Response to “Thinking About Our Work: Freud, Newton, and Einstein— Strange Bedfellows Indeed” Sherry D. Breslau1 issn 0362-4021 © 2016 Eastern Group Psychotherapy Society group, Vol. 40, No. 3, Fall 2016 255 1 Private practice, Manhattan; Faculty/Supervisor, Derner Institute for Advanced Psychological Studies; and Clinical Supervisor, City University of New York. Correspondence should be addressed to Sherry D. Breslau, PhD, CGP, 295 Central Park West, #6, New York, NY 10024. E-mail: docbreslau@aol.com. I enjoyed and appreciated reading Robert Pepper’s “Thinking About Our Work: Freud, Newton, and Einstein—Strange Bedfellows Indeed.” Though I don’t consider myself scientifically minded, I have long been fascinated by the parallels between modern physics and the ways many of us think about unconscious processes. Dr. Pepper clearly demonstrates how our thinking about the psyche, and group process in particular, runs parallel to such widely accepted theories as Newton’s laws of motion and Einstein’s theory of the conservation of energy. I tend to gravitate (metaphorically) toward quantum theories that allow for ambiguity and uncertainty, thus allowing for an endless stream of possibilities. This echoes the way I work with individuals and groups, allowing for free associations and an unfolding of process. In that context, I will review some basic phenomena of physics that I think run parallel to a psychoanalytic mind-set. The observer effect states that it is impossible to measure a subatomic particle without having a direct effect on it. Particles are not static; they behave like waves, and each wave has an unlimited number of potential “wave functions.” However, once you measure a particle, or “collapse” its wave function, you are unable to observe any of its other myriad possible functions. The resemblance to the psychoanalytic processes of free association, emotional exploration, and interventions is wonderfully striking. At each point in our analytic dialogue, we face an important choice. We may intervene, or we may remain silent and allow our patient’s process to keep unfolding. Whether our intervention is an interpretation, an observation, or a thoughtful reaction, at the moment that we choose 256 breslau to intervene, we are choosing a direction for this moment of our session, and all other possibilities are put on hold. One might argue that even silence is an intervention, and in some sense, of course, that is also true. If we are silent, we are choosing an encouragement of our patient’s associations, thus eliminating the possibility of overt interaction for the time being. In the language of quantum physics, we are perpetually making choices about the timing of collapsing our patient’s wave functions. Nowhere is this trade-off more apparent than in a nonstructured therapy group or process group. There are so many interactions going on, and the possibilities are endless. If we pursue an individual or a detail too quickly, we are likely to shut down an interpersonal process. If we wait too long, it may be difficult to get back to important emotional content. In his delightful (although arguably speculative) book The Self-Aware Universe, physicist Amit Goswami (1993) does an outstanding job describing his version of how the “personal unconscious” and neuroses develop: How does the personal unconscious arise according to the quantum theory? It arises as follows: The subject is conditioned to avoid certain mental states; consequently, the probability becomes overwhelming that these states are never collapsed from coherent superpositions (wave functions) that include them. Such coherent superpositions, however, may dynamically influence without apparent external cause the collapse of subsequent states. Not knowing the cause of behavior may lead to neurosis-generating anxiety. Eventually, the subject may imagine causes and proceed to eliminate them through such neurotic behavior as compulsive hand washing. (p. 566) An illustration of yet another phenomenon in physics that has always sounded very “Freudian” to me is the concept of black holes and event horizons. An event horizon is generally defined as a boundary in space-time beyond which events cannot affect an outside observer. Event horizons occur around black holes (created by the gravity of collapsed stars). It has long been thought that the gravitational pull of the collapsed star becomes so strong that nothing, not even light...
Search from 250 M+ research papersSearch from 250 M+ research papers
Mar 1, 2023
Yann Petit 
Open Access