Response to Layton: Considering the Sociopolitical Context of Dialectical Constructivism

Abstract

What is commonly missing from psychoanalytic formulations, including my own, that Lynne Layton rightfully challenges us to correct is the locating of the possible dysfunctionality of the individual and the family within the context, not just of a brutally indifferent universe but also of an arguably brutally indifferent economic, political, and institutional environment. I differ with Layton in that I am more prepared to consider possible universals that bear on human experience and moral standards. For example, I would say that “reflection on the foundations of knowledge” trumps nonreflective fundamentalist thinking in capturing the best attitude to assume towards pursuit of truth. Also, the universality of the human tendency to deny death may underlie many diverse cultural belief systems. Nevertheless, Layton challenges us to reflect on how conventional psychoanalytic practices may collude with aspects of our own culture we would do well to try to combat, in ourselves and in our patients, through owning and proactively exercising our moral influence.

Notes

¹It's a difference that may be more apparent than real. Layton's contributions to our literature and even what is implicit in her discussion here of “dialectical constructivism” make clear that she endorses this view, particularly as it pertains to claims about “knowledge.” My impression is that a too-religious adherence to the relativistic tenets of postmodernism compels her to disclaim her belief in the truth and transcendent moral value of some of her convictions.

²I will stand with Freud (1927) on this matter: “Some [religious doctrines] are so improbable, so incompatible with everything we have laboriously discovered about the reality of the world, that we may compare them—if we pay proper regard to the psychological differences—to delusions” (p. 31).

³See my reply to reviews of my book by Slavin, Stern, and Stein for my articulation of the place of transcendent universals in dialectical constructivism (Hoffman, 2001, pp. 487–488).