I’ve seen a few of your videos where you explain the shift in patients who show up for analysis in the 50s from guilty man to empty man. I have no isssue with the description but I think Zizek explains the shift to narcissism in a way that contributes another way of seeing man as still guilty: in his assessment, capitalist consumer society which has transformed man towards the narcissistic attitude (I’ve heard you say this also) now feels guilty for failing to live up to a new set of commandments. Instead of feeling guilty for not being “good”, man now feels guilty for not being happy. The commandments of Christianity are “be good, be humble”. The commandments of consumer capitalism are “consume and be happy”. Zizek states that people who show up for analysis are largely there because they feel empty, despite having succeeded in the consumption part yet still feel empty hence guilty for not being “happy”.
Ryan, his name was Dr. Ron Aldous. He was a psychiatrist and psychoanalyst in either Edmonton or Calgary. The paperis: Aldous, N.R. (2000). Progressive Crisis: An Outline. Canadian J. Psychoanal., 9(1):39-61..
I remember a book I read about Lacan and Derrida. They had chance encounter in the US for lectures. Lacan got infuriated when he saw Derrida, hehehe. I hope that story is a mere gossip, hehehe.
I love these lectures. I find it difficult to believe that tragic man suddenly showed up post-war when the genesis of the disorder is pre-oedipal or oedipal, i.e. before culture (e.g. post-modern culture) is really having an impact on the child. Maybe our post-modern culture is more likely to trigger pre-existing fragmentation, but surely for the entirety of human history people have suffered fragmentation.
@@doncarveth From your lectures and related reading, I understand that The Fall is longer and more painful in post-modern times without the safety-net previously provided by the absolute certainties of modernism.
@@doncarveth Thank you very much for that suggestion. It's a fascinating read. I find this particularly interesting living in Poland for 25 years, where they are currently undergoing an excruciating shift from modernity (rural, strict Catholicism, which was strengthened in reaction to Communism ) to post-modernity and experiencing a mental health and identity crisis in the process.
Another killer tape. Thank you. The way you posit Lacan as Freud filtered through Roman Catholicism and Sartre reminds me of the descriptions of Zizek as Marxism filtered through Hegel and Lacan!
I have found all of your lectures very useful. You have an impressive range of knowledge and are able to synthesize a higher level of understanding to these complex topics. Each time I listen to one of your lectures I have a deeper understanding of things I have read before and questioned. I’m also wondering if you have an introductory reader or recommendation of books and articles that someone new in the field should focus on? Thank you again for all you are doing to improve understanding in this area.
Really really interesting, I just came out of a narcissistic relationship and everything he says is so spot on. Nevertheless, I couldn't help but continuously think of Richard Gere throughout the whole speech, at least the angle does make them look so alike. Very very interesting, I did not know this guy and I'm definitely watching all of the videos!
I'm in analysis for my first time right now and found this talk to be very informative. Right now I utterly hate my analyst and this made me feel better that at least thats a positive in moving forward with the analysis.
Hello professor Carveth, I was wondering if you could give me the name of the psychologist and paper you mention at the 35 minute mark. I couldn't quite mark it out, Thank you for your fantastic video, brilliantly informative.
You mention a very interesting statement of 'the anxiety of influence'. For whom do you experience such anxiety? Very enjoyable and informative presentation.
