undrgrnd Cliquez ici NEWNEEEW nav-sa-clothing-shoes Cloud Drive Photos FIFA16 cliquez_ici Rentrée scolaire Shop Fire HD 6 Shop Kindle Paperwhite cliquez_ici Jeux Vidéo
Clinical and Observational Psychoanalytic Research et plus d'un million d'autres livres sont disponibles pour le Kindle d'Amazon. En savoir plus
EUR 26,06
  • Tous les prix incluent la TVA.
Il ne reste plus que 2 exemplaire(s) en stock (d'autres exemplaires sont en cours d'acheminement).
Expédié et vendu par Amazon.
Emballage cadeau disponible.
Quantité :1
Clinical and Observationa... a été ajouté à votre Panier
Vous l'avez déjà ?
Repliez vers l'arrière Repliez vers l'avant
Ecoutez Lecture en cours... Interrompu   Vous écoutez un extrait de l'édition audio Audible
En savoir plus
Voir les 2 images

Clinical and Observational Psychoanalytic Research: Roots of a Controversy (Anglais) Broché – 1 janvier 2000


Voir les formats et éditions Masquer les autres formats et éditions
Prix Amazon Neuf à partir de Occasion à partir de
Format Kindle
"Veuillez réessayer"
Broché
"Veuillez réessayer"
EUR 26,06
EUR 25,99 EUR 27,53

Livres anglais et étrangers
Lisez en version originale. Cliquez ici

Offres spéciales et liens associés




Détails sur le produit

Commentaires en ligne

Il n'y a pas encore de commentaires clients sur Amazon.fr
5 étoiles
4 étoiles
3 étoiles
2 étoiles
1 étoiles

Commentaires client les plus utiles sur Amazon.com (beta)

Amazon.com: 1 commentaire
5 internautes sur 5 ont trouvé ce commentaire utile 
at last, some disagreements... 6 février 2006
Par Cassandra - Publié sur Amazon.com
Format: Broché
This is a fascinating book: not only is it a very good read, but it also helps the reader understand, quite clearly, what are some of the main debates and differences of opinion within current psychoanalytic theory.

Andre Green and Daniel Stern stand on opposite sides of the debate around research: does infant observation and empirical research have relevance for clinical psychoanalysis? This is the main question of the book, and the reader is left to make up his / her mind, since both Green and Stern eloquently express their- very different- opinions.

Very briefly, Green's point of view centers around the idea that baby observation (and consequently all attachment-theory-based research that is currently very fashionable) has nothing to do with psychoanalysis. Green very persuasively argues that what is of relevance to psychoanalysis is always closely linked to the notion of 'apres coup', i.e. that time is always an interaction between past and present and that meaningful memories from the past become what they are in the context of a complex interplay between today and yesterday. The notion of 'apres coup' is a central one for psychoanalytic theory, leading to the idea that there is no such thing as 'action' which can be observed in a baby, since fantasy- both the parent's and the child's- is always involved, and since the actual action of the baby's present moment will take and retake its meaning in the context of future unconscious thoughts, memories, fantasies, etc. The main consequence of these ideas point to the fact that any observation of a baby can only ever take into account the surface, i.e. is in the end a behaviouristic procedure.

As for Daniel Stern's opinion, it is possibly more well known by American readers. He insists that baby observation and research around it are- if not directly, then indirectly relevant to psychoanalytic theory. He refuses to accept that what he does has anything to do with behaviourism, and makes the point that his studies help to delineate what is and what is not possible for a baby of this or that age- setting certain limits, in a way, for what clinical psychoanalysis can then set out to theorise.

I found Green's points far more persuasive, even though Stern's ideas are also interesting. The fact that they're interesting though, does not make them psychoanalytic. Green's insistence on the difference between psychology and psychoanalysis, and his general stance of pointing out differences and not points of contact between different views and theories was great and made things clear. As I see it, it is a problem that most writers (especially in the Anglo-American literature) have the tendency to be too polite, too careful, too 'nice'! This stance does not help theoretical issues become clear and certainly does not lead to any new ideas being produced, since there is such an overinsistence of everyone agreeing with everyone else!

All in all, this is a good book, very readable, and should be of interest not only to psychoanalysts and therapists, but to the general reader who is interested in psychoanalytic theory.
Ce commentaire a-t-il été utile ? Dites-le-nous


Commentaires

Souhaitez-vous compléter ou améliorer les informations sur ce produit ? Ou faire modifier les images?