Kohut's Last Words on Analytic Cure and How We Hear Them Now—A View From Specificity Theory

Abstract

These authors discuss Kohut's essay, noting that Kohut makes four apparently confusing assertions about the role of empathy in psychoanalytic process and cure. They then offer an original analysis that seeks to make sense of these conceptual confusions. In the second part of this article, the authors utilize Kohut's two-step formulation of analytic cure as another approach from which to understand specificity theory.

Translations of Abstract

Los autores discuten el ensayo de Kohut, observando que Kohut realiza cuatro afirmaciones aparentemente confusas sobre el papel de la empatía en el proceso de la cura psicoanalítica. Luego ofrecen un análisis original que busca encontrar el sentido de estas confusiones conceptuales. En la segunda parte de este artículo, los autores utilizan la formulación en dos pasos que hace Kohut de la cura analítica como otro abordaje desde donde entender la Teoría de la Especificidad.

Questi autori discutono il saggio di Kohut segnalando la presenza di quattro affermazioni apparentemente ambigue rispetto al ruolo dell'empatia nel processo e nella cura psicoanalitica. Presentano poi un'analisi originale che tenta di chiarire il senso di queste ambiguità concettuali. Nella seconda parte dell'articolo, gli autori individuano nella formulazione bi-fasica della cura analitica da parte di Kohut un ulteriore approccio tramite cui comprendere la teoria della specificità.

Ces auteurs discutent de l'essai de Kohut en relevant que Kohut fait ce qui semble être quatre affirmations confondantes sur le rôle de l'empathie dans le processus et la cure psychanalytiques. Ils proposent ensuite une analyse originale pour tenter de comprendre ces confusions conceptuelles. Dans la seconde partie de cet article, les auteurs utilisent la formulation des deux étapes de la cure analytique par Kohut comme une autre approche pour comprendre la théorie de la spécificité.

Die Autoren diskutieren Kohuts Essay und machen darauf aufmerksam, dass Kohut vier scheinbar verwirrende Aussagen über die Rolle der Empathie im psychoanalytischen Prozess und im Prozess der Heilung macht. Sie bieten dann das Beispiel einer Analyse an, das dieser konzeptuellen Verwirrung einen Sinn geben könnte. Im zweiten Teil dieser Arbeit verwenden die Autoren Kohuts zweistufige Formulierung der analytischen Kur als anderen Zugang zum Verständnis der „Specificity Theory“.

Keywords:

• empathy
• specificity theory
• self psychology
• Kohut
• Bacal
• optimal responsiveness
• process theory

Notes

¹The empathic mode of observation has become, so to speak, happily wedded to self psychology theory as its primary methodology; but, we must remind ourselves that it is not intrinsic to the structure of self psychology theory, notwithstanding the fact that the explicit offer of empathic attunement as a validating response has implicitly come to be recognized as the “standard technique” of the self psychologist.

² Kohut (1984) expressly rejects the use of empathy as offering a type of “cure through love” or “cure through being kind” (p. 102); yet, we may consider whether being understood by another can, in certain instances, be felt as love or kindness by the patient and might, indeed, contribute to his or her cure.

³How this patient actually experienced what Kohut did, we cannot know. Analysts have, since that famous moment, debated whether he could have done just as well by interpreting her need for human contact or, some felt, perhaps she would have done even better had Kohut offered her his whole hand rather than just a couple of fingers.