精神分析取向心理治療與詮釋現象學的辯證關係：精神分析臨床研究的困境與解決

The Dialectic Relationship between Psychoanalytic Psychotherapy and Hermeneutic Phenomenology: Dilemmas and Solutions in Psychoanalytical Clinical Research

10.7082/CARGC.200709.0157

洪雅琴(Ya-Chin Hung)；李維倫(Wei-Lun Lee)

投射認同 ； 相互構成 ； 詮釋現象學 ； 精神分析 ； co-constituting ； hermeneutic phenomenology ； projective identification ； psychoanalysis

中華輔導學報

22期（2007 / 09 / 01）

157 - 183

繁體中文

本文論述精神分析臨床研究的困境，並借助詮釋現象學取徑，為精神分析準備一個有別於直接訴諸臨床經驗的知識方法。精神分析的理論歸納無法達到實證主義對於可驗證性與推論的要求，使得精神分析在科學界的地位備受質疑。同時，由於精神分析的實踐知識屬性，也讓實證檢證工作格外困難。為了避免精神分析理論被詬病為「套套邏輯」，本文嘗試透過詮釋現象學方法的迂迴，來達成對精神分析理論的檢查與討論。本文認為精神分析的語言學特徵提供了其與詮釋現象學的接合點。作法上則是，先把精神分析理論放入括弧內，透過詮釋現象學的操作，繞道於文本分析，以檢視精神分析理論所指向的現象結構。 在實徵討論上，本文將以「相互構成」作為精神分析和現象學之間相互勾連的橋樑。精神分析的「投射認同」與現象學的「相互構成」都是談人和他者共同構成某種關係，只是現象學的「相互構成」對人內在的東西存而不論。本文最後也會交待精神分析臨床研究中，研究者兼任治療師的雙重角色問題，釐清研究者如何掌握其角色定位的關鍵與原則，以避免落入「套套邏輯」的研究窘境。

This article explores the dilemmas of psychoanalytical clinical research and also intends to propose a method which is differentiated from that based on clinical experiences with the help of hermeneutic phenomenology. Psychoanalysis structures its theory by clinical research; however, it cannot meet the requirements of verification and deduction in terms of empirical science. In addition, the practice traits of psychoanalysis make verifying empirical evidence difficult. For these reasons, psychoanalysis is not easy understood and accepted within the scope of academic research. In order to shed the impression of ”simple logical thinking”, this article attempts to provide a platform for examining psychoanalytical theory through hermeneutic phenomenology. In the empirical discussion, this article focuses on bridging psychoanalysis and phenomenology based on ”co-constitution”. This article suggests that ”projective identification” of psychoanalysis and ”co-constitution” of phenomenology are refering to how people co-constitute a certain relationship. The difference is that the ”co-constitution” of phenomenology believes the existence of human Beings' inner thoughts but it does not address those. In the last part, the problem of dual roles of a researcher and a therapist is discussed as well in order to clarify how the researcher controls keys and rules of her role positioning so that it is not trapped in the research dilemma of ”simple logical thinking”.

