December 2008
Unlearning and Learning From Freud For Negotiated Solutions
By Luis Miguel Diaz
This essay is inspired by Sigmund Freud’s persuasive, imaginative and
enigmatic writings on mental processes and their meanings. He was the
founder of psychoanalysis and is psychology's most famous author. The
relevance of Freud’s work is even manifested in popular language which has
incorporated expressions that he coined such as “mechanisms of defense” and
“Oedipus Complex.” The significance of his legacy remains disputed.
While mental processes were Freud’s primary interest, the goal of this essay is
to understand strategies that might aid in the resolution of complex problems. In
both the field of psychoanalysis and the field of conflict resolution, the
functioning of the mind is crucial and similar processes are involved.
The Man, the Character and his Circumstances
All human lives are complex, but few are recorded in such detail as Freud’s. He
was born in 1856 Freiberg in Moravia, Austrian Empire. Owing to his precocious
intellect, his parents favored him over his siblings from the early stages of his
childhood; and despite their poverty, they sacrificed everything to give him a
proper education. The family moved first to Leipzig, Germany before settling in
Vienna, Austria. After planning to study law, Freud joined the medical faculty at
University of Vienna to study under Darwinist Prof. Karl Claus.
In October 1885 Freud went to Paris on a traveling fellowship to study with
Europe's most renowned neurologist, Jean Martin Charcot, who specialized in
the study of hysteria and its susceptibility to hypnosis which he frequently
demonstrated with patients on stage in front of an audience. Freud later turned
away from hypnosis as a potential cure, favoring free association and dream
analysis.
In his 40s, Freud had numerous psychosomatic disorders as well as
exaggerated fears of dying and other phobias. During this time Freud was
involved in the task of exploring his own dreams, memories, and the dynamics
of his personality development. During this self-analysis, he came to realize the
hostility he felt towards his father (Jacob Freud), who had died in 1896, and he
also recalled his childhood sexual feelings for his mother (Amalia Freud), who
was attractive, warm, and protective. This time of emotional difficulty was the
most creative time in Freud's life. Feeling complete isolated he conceived his
book The Interpretation of Dreams, 1900, which sold only 321 copies in the first
six years after publication. In 1901 he published The Psychopathology of
Everyday Life.
In 1930, Freud received the Goethe Prize in appreciation of his contribution to
psychology and to German literary culture. Three years later the Nazis took
1
control of Germany and Freud's books featured prominently among those
burned by the Nazis. In March 1938, Nazi Germany annexed Austria in the
Anschluss. This led to violent outbursts of anti-Semitism in Vienna, and Freud
and his family received visits from the Gestapo. Freud decided to go into exile
"to die in freedom". He and his family left Vienna in June 1938 and traveled to
London.
A heavy cigar smoker, Freud endured more than 30 operations during his life
due to oral cancer. In September 1939 he asked his doctor and friend Max
Schur to assist him in suicide. Freud said: My dear Schur, you certainly
remember our first talk. You promised me then not to forsake me when my time
comes. Now it is nothing but torture and makes no sense any more. Schur
administered three doses of morphine that resulted in Freud's death.
Generalizations
Thinking in terms of generalizations is dangerously misleading for the
management of complex human conflicts. A conflict solver of complex problems
must avoid generalizations about human motivation and behavior and rather
strive to understand the dynamics of the relationships creating the problems.
Freud‘s thinking of the mind was grounded in generalizations about people and
their characteristics, while ignoring the myriad of differences that make
individuals unique. Is it possible for two people to be that identical? Because
people are so unique and complex, they defy narrow stereotypes. Do you know
a person who behaves consistently under all circumstances?
Freud would judge an entire group of individuals taking as an example an
individual of the group in a given moment. From pictures of a person in a given
moment (photos) he deduced mental processes and the person’s ways of
being. It was these mysterious mental processes that captivated Freud and
occupied much of his work. This essay will examine some of Freud’s
generalizations and their applicability to conflict resolution.
