Freshly modified...July 9th, 2011...
I have settled on a name for the particular brand of integrative psychoanalysis I wish to teach -- 'DGB Multi-Dialectic-Integrative (MDI) Psychoanalysis'.
Focusing on the principle of 'homeostatic-dialectic-(democratic) balance' as its central principle, this particular viewpoint -- that borrows different elements from most of the main schools of psychology, starting with 'Pre-Classical', 'Classical', and 'Object Relations Psychoanalysis' as its main foundational structure -- blends 'reality (traumacy and memory) theory' with 'fantasy theory', 'ego psychology' with 'id psychology', 'life' and 'death' forces circulating in the human personality, 'self-objects' blending with 'social objects', 'immediacy (here and now) theory' blending with 'transference (there-and-then) theory', 'narcissistic theory' blending with 'altruistic theory', the past blending with the pressent blending with the future, the conscious personality blending with the subconscious (preconscious and unconscious) personality, conscious memories blending with subconscious memories and both being potentially diagnosable as 'transference memories', not 'screen memories'....
Even though I am not formally trained in Psychoanalysis, and can be considered an 'outsider' and/or an 'underground' psychoanalytic theorist -- being an outsider can be at least partly a good thing as it allows you to develop a different perspective on things (or even a number of such different perspectives), which at the same time, prevents you from becoming locked inside one and only perspective, one 'overly tight, reductionistic, anal-retentive, theoretical box' that limits and closes off your mindset to other more flexible and functional possibilities.
'Liberal' only becomes 'overly permissive' at the point where 'important, functional boundaries are crossed'. Now obviously, the point at which 'functional' and/or 'normal' becomes 'dysfunctional', 'neurotic', and/or 'pathological' is always subject to significant 'social disagreement' and 'dialectic-democratic (or undemocratic) debate'...
The downside of not being an 'insider' is that you miss much of the depth of the whole evolution and spectrum of (in this case) psychoanalytic ideas, in terms of who's doing and saying what, and in this regard, I have to confess that I more or less lost contact with the evolution of psychoanalytic ideas after the whole Anna Freud, Kurt Eissler, and Jeffrey Masson Seduction Controversy died down in the early 90s, by which time Anna Freud had died in 1982 at the beginning of the controversy, Eissler died in 1999, some 5-7 years after the controversy had subsided, and Masson was about to start his new career in animal psychology shortly after his litigation procedures had finally ended in the early 90s...
Today, I don't have a clue who is running the Freudian Empire at the top, nor who the main psychoanalytic theorists are, nor what kind of work they are doing...The only 'legendary' psychoanalyst who I know is still alive is Otto Kernberg. (I read part of a recent interview with him that you can find online. I would like to read more of Kernberg's work.) I don't know what happened to Brian Bird. I can't find anything about him -- other than his classic essay on transference (and that Masson met and liked him). Harry Guntrip died in 1975. Morris Eagle received an honourary award for his work in psychoanalysis in 2009, and I assume is still alive. Guntrip (Psychoanalytic Theory, Therapy, and The Self, 1971, 1973) and Eagle (Recent Developments in Psychoanalysis, 1984) more or less introduced me to the study of 'Object Relations Theory'.
My work, I would eventually like to coherently organize and put on a new blogsite that I have just opened up -- the 'Psychoanalytic Branch' of Hegel's Hotel...http://hegelshoteldgbpsychoanalysis.blogspot.com
in which you should expect a 'solid evolutionary development of the new, 'all-encompassing multi-integrative school' that I have been talking about here -- which will include excerpts and modifications of all 50 years of Freud's theorizing in Strachey's Standard Edition, as well as Object Relations, Self-Psychology, Jungian Psychology, Adlerian Psychology, Gestalt Therapy, Transactional Analysis, Cognitive Therapy, General Semantics Theory and Therapy, Primal Therapy, Self-Esteem Psychology...).
My Table of Contents of '(GAP)-DGB Multi-Dialectic-Integrative Psychoanalysis' can be found at the link listed above...
The initials -- and acronym -- 'DGB' which stands for 'Dialectic Gap-Bridging' as well as the initials of my name, is perhaps mainly a duplication of the acronym 'MDI' which stands for 'Multi-Dialectic-Integrative'. Before both of these acronyms, I used to use the acronym 'GAP' which stands for 'Gestalt-Adlerian-Psychoanalytic' and also the idea of the various 'theoretical gaps' that DGB Philosophy-Psychology seeks to 'bridge' in some greater or lesser capacity in each and every essay that I write....
The idea of 'multi-dialectic-integrative' can also be referred to as 'multi-bipolar-integrative'. When a psychologist or psychiatrist uses the term 'bipolar personality' today, he or she is basically implying that the 'class' of people under discussion (which could include all of us to greater or lesser extents) have 'unintegrated bipolar personalities'...The therapeutic process whether through 'drug therapy' and/or 'pscyhotherapy' can be presumed (or not) to be one of seeking 'greater bipolar integrationism' and 'less bipolar extremism' in this type of client population (which as stated above probably includes all of us to some greater or lesser extent).
