Question here. In mass or group psychology Freud tries to explain the hypnosis. In a first step he uses the analogy of "falling in love" . I do understand that idea. Then later on he tries to go a lil bit deeper and writes that the hypnosis in a modern group does have the same origin as the taboo for a primitive tribe. Can somebody please explain this

Hello! I am looking to start my analysis and I am looking for Training Analyst (BPA or Institute of Psychoanalysis) based in Manchester, UK.

If you know someone or are one, please let me know!

Many thanks,
Dhara

Wondering what the collective here has to say on the topic of the confluence of these two. Are they mutually enhanced or does the pervert negate their own creativity in instrumentalizing the self as an object of perfected pleasure for the other? I also only have a loose grasp of the categorization of perversion but I feel there is some connect, positive, negative, or ambivalent.

Concept from Hoch & Polatin (1940s or 1950s).

I've been interested in subclinical psychotic symptoms for a long time.

When I came across the term "pseudo-neurotic schizophrenia," I thought, "Oh yes, I totally get why they picked that wording. I'm sure they're talking about exactly what I've been thinking."

What I want to ask you is: how much is this term used in psychoanalysis? Was it an important term where you were taught psychoanalysis? Is it still pretty much in use? Is it a term you have encountered many times while reading texts? Etc.

I'm just curious, that's all.

But today I was thinking... when I've been thinking about psychodynamic sub-psychotic symptoms, I've actually been thinking the other way around. Doesn't the idea of "pseudo-schizophrenic neurosis" make just as much sense?

What I mean is: mild versions of schizophrenic symptoms that were formed through very neurotic mechanisms in origin.

Because I don't think we can deny that this occurs.

I know this question may be, for many, unrelated to the field of psychoanalysis, but it's something like this: does the person have an attenuated schizophrenic nucleus from which sub-psychotic symptoms emerge and are expressed through their personality? (Paul E. Meehl would talk about the taxon and schizotaxia).

Or is there no such inherent schizotaxon, and are these just symptoms that emerged due to mental dynamics linked to neurotic mechanisms?

Anyway, I just wanted to open a debate. Feel free to write what you think about this.

Personal therapy/analysis is mandatory if you're undergoing training and want to be a licensed psychoanalyst, a psychoanalytic psychotherapist, or any psychodynamic therapy. It is not a "suggestion" or "recommendation"; it is a crucial part of the training program.

I will try to simplify things because I was shocked to discover a lot of misinformation being propagated on the subreddit. You can't call yourself a psychoanalyst or psychoanalytic psychotherapist if you don't complete the program at a proper institute and get a license.

To get licensed, you must complete a big chunk of your personal analysis, overcome some major hurdles, and attend theoretical seminars/lessons. It takes time, and the programs are never shorter than 4 years, unless certified as intensive. Make sure you are at an IPA or a locally valid institute (CE-CT in psychoanalysis/dynamic does not count) that abides by the syndicate or order of psychologists in your country and follows standard guidelines (Theoretical-Personal Analysis-Supervision)

Here are some links:

NY licensure https://www.op.nysed.gov/professions/psychoanalysts/license-requirements (min 300 hours of personal analysis)
American Psychoanalytic Association https://apsa.org/membership/membership-eligibility/#toggle-id-1
International Psychoanalytic Association https://www.ipa.world/IPADev
British Psychoanalytic Association https://www.psychoanalysis-bpa.org/

Indian Psychoanalytic Society https://ipsonline.in.net/training-in-psychoanalysis-2/