Freud once said:
The great question that has never been answered, and which I have not
yet been able to answer, despite my thirty years of research into the
feminine soul, is: What does a woman want?
One response could be the question: do all women want the same? Here,
Freud’s generalization is a mixture of sense of humor and perplexity based on
personal experiences, apart from being a question without answer as long as it
is not placed in a given context.
Sometimes instead of keeping silent, he also made generalizations with a
combination of poetry and great imagination to present facts of life and grant
them a universal meaning. For example:
2
The act of birth is the first experience of anxiety, and thus the source and
prototype of the affect of anxiety.
Freud makes the connection between the dread of the human fetus in its
perilous journey through the improbably narrow birth canal and the meaning of
anguish. As such, anguish is representing the concept of a narrow space.
Freud was an extremist and possessed a unique talent to move from one
extreme to another. While for him traditionally mental dynamics were the result
of inaccessible mysteries, under psychoanalysis all mental states had an
explanation or meaning in terms of the principle of causality. Psychoanalysis
provided the interpretation of all the determiners.
Freud was a master of the composition of thoughts and words, however he was
trapped by his own generalizations and exaggerated simplifications.
Freud’s penchant for generalizations is clearly represented in his firm ideas
about the nature of humans. For him, humans were beings that primarily
responded to instincts. For Freud instincts are the principal motivating forces in
the mental realm, and as such they energize the mind in all of its functions.
Such instincts, could be reduced to a small number of basic ones, which he
grouped into two broad generic categories, Eros (the life instinct), which covers
all the self-preserving and erotic instincts, and Thanatos (the death instinct),
which covers all the instincts towards aggression, self-destruction, and cruelty.
It seems that Freud wanted to simplify, rationalize and generalize every
unconscious behavior. Hence the significance which he attributed to slips of the
tongue or pen, obsessive behavior, and dreams - all, he held, are determined
by hidden causes in the mind mental and reveal what would otherwise not be
known at all. It follows from this that whenever we make a choice we are
governed by hidden mental processes of which we are unaware and over which
we have no control.
A complex conflict might have numerous causes. What role do genetic,
biological and physiological processes play as determiners of thoughts or
feelings? What about the food we eat, the liquids we drink, the air we inhale?
What about expectations for the future that can be seen as determiners of
behavior? What about the physical pain we feel? What about lack of sleep the
night before? What about the vocabulary of the language we develop? What
about the history, education, traditions, culture and personal experiences that
shapes us? What about external elements such as climate, natural forces and
magnetic fields, and the movement of planets as determiners of mental states
or relationships?
Understanding the mind and behavior surpasses mere generalizations. It is
dangerous to believe that any model explains everything under all
circumstances. Such generalizations are dangerous and miss vital complexities
which might be relevant.
3
Freud’s reliance upon generalizations and deterministic explanations impeded
him to articulate even his own thoughts. He wrote:
The tendency of aggression is an innate, independent, instinctual
disposition in man... it constitutes the most powerful obstacle to culture.
Civilized society is perpetually menaced with disintegration through this
primary hostility of men towards one another.
How could civilization surface despite human aggression? Much points to the
tension between civil society and the urge for aggression, yet Freud viewed
aggression as a powerful determiner of human behavior, rather than a choice
that one could make or not make.
In summary, an effective conflict solver must avoid generalizations about the
parties and situations. She must try to observe each person and situation in the
context where they exist. She must try to associate and consider all possible
processes that may be determiners of the situation. She must unlearn
languages or styles of thinking that generalize subjects and processes.
Recommendations for Conflict Solvers
A preliminary issue for approaching complex problems is whether they require a
set of rules for the solutions to be followed.
Freud established recommendations rather than rules regarding how
psychoanalysts should conduct themselves in assisting their patients. He ruled
out strict rules of conduct and believed that “recommendations” of what the
psychoanalyst should not do would adequately guide the practice. As Freud
acknowledged:
The `Recommendations on Technique' I wrote long ago were essentially
of a negative nature. I considered the most important thing was to
emphasize what one should not do….