Well yes absolutely brilliant but yes there are gaps the piece and the whole deal, bottom-up Freudian 1920's Psychoanalysis and its evolution or emergence in the years that follow by other theorists, Kohut etc . But it is incredible we have discovered so much since Freud but are no nearer the truth any more than Quantum mechanics is the truth , right at the beginning he speaks of Freuds ant - religious stance that is instantly a block to the transcendent or negative forces transformed by the psyche, but still an incredible tour de force of emergent modern psychoanalysis, self-psychology. My problem is despite being gifted and inspired how can I finish training when I have no funds ? or retrain without funds yet this level is what s good therapists should aspire to, the cost of training is prohibitive and once you have begun to do self work after many years, I can really resonate with a lot of this , so it is possible to be ready to work at this level and on a group or neurotically normalized mental health perspective you are a threat or seen as one, the dichotomy is false . The DANGER is in the interpretations fed back to the client they are just that "inferior and unworthy and must supplant thier own newly burgeoning self sense with it's new insights and begginnings of clarity and it cements the libidinal force or dynamic in favour of the analysts and thus they, patients are always disempowered , the expert is right. Which philosophically is the same as well in the extreme of the original the toxic parenting it , the patient had to fend off in the first place , I know and my power force, knowledge is .., the problem is in the dialectic rather as an avoidance of what you might call interbeing a deeper undefinable sense of two and yet oneness of intimacy of joy of excitement, bit when it condenses out the patient is one down ! That is what Jung called a purer complex or falling back into an intellectual, not now not loving absence, as the thoughts detract from the patients own need at the time, ideas ... ideas, ideas there is a marked difference between great therapy and great theory which is a by-product, how do we explain what happened, post pivotal moment, atoms are fuzzy balls look! But sir ....? Get ....out of your head I feel like screaming get out of your F... head and be available! For your poor patients, clients "I analyze ....who has a narcissistic disorder? Yep , a purer as Jung might write later in his notebook, a boy who was that little intellectual Mummy adored, oh m,y little darling is so brilliant, the poor patient has to prop this up .... But there is a lot of good stuff here institutes, they are just theories , analogues, ways of describing often writing over the sacred ground of the possibility of intimacy? God, it gets worse as the lecture goes on, like get me out of this vulnerable space and some of those questions, see how this defence multiplies at a rate like a virulent bacteria, anything but be open to relating in the moment , got it , this is a senior lecturer note NOT a therapist! umm, I think my long-distance analysis would be, a scared little boy terrified of intimacy and the vulnerability which must be part of this. Like the bible scholar who was beaten by his parents, God is and i am one of the chosen! Got it ...
According to the definition of Self psychology ， what is the meaning of extra analysis ？ It means the materials beyond the session ？ or outside the session ？
Perhaps you were referring to extra transference interpretations, meaning interpretation of conflicts, transferences etc., in the patients relationships with people other than the analyst. As opposed to working only in the transference, that is only on The relationship with the analyst?
I am just thinking about the topic of narcissistic patients having their characteristic symptoms only as the visible part of the iceberg and they all have the classic „freudian” conflicts and anxieties in deep, which becomes visible later in the therapy. Isn’t it rather a process of their healing? When a patient comes in analysis with diffuse narcissistic symptoms and develops some self-object transference it is because his psychological makeup is on the level of fragmentation-prone self, isn’t it? At this time he/she -by definition- cannot have freaudian type of inner conflicts and anxieties because he is simply not „one” enough to experience such feelings. He has to advance in the healing process to gain some stable cohesion of the self in order to be capable of developing a freudian transference. Thus, the conflict of the tragical man cannot really coexist with the conflict of the guilty man because the former is simply not matured enough to experience the problems of the latter. Where am I wrong?
That is exactly how self psychologists see the matter, but I feel it leaves the unconscious out of account. I believe guilty man exists unconsciously underneath tragic man, defended against. I don’t believe guilty men emerges when the patient is structured enough for it to exist. I believe it exists all along underneath and emerges into consciousness at this later stage. I believe a lot of the emptiness experienced by tragic man is the result of the annihilating super ego of guilty man at work. Hope that clarifies.
@@doncarveth Thank You, for the answer Professor Carveth! Now you gave me a lot to think over. It is very difficult to me to imagine a metapsychological structure in which fragmented representations of the self and the significant others dominate the psychic reality of someone while much more unified but conflicting representations are hiding only in the unconscious. Up to now I considered the fragmented or splitted representations (either in kohutian or kernbergian or kleinian sense) as an unequivocally more primitive level of psychic functioning than the cohesive oedipal objects of the freudian neuroses. (I am not a psychoanalyst myself, just a psychologist with limited clinical experience) Btw. your lectures are awesome. Always hiting the main point by which making other less crucial details clear automatically.
clearly, Mr. Carveth, your critizism of Lacan is not well founded. i.e. the concept of the name-of-the-father derives from the Oedipus complex and is an abstraction of the law with a pun that only works in French. Also, Lacan does refer to Sartre on various occations but theoretically he is much closer to Hegel and other philosophers. Saying Lacan rephrased existentialism with structuralist language is almost comical and shows your lack of study in this field. Coming from such a Catholic family it is only normal and healthy to deal with the religion. Freud wrote a book about Moses and was an atheist and Lacan took up the topic of religion. Culture and language contribute their part to the unconscious and the sympotoms of society and in many, religion is still very present. Saying Catholizism is the only true religion refered to it being institutionalized and institutions create truth. And I could find no book of Lacans' titled Catholizism. I see your critizism coming from a personal distaste and thats fine, but you also devalue the clinical work without in-depth knowledge and that is not respectable for any clinician. If you critizise, do your research. I shouldnt have to say this to an academic. There are many Lacanian psychoanalyists all over the world, in institiutions, organisations and behind the couch you might not know this.
