Cultural perspectives in projective psychology
Azoulay, Catherine
Cultural perspectives in projective psychology - 2020.
72
Psychoanalytically oriented projective psychology attempts to evaluate a subject’s psychic functioning using projective tests, the most used in France being the Rorschach and the tat. It studies the internal world dynamics, that is to say identifications and conflicts in regard to difference of sexes and generations, anxieties and defence mechanisms. However, if we consider that the intra-psychic dynamic elaborates itself in and through a given cultural environment, it raises the question, in any subject’s evaluation, of taking into account the cultural difference that R.Kaës called the third difference. Therefore in our projective evaluations we are confronted with both exciting and highly complex questions. In this article, some questions will be raised to create a debate dynamic: in what way can Devereux’s concept of cultural counter-transference be useful in the subject/clinician relationship during a projective evaluation? Furthermore, what part may be attributed to the cultural environment in the highlighting of a subject’s psychic functioning and eventually in psychic disorders and how can we account for it? Finally, must our tools be transformed to access the psyche of another culturally different?
Cultural perspectives in projective psychology - 2020.
72
Psychoanalytically oriented projective psychology attempts to evaluate a subject’s psychic functioning using projective tests, the most used in France being the Rorschach and the tat. It studies the internal world dynamics, that is to say identifications and conflicts in regard to difference of sexes and generations, anxieties and defence mechanisms. However, if we consider that the intra-psychic dynamic elaborates itself in and through a given cultural environment, it raises the question, in any subject’s evaluation, of taking into account the cultural difference that R.Kaës called the third difference. Therefore in our projective evaluations we are confronted with both exciting and highly complex questions. In this article, some questions will be raised to create a debate dynamic: in what way can Devereux’s concept of cultural counter-transference be useful in the subject/clinician relationship during a projective evaluation? Furthermore, what part may be attributed to the cultural environment in the highlighting of a subject’s psychic functioning and eventually in psychic disorders and how can we account for it? Finally, must our tools be transformed to access the psyche of another culturally different?
Réseaux sociaux