The parents of the imaginary student come to visit in order to see the university that their son or daughter attends. They are shown the administrative building, the library along with the business school but one innocent question seems to baffle their tour guide. The mother of our student wishes to know where the university is and can only be told that the university is both everywhere and more. Harvard is neither a mere collection of buildings or at all capable of being located. It is something akin to an idea just as the mind and the self are neither fixed nor bounded. Harvard means different things to different people very much as do object relations”. (See also entries TRANSFERENCE, SELF PSYCHOLOGY) V. Be. The Rise of Proposed "Third" Models Of Psychic Functioning On both sides of the Atlantic, French analysts (Brusset, 1988, 2005, 2006, 2013) have adopted the term "The Third Model” (‘Le Troisième Topique’) to retrospectively assemble under one metapsychological rubric the work of a number of post-Freudian authors on the role of the object in the development of the psychic apparatus. The designation #3 refers to the fact that this model has been progressively elaborated by various leading thinkers who have felt the need to add the relationship to early caretakers as prerequisite to the attainment of a psychic apparatus capable of operating according to one or the other of the two Freudian models of the psychic apparatus: The first being the topographical one (Freud 1900) of a division into consciousness, unconsciousness, and preconsciousness, each with their separate rules of

234

Made with FlippingBook - professional solution for displaying marketing and sales documents online