El poder en psicoanálisis

Abstract

A partir de experiencias institucionales (en particular, la desarrollada en la Secretaría Científica de la Asociación Psicoanalítica Argentina), se plantea la cuestión de los efectos del poder en el psicoanálisis mismo. El poder que se toma en cuenta es el implícito, es decir aquel ejercicio de poder del orden de lo inconsciente. Apoyándose en los escritos de Freud, se muestra cómo la pulsión de apoderamiento puede dar lugar a una expresión sádica de poder o contribuir a la constitución del saber. En base a lo antedicho y a emergentes de las experiencias institucionales, se aborda la cuestión del poder en la clínica psicoanalítica. Se historiza la progresiva insuficiencia del modelo objetivante del paciente y la progresiva inclusión de la subjetividad del analista y los efectos de poder a que esto último puede dar lugar. Se postula que, al ser el poder inherente al ser humano, no se lo puede controlar, por medios artificiales, sino que requiere procesos elaborativos continuos (análisis, autoanálisis, supervisiones), donde el encuadre, con las modificaciones que sean pertinentes, es un factor importante en el evitar desbordes por parte del analista.

Issued from institutional experiences. In particular from the one developed in the Secretaría Científica de la Asociación Psicoanalítica Argentina (Scientific Secretary of the Argentine Psychoanalytic Association). Activity systematized proceeding from clinical material, large and small group debates. The subject of the effects of power in psychoanalysis itself is tackled. The power taken into account is the implicit one, which is the exertion of power in the realm of the unconscious. Based on the writings of Freud this study shows how the dominium drive may generate a sadistic expression of power or contribute to the foundation of knowledge. Based on the previous statements and due to the emergences of institutional experiences the issue of power in psychoanalytic clinic is addressed. The progressive insufficiency of the patient’s objectivation model and the progressive inclusion of the subjectivity of the analyst as well as the effects of power to which this may lead are recorded. It is assumed that power, inherent to the human being, cannot be controlled by artificial means but requires continual elaboration processes (analysis, self analysis, and supervisions). Because of this, framing, with the pertinent modifications, is an important factor in the avoidance of excesses on the part of the analyst. A second issue that arises concerns the difficulty of debate among psychoanalysts. It is asseverated that the particular acquisition of analytical thinking, to a great extent resulting from a transmission of considerable experiential content, brings forth important narcissistic aspects related to the effect of unconscious power. In turn, this becomes an obstacle, since it implies challenging the assumptions held by each participant in the exchange. Finally the inevitable existence of a “doxa”, which is undisputed accepted knowledge that perpetuates forms of power, constitutes a major obstacle for a debate covering basic themes. In order to reduce these obstacles, the introduction of non habitual ideas is proposed to the groups concerned as well as devices, which because of their innovative features, lead to avoid the tendency to sterilize modalities applied up to now.