The type of theory that I am trumpeting here is one that goes back to the philosophical assumptions and premises of our oldest philosophers such as Anaximander, Heraclitus, and Lao Tse ('yin' and 'yang'), who all in their own particular way, emphasized the idea that the world is built on the principle of 'attraction' and 'repulsion', 'force' and 'consent', of 'opposites colliding and/or collaborating with each other', trying to 'overpower' each other, 'manipulate' each other, 'exploit' each other, 'suppress' each other, 'opress' each other, and/or the opposite -- 'dialectic-democratic consent' which may or may not include the idea of 'integrating opposite characteristics, beliefs, values, lifestyles, etc'...
It is based on the principle that opposites can both attract and repel, that similarities can both attract and repel, that the world is full of countless 'bipolarities' that 'dialectically interact' with each other, and affect each other in both positive and/or negative ways, that 'integrating opposite bipolarities constitutes much of what makes man happier and healthier -- both individually and collectively, in a movement that might be called 'diversified unification' and/or 'unified diversification' -- that 'Multi-Dialectic-Integrative Psychoanalysis is born.
An example of how this type of paradigm works:
Let's look at the example of a typical family. A husband has a 'dialectic' relationship with his wife (meaning that there are interactive and ideally integrative dynamics going on between the husband and wife with 'actions' and 'reactions' flowing back and forth -- and affecting each other -- from both sides). Now the father is going to have a different type of dialectic relationship going on with his son. The mother will have still a different dialectic relationship going on with her son. And if there is another son and/or daughter involved, the number of different dialectic relationships will continue to expand for every extra member of the family. And I have not yet mentioned the different types of dialectic relationships that are going on between each two siblings....and the different types of dialectics that surface when a third sibling enters into the picture...and/or a parent....and on, and on, we could list the different types of dynamics going on in the family depending on who and who isn't present....This is what I mean by 'multi-dialectics'.
Now, within any dialectic relationship, there is going to be some combination of 'powerplays', 'manipulations', and 'competitions' vs. 'co-operation' and 'integration' going on...That is the nature of any relationship...Adding more people into the fold simply escalates the different numbers and/or types of competitive and/or co-operative interactive dynamics...
Thus, the whole idea of 'dialectic logic' is to map out the different types of interactive, dynamic competitive and/or co-operative possibilities and/or realities in any given set of two or more people, or even two or more 'entities' like 'metaphorical structures postulated within the working psyche'... And the same can even be done for the different body organs in the body as a biologist or biochemist or neurologist or physiologist may look at any or all different possible type(s) of (healthy or unhealthy) interactive dynamics between the different organ structures....
Thus, we can ask the question: What is the general, dialectic, interactive relationship between the 'id' and the 'ego' in most particular situational and/or character contexts?
I would answer: Well, the general goal of the id is to propel its internal tension, its instinct or impulse, its emotion, its experience, its memory, its belief...upwards from subconsciousness to consciousness -- perhaps by way of a conscious mediating 'ego-state' that we might call the 'Idian Ego' or in my previous terminology, 'The Narcissistic-Dionysian Ego' -- that has a direct impact on 'The Central Mediating Ego'. However, at the same time, the combined job of The Central Ego and The Righteous Superego is to 'push back down' any perceived dangerous and/or anxiety-provoking 'internal tensions' from the population mentioned above...The 'non-threatening' id propulsions may be 'streamlined straight through to The Central Ego for immediate action' whereas the more threatening of the id propulsions may be 'siphoned and vaulted off' into a 'dissociated part of the personality'. This is what we are calling here the 'Id Vault' or 'Shadow-Id (SId) Vault'.
Metaphorically speacking, if this is done early enough in the process, we can say that The Central Ego has 'sent down' 'ego-defenders' to 'swarm', 'encompass', and 'contain' the 'rising internal tensions' before they even get out of subconsciousness -- in which case we can say that 'The Id or Sid Vault' is located in the subconscious personality -- the primary 'home' of the Id.
We can also say that the SId Vault contains a mixture or 'complex' of 'Shadow', 'Id', and 'Ego-Defending' factors... If the relative strength of the 'Shadow-Id Factor' is greater than the strength of the 'Ego-Defending Factor', the SId Vault will break down and whatever was making the most amount of 'noise' in The SId Vault will be propelled upwards into consciousness and into the Central Ego -- with or without the 'ego's consent'.