On the contrary, what the helper should do was left to tact. A sort of elasticity
should exist. The expression of tact must be based essentially on the dissection
of our own self. Tact included the notion of modesty, which should be the
expression of the acceptance of the limits to our knowledge.
Tact involves being mindful of the other person and the context while taking into
account one's own conduct. As such, tact was important for keeping or creating
harmonious relationships. Tact is also the talent to provoke change with
kindness. Tact responds to the reading of the context rather to rules of conduct.
In a way, tact is an expression of intuition.
Freud's recommendations also included anonymity, neutrality, and
confidentiality and served as the foundation of modern codes of ethics for
psychoanalysts. Are these recommendations effective for conflict solvers?
4
With regard to anonymity, Freud recommended that the analyst not reveal his
own emotional reactions or discuss his own experiences. Freud viewed any
previous acquaintance with the patient or relation with the patient or the
patient's family as a serious disadvantage. Such anonymity, on the other hand,
makes it difficult for conflict resolvers to develop the relationship of trust that is
important in facilitating conflict resolution. Anonymity is also a very Western
European concept that does not fit well with the values of collectivist cultures
where trust and respect are given to those whom you know rather than
anonymous strangers.
With regard to neutrality, Freud recommended that the analyst should not give
the patient directions concerning choices in the patient's life nor assume the role
of teacher or mentor. The technique neutrality, central to the psychoanalytic
situation, is also essential for the proper evolution of an analytic process.
Neutrality is both an attitude and the behavioral stance most frequently
recommended for the analyst, and is considered by many as essential in
defining analytic treatment. Every psychoanalyst is supposed to function as a
neutral analyst.
If no human being is free from a history and expectations, to what extent is
Freud asking the impossible? To what extent does this recommendation of
neutrality force the analyst into a self-deception? Perhaps it is enough if the
patients or parties perceive the helper as neutral. Otherwise, it seems that
asking for neutrality from a human being in therapy or in dispute resolution is
merely illusory. Perhaps this is why the Joint Standards of Conduct for
Mediators requires that neutrals behave in an impartial manner rather than
focusing on what is in the mind of the neutral. Hence, the mandate is for
impartiality rather than neutrality.
With regard to confidentiality, Freud recommended that the analyst should not
disclose the information he gathered from patients. Confidentiality means that a
physician may not disclose any medical information revealed by a patient or
discovered by a physician in connection with the treatment of a patient.
Nowadays this recommendation is a binding rule or a guide of conduct included
in codes of ethics for all sort of professionals who handle information from
clients or patients.
These three recommendations—anonymity, neutrality, and confidentiality--are
familiar to experienced conflict solvers. They are fundamental to Freud's
technical contributions to the practice of psychoanalysis. None of them was ever
retracted or substantially modified in any of Freud's writings.
Interestingly, deviations from such simple, negative “recommendations” have
been recorded in historical sources in Freud’s practice. These results show a
substantial disparity between Freud's recommendations and his actual methods
(i.e. his perceptions of his behavior versus the perceptions of other observers of
his behavior). These findings reveal an active, personal, and emotionally
engaged clinician quite different from the image of the analyst as uninvolved
and neutral listener and interpreter of transference and resistance. This
5
information shows a lack of correspondence
recommended and what he actually did.
between
what
Freud
What is to be learned from Freud’s actual practice as a psychoanalyst? The
lesson is that a conflict solver must respond more to what seems appropriate in
the context. In other words, an effective conflict solver must not be bound by
rules or recommendations. Her energy must be emergent and focused on
observation and positive energy in assisting parties for a negotiated solution.
Accepting and Converting the Problem Into solution
Freud discarded old methods used for mental diseases. He discovered that
their puzzling symptoms had a definite meaning, and that there was nothing
arbitrary. He elaborated hypotheses on the complex problems of human
behavior, and on the frontier between normal and abnormal mental states. The
starting point was the acceptance of mental disorders as real problems and the
adoption of strategies to convert the problem into solutions. This view is clearly
illustrated when he speculated:
A man should not strive to eliminate his complexes but to get into accord
with them: they are legitimately what direct his conduct in the world.
