Is the nature of psychoanalytic thinking and practice (e.g., in regard to sexuality) determined by extra‐analytic, social and cultural developments?

Difficultés dans la pratique psychanalytique actuelle

“…Ces exposés entre psychanalystes formateurs, témoins d'un demi-siècle de notre temps, pourraient paraître passéistes ou vains, s'ils ne traduisaient un questionnement partagé par un grand nombre de collègues. Il est frappant de constater qu'au fil de leurs répliques (Ahumada JL 2016c ;Paul RB 2016c), les positions respectives des deux intervenants se font moins tranchées et contribuent à traduire la complexité du débat et surtout du travail du psychanalyste dans notre monde actuel, dans un conflit relatif entre pratique et théorie qui nous concerne tous.…”

Response to Jorge L. Ahumada

“…In his answer to the question of whether psychoanalytic theory and practice are determined by socio‐cultural factors, Jorge Ahumada (, p. 883) asserts that “human beings are historical , and so is the psyche and its pathologies: therefore psychoanalytic thinking, issued from the neuroses, must change as its object of study changes” (citation; emphasis in original). He goes on to say that the patient population analysts now regularly see does not want or indeed tolerate four or five times a week treatment on the couch.…”

Introduction to ‘Is the nature of psychoanalytic thinking and practice (e.g., in regard to sexuality) determined by extra‐analytic, social and cultural developments?’

“…While Ahumada () regards sexuality as part and parcel of the broader human predicament, towards the end of his paper he returns to address one aspect of sexuality of particular interest to the psychoanalyst – the dynamics of homosexuality. He writes:

How each psychoanalyst thinks about homosexuality ought to issue, beyond considerations of political correctness, from his clinical experience.

…”