Intimacy and technology. Developing a psychoanalytic dialogue

Journal title PSICOANALISI
Author/s John Churcher
Publishing Year 2018 Issue 2017/2 Language Italian
Pages 7 P. 61-68 File size 143 KB
DOI 10.3280/PSI2017-002006
DOI is like a bar code for intellectual property: to have more infomation click here

Below, you can see the article first page

If you want to buy this article in PDF format, you can do it, following the instructions to buy download credits

Article preview

FrancoAngeli is member of Publishers International Linking Association, Inc (PILA), a not-for-profit association which run the CrossRef service enabling links to and from online scholarly content.

In the classical setting the limited physical space of the consulting room contains the possibility of real action and allows unrestricted transmission of unrepresented states. However strong the illusions of presence created by telecommunications, we should therefore be extremely cautious about treating them as equivalent to real, physical presence for the purposes of psychoanalysis. The problem is not that the virtual reality created by telecommunication is "not real". Rather, it concerns the specificity of psychoanalysis as a peculiar kind of personal relationship and clinical practice, and one which requires a setting that meets specific conditions of intimacy.

Keywords: Presence, setting, telecommunication, body-schema, prosthesis, remote analysis, intimacy

  1. Bleger J. (1967). Simbiosis y ambigüedad: estudio psicoanalítico. Buenos Aires: Paidós (trad. it. Simbiosi e ambiguità. Studio psicoanalitico. Donazzan A. (transl.). Petrilli M.E., Rosetti M. (eds.). Roma: Armando, 2010).
  2. Bullinger A. (2012). De l’organisme au corps: une perspective instrumentale. In: Le développement sensori-moteur de l’enfant et ses avatars. Un parcours de recherche. Toulouse: Eres.
  3. Churcher J. (2013). Editorial Introduction to Symbiosis and ambiguity: a psychoanalytic study. Rogers S., Bleger L., Churcher J. (transl.). Churcher J., Bleger L. (eds). New Library of Psychoanalysis. London: Routledge.
  4. Churcher J. (2015). The psychoanalytic setting, the body-schema, telecommunications, and telepresence: some implications of José Bleger’s concept of encuadre.
  5. Churcher J. (2016). Der psychoanalytische Rahmen, das Körperschema, Telekommunikation und Telepräsenz: Implikationen von José Blegers Konzept des “encuadre”. Psyche: Zeitschrift für Psychoanalyse und ihre Anwendungen, 70, 1: 60-81.
  6. Churcher J. (2017). A new “fact of life”: mass surveillance of telecommunications and its implications for psychoanalytic confidentiality. Paper presented at the 50th Congress of the International Psychoanalytical Association, Buenos Aires, 25-29 July 2017.
  7. Green A. (1975). The Analyst, Symbolization and Absence in the Analytic Setting (On Changes in Analytic Practice and Analytic Experience). In Memory of D. W. Winnicott. Int. J. Psycho-Anal., 56: 1-22.
  8. Head H., Holmes H.G. (1911-12). Sensory disturbances from cerebral lesions. Brain 34: 102-254.
  9. Morpurgo V.E. (2013). Da Prometeo al Big Brother. In: Marzi A. (ed.). Psicoanalisi, identità e Internet. Esplorazioni nel cyberspace. Milano: FrancoAngeli.
  10. Polanyi M. (1966). The Tacit Dimension. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
  11. Russell G.I. (2015). Screen Relations: the limits of computer mediated psychoanalysis and psychotherapy. London: Karnac.
  12. Sabbadini A. (2013). New technologies and the psychoanalytic setting, in: Lemma A., Caparrotta L. (eds.). Psychoanalysis in the technoculture era. London. London: Routledge

John Churcher, Intimità e tecnologia. Sviluppare un dialogo psicoanalitico in "PSICOANALISI" 2/2017, pp 61-68, DOI: 10.3280/PSI2017-002006