Converting problems into solutions includes a reorientation of the forces that
provoked the problem. Instead of elaborating on the problem, one has to gain
perspective and develop strategies that include recalling our best times about
the situation in the past, wishing and thinking about what worked best then,
visioning what we want in the future, and building from our strengths to work
toward our vision.
Fragmentation of Resources for Conflict Management
Deciding paths to pursue personal happiness, Freud provided the following
fable:
Just as a cautious businessman avoids investing all his capital in one
concern, so wisdom would probably admonish us also not to anticipate
all our happiness from one quarter alone.
A teaching from his advice is that in designing possible courses of action for
conflict solution one should not limit solutions by putting all of one’s eggs in the
same basket.
Looking at Options
Explaining Psychoanalysis, Freud expressed:
Analysis does not set out to make pathological reactions impossible, but
to give the patient's ego freedom to decide one way or another.
6
For complex problems it is desirable to follow a flexible strategy that includes
anticipating many options. An option is a possible path of action or thinking to
achieve something, but not the obligation to comply with it.
Talking cure
After experimenting with hypnosis on his neurotic patients, Freud abandoned
hypnosis in favor of a treatment where the patient talked through his or her
problems. This came to be known as the talking cure that is widely seen as the
basis of psychoanalysis.
The talking cure might serve as a sort of narrative mechanism for a party to
construct and express their view of the problem. The process may be laborious.
It is one of the tasks the conflict solver may use to assist the parties to
recognize, and to overcome, their own natural resistance to change their
perception. Dialoguing with the parties might bring them to a point where they
can identify options for conflict solution.
Through the talking cure one must seek the invisible, the network of conflicting
perceptions which exist behind the conflict.
The talking cure is deeply rooted in Freud’s view of primitive human cognition.
Freud stated:
Words were originally magic and to this day words have retained much of
their ancient magical power. By words one person can make another
blissfully happy or drive him to despair, by words the teacher conveys his
knowledge to his pupils, by words the orator carries his audience with
him and determines their judgments and decisions. Words provoke
affects and are in general the means of mutual influence among men.
Thus we shall not depreciate the use of words in psychotherapy and we
shall be pleased if we can listen to the words that pass between the
analyst and his patient.
In spite, or because, words were originally magic and maintain that original
magic, they might serve to facilitate conflict solving.
In going back to the evolution of humans Freud imagined:
The first human who hurled an insult instead of a stone was the founder
of civilization.
This celebrated quotation from Freud may be a beautiful metaphor for a radical
change in human interactions. The word substituted the weapon for the
settlement of disputes. The talking cure is for psychoanalysis what the magic
language is for negotiated solutions; it may generate the changes required for
conflict management.
Magic language includes the use of analogies or metaphors. Freud stated:
7
Analogies, it is true, decide nothing, but they can make one feel more at
home.
Generally, a metaphor is as a way of speaking in which one occurrence is
expressed in terms of another, whereby this correlation throws new light on the
situation. Metaphors have impact on and illuminate human communication and
experience.
Efficacy of Psychoanalysis
Freud’s theories explained the healing of neurotic illness, yet the results are
mixed. Even a good theory might be badly applied, leading to negative results.
Another difficulty is to specify what counts as a cure for a neurotic illness, as
distinct, say, from the mere alleviation of the symptoms. The therapeutic
effectiveness of psychoanalysis remains controversial.
Conclusion
Two fundamental features of Freud’s work regarding therapeutic interventions in
mental processes appear to be confusing. The first deceptive concept was
Freud’s generalizations that ignore individual and contextual uniqueness. The
second is Freud’s belief that psychoanalysts, in assisting their patients, should
follow strict recommendations about what they should not do.
A variety of useful concepts also emerged from Freud’s work that may provide
much needed guidance for effective conflict resolvers. Among these are:
accepting and converting the problem into solution; fragmenting resources for
conflict management; looking at options; and the power of the talking cure.
8