0.4 Neo-freudian perspectives on personality  (Page 26/28)

He offers an excellent summary of the basic elements of theorists we have examined (Klein, Winnicott, Sullivan, Mahler), as well as some we haven’t (Fairbairn, Jacobson), and how their theories can be blended with classical Freudian psychoanalytic theory. He then examines how psychoanalysts today are addressing a wide variety of unresolved topics, including: Freud’s dual-drive theory (libido and aggression), homosexuality and bisexuality, mourning and depression, social violence, and the resistance among many in the field of psychoanalysis to improved research and changes in psychoanalytic education and training (Kernberg, 2004).

In the final chapter of his book on Contemporary Controversies… , Kernberg examines the historical progression of psychoanalytic thought in English speaking countries (the so-called English schools). The “controversial discussions” of the 1940s led to a mutual agreement to disagree among three major lines of thought: the ego psychologists following Anna Freud, the object relations theorists following Melanie Klein, and the independent school that included D. W. Winnicott. Although the result of these discussion was to delineate the differences among these approaches, over time practicing psychoanalysts recognized the limitations of each approach (Kernberg, 2004). So, many theorists and clinicians began bringing together those elements of each approach that were most valuable. Along the way came some very different perspectives, such as those of Kohut and his self psychology and the culturalist views of Sullivan, and the field was changed dramatically. Kernberg also contrasts these developments to those within the French school of psychoanalysis, a somewhat more traditional approach that emphasizes psychoanalytic method over technique (Kernberg, 2004). He concludes by suggesting that the future of psychoanalytic thought may be a blending of the English and French schools (Kernberg, 2004). One notable early French psychoanalyst was Princess Marie Bonaparte, a personal friend of Sigmund and Anna Freud. We will briefly look at her contributions to psychoanalytic theory in a later chapter.

Personality Theory in Real Life: Kernberg’s Psychoanalytic

Theory of Personality Disorders

Otto Kernberg is one of the leading figures advocating a psychoanalytic theory of personality disorders, particularly within an object relations perspective (see Kernberg&Caligor, 2005). In important ways he has followed the model of Sigmund Freud, in that he has based much of this theory on experience psychoanalyzing patients. His theory has been developed in conjunction with the therapeutic approach that grew out of both that experience and his developing theory. Thus, Kernberg’s work represents an applied approach to the study of personality disorders.

Kernberg’s model of personality disorder emphasizes personality structures, which are derived from the interaction of constitutional (i.e., temperamental) and environmental factors during early childhood. These structures are relatively stable mental functions or processes that serve to organize an individual’s behavior and subjective experiences. Psychological structures that are conscious and observable are typically referred to as “surface” structures , whereas those that are primarily unconscious are called “deep” structures . The basic building blocks of these personality structures are internalized object relations. Internalized object relations are particular emotional states linked to a specific image of a particular relationship (e.g., anxiety linked with an image of a confused and unsure self and a critical, judgmental parent). These internal object relations are integrated and hierarchically organized into the higher-order structures that form the personality. At the core of this personality organization is the individual’s “identity.” According to Kernberg and Caligor (2005), a healthy, consolidated identity corresponds with a stable and realistic sense of self and others. In contrast, a pathological identity stems from an unstable, polarized, and unrealistic sense of self and others. This pathology arises because the emotional states of the internalized object relations are predominately negative; they are crude, intense, and poorly modulated. There is also a preponderance of aggression and defensive mechanisms based on primitive dissociation (splitting).