Abstract
In replying to commentators William J. Coburn and Therese Ragen, I weave together some strands from their discussions in order further to clarify the evolving influence of “mutual” analysis on our thinking and practice. In extending several issues they brought up, and raising some they did not, I expand upon my thesis—based on developmental, psychological, and biological discoveries—that deeply mutual analytic processes are at work in analysis and must and can be addressed to therapeutic advantage. I explore some further features and challenges that result from endorsing such a position—managing self-disclosure and emotional honesty; recognizing the role of mutual healing; and, above all, maintaining a stance that fundamentally respects uncertainty and the self and other as being mutually constituted. I also share some thoughts attempting to position neuroscience among other neighboring disciplines as sources that productively inform analytic work.
Talk to us
Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have
Schedule a callDisclaimer: All third-party content on this website/platform is and will remain the property of their respective owners and is provided on "as is" basis without any warranties, express or implied. Use of third-party content does not indicate any affiliation, sponsorship with or endorsement by them. Any references to third-party content is to identify the corresponding services and shall be considered fair use under The CopyrightLaw.