@@doncarveth Who is Lucan? no I havent read any book of yours. I was refering to what you said and how you positioned yourself in your critisism of Lacanian psychoanalysis in THIS video.
![Sean Rii, Karyon, Sharzkii - Taungule [My Love] (Official Music Video)](http://i.ytimg.com/vi/eJoMuypbSzQ/mqdefault.jpg)
Listening to your lecture at home while in quarantine is very enjoyable.
Another grateful student here. Thank you for these lectures, Professor.
Most welcome
Thanks for your comments.
I’ve seen a few of your videos where you explain the shift in patients who show up for analysis in the 50s from guilty man to empty man. I have no isssue with the description but I think Zizek explains the shift to narcissism in a way that contributes another way of seeing man as still guilty: in his assessment, capitalist consumer society which has transformed man towards the narcissistic attitude (I’ve heard you say this also) now feels guilty for failing to live up to a new set of commandments. Instead of feeling guilty for not being “good”, man now feels guilty for not being happy. The commandments of Christianity are “be good, be humble”. The commandments of consumer capitalism are “consume and be happy”. Zizek states that people who show up for analysis are largely there because they feel empty, despite having succeeded in the consumption part yet still feel empty hence guilty for not being “happy”.
Not just for not being happy, but we’re having a band in the attempt to be good in favour of the attempt to be happy
This has been amazing! Thank you for posting!
I keep coming back to this lecture and I find something new each time. Truly brilliant presentation of this material Dr Carveth.
I find your videos amazingly useful. Thank you !
Ryan, his name was Dr. Ron Aldous. He was a psychiatrist and psychoanalyst in either Edmonton or Calgary. The paperis:
Aldous, N.R. (2000). Progressive Crisis: An Outline. Canadian J. Psychoanal., 9(1):39-61..
Thank you very much professor.
Amazing presentation Professor Carveth. First time I heard about the work of Spotnitz, got curious about it. Thank you very much! Best regards.
Very useful to hear how spotnitz fits into the picture.
seconded!
I remember a book I read about Lacan and Derrida. They had chance encounter in the US for lectures. Lacan got infuriated when he saw Derrida, hehehe. I hope that story is a mere gossip, hehehe.
Wonderful lecture! Thank you
I love these lectures. I find it difficult to believe that tragic man suddenly showed up post-war when the genesis of the disorder is pre-oedipal or oedipal, i.e. before culture (e.g. post-modern culture) is really having an impact on the child. Maybe our post-modern culture is more likely to trigger pre-existing fragmentation, but surely for the entirety of human history people have suffered fragmentation.
Postmodern culture does seem to lead to an increase of borderline, narcissistic and psychotic conditions.
@@doncarveth From your lectures and related reading, I understand that The Fall is longer and more painful in post-modern times without the safety-net previously provided by the absolute certainties of modernism.
@@hogski1000 Yes, see George Steiner “nostalgia for the absolute.”
@@doncarveth Thank you very much for that suggestion. It's a fascinating read. I find this particularly interesting living in Poland for 25 years, where they are currently undergoing an excruciating shift from modernity (rural, strict Catholicism, which was strengthened in reaction to Communism ) to post-modernity and experiencing a mental health and identity crisis in the process.
Thank you very much.
Thanks.
thank You! for this explanations.
Another killer tape. Thank you. The way you posit Lacan as Freud filtered through Roman Catholicism and Sartre reminds me of the descriptions of Zizek as Marxism filtered through Hegel and Lacan!
I have found all of your lectures very useful. You have an impressive range of knowledge and are able to synthesize a higher level of understanding to these complex topics. Each time I listen to one of your lectures I have a deeper understanding of things I have read before and questioned. I’m also wondering if you have an introductory reader or recommendation of books and articles that someone new in the field should focus on? Thank you again for all you are doing to improve understanding in this area.