1. 李維倫(2004)。以置身所在作爲心理學研究的目標現象及其相關之方法論。應用心理學研究，22，157-200。
   連結：
2. Alvesson, M.,Skoldberg, K.(2000).Reflective methodology: New vistas for qualitative research.London:Sage.
3. Bachrach, H.,Weber, J.,Solomon, M.(1985).Factors associated with the outcome of psychoanalysis.International Review of Psychoanalysis,31,196-199.
4. Bateman, A.,Holmes, J.(1995).Introduction to psychoanalysis contemporary theory and practice.
5. Breuer, J.,Freud, S.(1895).Studies in hysteria.London:Hogarth.
6. Fonagy, P.(2002).An open door review of outcome studies in psychoanalysis.London:International Psychoanalytical Association.
7. Freud, S.(1914).Remembering, repeating, and working through.London:Hogarth.
8. Freud, S.(1911).Formulations of the two principles of mental function.London:Hogarth.
9. Freud, S.(1900).The interpretation of dreams.London:Hogarth.
10. Gadamer, H. G.(1989).Truth and method.London:Sheed & Ward.
11. Gedo, J.(1999).The evolution of psychoanalysis: Contemporary theory and practice.New York:Other Press.
12. Green, A.｜J. Sandler (Eds.),A. M. Sandler (Eds.),R. Davies (Eds.)(2000).Clinical and observational psychoanalytic research: Roots of a controversy.London:Karnac.
13. Habermas, J.(1972).Knowledge and human interests.London:Heinemann.
14. Heidegger, M.,D. F. Krell (Ed.)(1977).Basic writings.New York:Harper and Row.
15. Heimann, P.(1950).On counter-transference.International Journal of Psychoanalysis,31,81-84.
16. Home, J.(1966).The concept of mind.International Journal of Psychoanalysis,49,42-49.
17. Husserl, E.(1976).Ideen zu einer phanomenologie und phanomenologischen philosophie.
18. Jacobs, M.(1992).Sigmund Freud.
19. Klein, M.(1946).Notes on some schizoid mechanisms.International Journal of Psychoanalysis analysis,27,99-110.
20. Laplanche, J.(1989).New foundations for psychoanalysis.Oxford:Blackwell.
21. Lavie, J. C.(1997).L’amour est un crime parfait.
22. Malan, D.(1976).The frontier of brief psychotherapy.New York:Plenum.
23. Modell, A.(1978).The nature of psychoanalytic knowledge.Journal of American Psychoanalysis Association,26,641-658.
24. Palmer, R. E.(1969).Hermeneutics: Interpretation theory in Schleiermacher, Dilthey, Heidegger, and Gadamer.Evanston:Northwestern University Press.
25. Perron, R.,P. Fonagy (Ed.)(2002).An open door review of outcome studies in psychoanalysis.London:International Psychoanalytical Association.
26. Popper, K.(1959).The logic of scientific discovery.London:Routledge.
27. Ricoeur, P.(1969).Le conflict des interpretations.
28. Ricoeur, P.(1976).Interpretation theory.Fort Worth:Texas Christian University Press.
29. Ricoeur, P.(1981).Hermeneutics and the human sciences.New York:Cambridge University Press.
30. Ricoeur, P.,K. Blamey,J. B. Thompson, (Trans.)(1991).From text to action: Essays in hermeneutics, Ⅱ.Evanston, IL:Northwestern University.
31. Rycroft, C.(1985).Psychoanalysis and beyond.London:Chatto.
32. Sandler, J.,Sandler, A. M.(1984).The past unconscious, the present unconscious, and interpretation of transference.Psychoanalysis Inquiry,4,367-399.
33. Sokolowski, R.(2000).Introduction to phenomenology.
34. Spence, D.(1982).Narrative truth and historical truth: Meaning and interpretation in psychoanalysis.New York:Norton.
35. Strenger, C.(1991).Between hermeneutics and science.Madison:International University Press.
36. Wallerstein, R.(1986).For-Two live in treatment: A study of psychoanalysis and psychotherapy.New York:Guilford.
37. 于而彥譯(2000)。佛洛伊依德－精神分析之父。台北:生命潛能文化。
38. 李幼蒸譯(1994)。純粹現象學通論。台北:桂冠。
39. 李郁芬、謝隆儀、黃世明、楊明敏、吳建芝、林雨芳譯(2006)。愛是完美的犯罪。台北:五南。
40. 李維倫譯(2004)。現象學十四講。台北:心靈工坊。
41. 林玉華、樊雪梅譯(1999)。當代精神分析導論理論與實務。台北:五南。
42. 林宏濤譯(1995)。詮釋的衝突。台北:桂冠。
43. 洪雅琴(2005)。博士論文(博士論文)。台北市，國立台灣師範大學教育心理與輔導研究所。
44. 洪雅琴、李維倫。一個犯罪少女的置身所在：家的錯落與回返。
45. 劉佳昌。精神分析的科學地位與研究方法：爭議與省思。
46. 潘德榮(2002)。詮釋學導論。台北:五南。
47. 嚴平譯(1992)。詮釋學。台北:桂冠。

1. 許皓宜、李御儂(2015)。外遇與分裂： 一位男性外遇者的經驗詮釋。教育心理學報，46(3)，449-469。
2. 林育陞(2016)。精神分析與人本主義理論對人性核心論點探討。諮商與輔導，362，2-7。
3. 修慧蘭,余振民(2018)。新手諮商師移情愛治療經驗之個案研究。輔導季刊，54(3)，31-44。