Review
PSYCHOANALYSIS WITH CHILDREN IN THE XXI CENTURY
The NEL Cali, 11, 12 and 13 February, held a seminar Child Psychoanalysis in the XXI century led by psychoanalyst Ana Ruth Najles, AME, Analyst Member of the School of Lacanian Orientation (EOL) and World Association of Psychoanalysis (AMP).
This important work attracted a large audience of the city, who responded to our call about a job and in psychoanalytic thinking on the subject of psychoanalysis with children in contemporary times. Thus, in the public conference, which was attended by over 400 people, Ana Ruth Najles, addressed the issue of learning problems and responses of psychoanalysis. Placed in the first instance the characteristics of the subjectivity of the time reveal, according to the logic of the speeches given by Lacan, the domain of discourse of the master, which historically has represented the interests of power political. Today we find that this has slipped into the apparatus of knowledge and is placed at the ideal of science, which has emerged as the logic of the absolute power of knowledge.
significant spraying of computers has also led to the rise of this empire that denies or ignores the singularity represented by knowledge of the unconscious. So there is no exception, all are equal, we should all learn the same, and pay the same in favor of absolute knowledge. This is explained very well from the university discourse, where the S2, the knowledge located in the place of the agent realizes an operation which, in the words of Jacques-Alain Miller, indicates a movement civilizing domination is the satisfaction of the body, I live by absolute knowledge. Operation that hides an attempt to do away with the uniqueness of instinctual enjoyment and knowledge of the unconscious is as a knowledge not known to be singled out to each speaker. This operation is also subject children.
This implies a call to the parent who promises the return of the worst: totalitarianism. Then, all system devices, including pedagogy, are instruments of suppression of unconscious knowledge. This results in the loss of the status of being speaker, leaving the individual in the place of any object, an object that can be approve, exchange and replace any other. Learning disorders in psychoanalysis can be read then, as the manifestation of the malaise of a speaking subject, which claims its uniqueness, ie, a particular relationship to sexuality in terms of the difficulties that the speaking being has to take a stand sexed.
The following invited lectures worked our psychoanalyst topics: "What do we say when we say, child?" "The psychoanalytic treatment of children" and "What they claim to children's family, school, society?" This presentation illustrated with a case filed by one of our associates, Patricia Joy.
To address these issues Najles Ana Ruth, from a profound journey through the work of Lacan, of the psychoanalytic discovery that reveals the core of subjectivity that goes beyond the individual organization and imaginary parts of the self, where the unconscious this subject is ignored by the self, referring to the symbolic field. This is what the end of Lacan education will be characterized by the order of the face after having represented by way of the ghost. Similarly, Najles shows that Lacan uses the distinction of the relations expressed in terms of records imaginary, symbolic and real, to show that talking is not the same level of the individual imagination, ie the self as body image, to talk about the subject that has to do with the symbolic dimension and the speaking being involved in the seizure of significant living by producing what Lacan calls the event his last teaching body.
On this basis, the different states of being speaker must be considered with respect to the position of discourse that assumes everyone. This position is determined by the apparatus of speech posed by Lacan in Seminar 17, are appointed as master discourse, academic discourse, discourse of hysteria and analytical discourse. From these speeches, Lacan tries to locate precisely the relationship between words and bodies, or between words and the living body via the object plus as of enjoyment to realize how alive the body, drive enjoyment. In this sense it is completely misleading regarding any stage of evolutionary development and chronology.
Najles Ana Ruth says, then, the relevance for the practitioner to know to locate their discursive position, as the aberrations in the clinic with children have occurred precisely because of mistakes in this direction. Position in the analytic discourse is that the analyst is warned that the child is in a state of unfinished or undeveloped, which is not an attempt to heal, to educate him, let alone marvel at him in a purely imaginary plane elevates the recovery of supposedly lost ego ideal of childhood. Also not to be confused intervention levels, as saying, for example, parents of a child that is not mom and dad. Because the parental couple is nothing significant that the couple allows the subject is constituted as an effect of discourse of the unconscious.
In the same way parents receive the child also means that practitioners do not forget that in order demand slips something else in the form of the child, because the misunderstanding of the language is structurally . Behind what is said of the child are very different from others who talk and walking after the surgery. Therefore, the policy analyst will lead to the child to talk and work as a subject to produce significant masters of their alienation, their enjoyment, something very different from push to play with toys. Najles emphasizes that rather when a child comes to the consultation should push it play but with the words, because talk is at stake the object which is held by the analyst's presence .
Finally, on behalf of the Board and all who make up the NEL Cali, thank Ana Ruth Najles, strength and authority in the transmission characteristic of psychoanalytic practice that gave us an important road map to direct clinical work with children, from a perspective that recognizes them as speaking beings can and should take responsibility for their enjoyment, which takes them out of the position of victims making architects of their destiny.
G Castañeda Gloria Irina
Secretary of the Board of Cali NEL
0 comments:
Post a Comment