Thank you, glad you have found them useful. Steven Michell and Margaret Black, Freud and Beyond is still useful.
Really really interesting, I just came out of a narcissistic relationship and everything he says is so spot on. Nevertheless, I couldn't help but continuously think of Richard Gere throughout the whole speech, at least the angle does make them look so alike. Very very interesting, I did not know this guy and I'm definitely watching all of the videos!
Very interesting. Would like to hear about Spotnitz.
I enjoy listening to you very much
Thank you
I'm in analysis for my first time right now and found this talk to be very informative. Right now I utterly hate my analyst and this made me feel better that at least thats a positive in moving forward with the analysis.
I would advisw you to stay away from learninh psychology and allow yourself to be utterly free in the emotional spectrum
Hello professor Carveth, I was wondering if you could give me the name of the psychologist and paper you mention at the 35 minute mark. I couldn't quite mark it out, Thank you for your fantastic video, brilliantly informative.
You mention a very interesting statement of 'the anxiety of influence'. For whom do you experience such anxiety? Very enjoyable and informative presentation.
All of the major psychoanalysts: Freud, Klein, Lacan, Winnicott, Kohut, etc.
Gustavo, you are most welcome.
So grateful for this! Is there anywhere where you can find the integrated model, or the old version? hard to see in the video
The chart is more visible in the video I did on Kornberg
ruclips.net/video/EHQ0Mc-oYfk/видео.htmlsi=o668ZjyjyaD43FPW
How can I get a transcription into English, or just subtitles?
This is so interesting, thanks for sharing it out here in YT. Dark Intellectual Web :P
Most welcome
I’m afraid I don’t know of his work.
Welcome
Thanks for sharing this. Very useful :-)
Sir, please let me know your books. Are they intelligible to a pedestrian like me?
I think my 2023 “guilt: a contemporary introduction” certainly is
What film about : The Robert sons made in the forties you mentioned in this vídeo ?? Can you tell me ??
ruclips.net/video/s14Q-_Bxc_U/видео.html
Well yes absolutely brilliant but yes there are gaps the piece and the whole deal, bottom-up Freudian 1920's Psychoanalysis and its evolution or emergence in the years that follow by other theorists, Kohut etc . But it is incredible we have discovered so much since Freud but are no nearer the truth any more than Quantum mechanics is the truth , right at the beginning he speaks of Freuds ant - religious stance that is instantly a block to the transcendent or negative forces transformed by the psyche, but still an incredible tour de force of emergent modern psychoanalysis, self-psychology.
My problem is despite being gifted and inspired how can I finish training when I have no funds ? or retrain without funds yet this level is what s good therapists should aspire to, the cost of training is prohibitive and once you have begun to do self work after many years, I can really resonate with a lot of this , so it is possible to be ready to work at this level and on a group or neurotically normalized mental health perspective you are a threat or seen as one, the dichotomy is false .
The DANGER is in the interpretations fed back to the client they are just that "inferior and unworthy and must supplant thier own newly burgeoning self sense with it's new insights and begginnings of clarity and it cements the libidinal force or dynamic in favour of the analysts and thus they, patients are always disempowered , the expert is right.
Which philosophically is the same as well in the extreme of the original the toxic parenting it , the patient had to fend off in the first place , I know and my power force, knowledge is .., the problem is in the dialectic rather as an avoidance of what you might call interbeing a deeper undefinable sense of two and yet oneness of intimacy of joy of excitement, bit when it condenses out the patient is one down ! That is what Jung called a purer complex or falling back into an intellectual, not now not loving absence, as the thoughts detract from the patients own need at the time, ideas ... ideas, ideas there is a marked difference between great therapy and great theory which is a by-product, how do we explain what happened, post pivotal moment, atoms are fuzzy balls look! But sir ....?
Get ....out of your head I feel like screaming get out of your F... head and be available!
For your poor patients, clients "I analyze ....who has a narcissistic disorder?
Yep , a purer as Jung might write later in his notebook, a boy who was that little intellectual Mummy adored, oh m,y little darling is so brilliant, the poor patient has to prop this up ....