This 'upward driving propulsion' can be facilitated by such factors as drugs, alcohol, change in situational context, a rise in internal tension, a lowering of defense-mechanisms...The whole 'ego defensive system' can be very much likened to the way the 'immune system' functions on the biological level....And the 'Id Force' or 'Id Propulsions' can be likened to some conflated or non-conflated combination of 'red blood cells' (our 'life force') and 'toxic black cells' ('pathogens' arising from some combination of 'traumatic', 'compensatory', and/or 'narcissistic' learning -- which can create a 'destructive', 'self-destructive', and/or 'death force' within us...propelling upwards towardes the Central Ego and Social (or 'Anti-Social) expression....
The precursor to the id before 1923 was 'the pleasure ego' -- which means that Freud changed 'the id' from being a more or less 'conscious ego state', and dialectically opposed to the 'reality ego' (a 'splitting of ego-consciousness into two opposing ego-states here) before 1923, to being a 'largely unconscious un-ego state' in 1923 and afterwards (which seems somewhat inconsistent with Freud's idea that 'the ego' was 'born' from the more 'primitive and uncivil id'.) The question can easily be asked: Can't the id be viewed as an 'ego-state' -- largely subconscious in its most primitive, uncivil, evolving form -- but then perhaps having a 'conscious partner' that we might refer to as 'The Idian Ego (which is an integration of what I have so far been calling 'The Dionysian-Narcissistic-Rebellious Ego').
We have to look at 'The Id' as being a 'primitive ego state' -- the first 'ego state' in the evolutionary development of the child (and primitive man) -- Freud more or less wrote this, as he asserted that the ego was born from the id as an evolutionary and civil enhancement to the overall well-being of the organism. The id followed 'the pleasure principle' while the ego followed 'the reality principle' (safety and ethics or 'the law' first). The id followed the 'primary process' (symbolic language, uncivil wishes, contradictory impulses, no inherent, consistent logic) whereas the ego followed the principles of more coherent, consistent, logical thought (at least ideally).
Pathological breakdowns in 'logic' can be a determining factor in a person's overall type of 'pathology' or 'neurosis', and/or breakdowns in 'social ethics and values', or conversely 'overly stringent ethics and values' can also have a determining effect on the outcome of a person's particular 'neurosis'. Either way, the person can be viewed as being dialectically and/or democratically 'out of balance' in some capacity -- neurosis is generally, if not always, a product of some form of 'bipolar extremism'.
Though I write in the third person here in terms of 'metaphysical and/or metaphorical structures' -- in the end, all of these different 'psychic structures' have to be 'owned' or 're-owned' by us -- the 'I' in the 'Wholistic Self' -- and we are responsible and accountable for each and every behavior that comes out of whatever 'structure' or 'substructure' that we intend to use as a basic 'teaching and/or learning device' for better understanding the intra-psychic dynamics of the personality.
These are some of the different types of 'dialectic dynamics' that you are likely to find going on between the Id and The Central Ego, or between the conscious Idian Ego and The Central Ego with the Righteous Superego harping on the Central Ego from 'over top of its shoulder' like a 'critical, judging parent'.
There is the basic overall look at how I have taken what I consider to be the best of the work of Freud -- in his 50 years of theorizing -- and added a few extra elements from my own theorizing that is aimed at 'bridging the gap' between Freud's 1895 'Traumacy Theory' and his post-1896 'Instinct, Fantasy, Oedipal, and Narcissistic Theory'.
Certainly more is to come as I view myself as one of the 'leading edge transference theorists in the world (underground or not).
In this regard I will seek to continue to bring together such old, new, and/or modified concepts as: 'Traumacy Transferences', 'Impulse Transferences', 'Defensive or Compensatory Transferences', 'Identification and/or Introjective Transferences', 'Projective Transferences', 'Narcissistic Transferences', 'Approval-Seeking Transferences', 'Righteous Transferences', 'Nurturing Transferences', 'The Repetition Compulsion', 'The Re-Creation Compulsion', 'The Mastery Compulsion', 'Serial Behavior Patterns', 'Profiling Different Character Types', 'Profiling Different types of Complexes and Neuroses' (Anxiety Neuroses, Phobic Neuroses, Obsessive-Compulsions, 'Anal' Obsessions, 'Oral' Obsessions, Narcissistic Neuroses, Paranoia, Different Types of Bi-Polar Disorders, 'Anal-Schizoid' (Distancing) Behavior, Borderline Personality Types (what I consider -- following after Guntrip -- to be people with certain neurotic features in their personality that could -- if certain 'safeguards' are taken away -- balloon into a full-blown 'psychosis' or 'psychotic breakdown' or 'schizophrenia'...)...following in Jung's line of work... 'Mythological Archetypes/Heroes/Gods at work within the personality'...and much, much more...
-- dgb, July 2nd, updated July 9th, 2011,
-- David Gordon Bain
-- Dialectic Gap-Bridging Negotiations...
-- Are Still in Process...
