Psychoanalysis and Applied Psychoanalysis

A contribution by Don Carveth to the PsyArt list:

When I engage in interpretation of a text that, not being a living person who has contracted with me to engage in the peculiar dialogue called psychoanalysis, I call what I am doing applied psychoanalysis. Over my career I have published a number of applied psychoanalytic studies. I don't devalue the activity. I don't devalue myself or others who engage in applied psychoanalysis. Like other forms of scholarship, applied psychoanalytic studies can be poor, mediocre, good or excellent. The mere fact that I am trained and qualified to engage in clinical psychoanalysis does not in any way guarantee that my work in applied psychoanalysis will be better or as good as that of colleagues working in applied psychoanalysis who are not clinically trained. I have the deepest respect for the work of my friend and mentor Eli Sagan whose application of psychoanalysis in the field of psycho-history and sociology is simply superb. Few clinically trained psychoanalysts could hope to accomplish as much. The point is not to value or devalue individuals.  The point is that the activities are distinctly different. Applied psychoanalysis is something different from clinical psychoanalysis. As a scholar myself, I confess that my value system is such that I am far more impressed with Eli's wonderful applied psychoanalytic scholarship than I am by the work of even my most talented clinician colleagues.  But Eli would never call himself a psychoanalyst. He had extensive personal analysis, but if he had wanted to be a psychoanalyst he would have obtained Institute training. He was too busy conducting brilliant studies in the field of applied psychoanalysis.

En terreno (des)conocido