English (United Kingdom)

https://curated-unify.zendy.io/wp-json/zendy-region/v1/featured_content/oa?rat=en

https://curated-unify.zendy.io/wp-json/zendy-region/v1/highlighted_journal/

Global: Zendy Plus annual

Presents the access of premium content as premium feature

Premium Content

Presents the keyphrase highlighting as premium feature

Keyphrase Highlighting

Presents the summarisation as premium feature

Summarisation

Insights

Presents the pdf analysis as premium feature

PDF Analysis

Presents the zaia usage as premium feature

ZAIA

Global: Zendy Tools annual

Global: Zendy Free Plan

Global: Zendy Tools monthly

Global: Zendy Plus monthly

Acrimony, dissension, and controversy have characterized psychoanalytic education from the beginning. The usual scapegoat for this situation has been the training analyst system. But this system is seen as just a symptom of deeper, underlying conflicts about our field and preparing for it. In particular, the tendency toward authoritarian dogmatism amongst psychoanalysts is a prime contributor. This inclination derives from the defensive idealization and fanaticism characterizing many psychoanalysts. Such idealization helps us to manage the many uncertainties that characterize our theory, our practice, and our pedagogical efforts. Various methods to address these uncertainties more directly are suggested as a way to counteract the negative effects of fanaticism.

The deleterious impact of idealization and fanaticism and their underlying causes in psychoanalytic education