But there is a lot of good stuff here institutes, they are just theories , analogues, ways of describing often writing over the sacred ground of the possibility of intimacy?
God, it gets worse as the lecture goes on, like get me out of this vulnerable space and some of those questions, see how this defence multiplies at a rate like a virulent bacteria, anything but be open to relating in the moment , got it , this is a senior lecturer note NOT a therapist!
umm, I think my long-distance analysis would be, a scared little boy terrified of intimacy and the vulnerability which must be part of this. Like the bible scholar who was beaten by his parents, God is and i am one of the chosen! Got it ...
What’s the meaning of 「extra analysis 」in term of Self Psychology ？
Can you elaborate, I don’t understand your question.
According to the definition of Self psychology ，
what is the meaning of extra analysis ？
It means the materials beyond the session ？
or outside the session ？
Perhaps you were referring to extra transference interpretations, meaning interpretation of conflicts, transferences etc., in the patients relationships with people other than the analyst. As opposed to working only in the transference, that is only on The relationship with the analyst?
Could you do a presentation on IFS by Richard Schwartz?
I am just thinking about the topic of narcissistic patients having their characteristic symptoms only as the visible part of the iceberg and they all have the classic „freudian” conflicts and anxieties in deep, which becomes visible later in the therapy. Isn’t it rather a process of their healing? When a patient comes in analysis with diffuse narcissistic symptoms and develops some self-object transference it is because his psychological makeup is on the level of fragmentation-prone self, isn’t it? At this time he/she -by definition- cannot have freaudian type of inner conflicts and anxieties because he is simply not „one” enough to experience such feelings. He has to advance in the healing process to gain some stable cohesion of the self in order to be capable of developing a freudian transference. Thus, the conflict of the tragical man cannot really coexist with the conflict of the guilty man because the former is simply not matured enough to experience the problems of the latter. Where am I wrong?
That is exactly how self psychologists see the matter, but I feel it leaves the unconscious out of account. I believe guilty man exists unconsciously underneath tragic man, defended against. I don’t believe guilty men emerges when the patient is structured enough for it to exist. I believe it exists all along underneath and emerges into consciousness at this later stage. I believe a lot of the emptiness experienced by tragic man is the result of the annihilating super ego of guilty man at work. Hope that clarifies.
@@doncarveth Thank You, for the answer Professor Carveth! Now you gave me a lot to think over. It is very difficult to me to imagine a metapsychological structure in which fragmented representations of the self and the significant others dominate the psychic reality of someone while much more unified but conflicting representations are hiding only in the unconscious. Up to now I considered the fragmented or splitted representations (either in kohutian or kernbergian or kleinian sense) as an unequivocally more primitive level of psychic functioning than the cohesive oedipal objects of the freudian neuroses. (I am not a psychoanalyst myself, just a psychologist with limited clinical experience) Btw. your lectures are awesome. Always hiting the main point by which making other less crucial details clear automatically.
Send me your email address and I’ll see what I can do.
clearly, Mr. Carveth, your critizism of Lacan is not well founded. i.e. the concept of the name-of-the-father derives from the Oedipus complex and is an abstraction of the law with a pun that only works in French. Also, Lacan does refer to Sartre on various occations but theoretically he is much closer to Hegel and other philosophers. Saying Lacan rephrased existentialism with structuralist language is almost comical and shows your lack of study in this field. Coming from such a Catholic family it is only normal and healthy to deal with the religion. Freud wrote a book about Moses and was an atheist and Lacan took up the topic of religion. Culture and language contribute their part to the unconscious and the sympotoms of society and in many, religion is still very present. Saying Catholizism is the only true religion refered to it being institutionalized and institutions create truth. And I could find no book of Lacans' titled Catholizism. I see your critizism coming from a personal distaste and thats fine, but you also devalue the clinical work without in-depth knowledge and that is not respectable for any clinician. If you critizise, do your research. I shouldnt have to say this to an academic. There are many Lacanian psychoanalyists all over the world, in institiutions, organisations and behind the couch you might not know this.
Jade Oscill , I see you haven’t done your research and have not read the extensive chapter on Lucan in my recent book.
@@doncarveth Who is Lucan? no I havent read any book of yours. I was refering to what you said and how you positioned yourself in your critisism of Lacanian psychoanalysis in THIS video.
All male centric. Yawn.