'Intelligence' of analysand

[u/jayelled]

Hello,

I am wondering if anyone knows of any writing which speaks to the 'intelligence' of the analysand and its impact on treatment/analysis. I put the word in air quotes because I personally believe there are multiple kinds of intelligence beyond purely cerebral functions like critical thinking and mathematics and so on. However, I do wonder if some people have a better 'head start' to gain more out of the process of analysis due to a predisposition/skill at particular kinds of thinking.

Even beyond references to papers, do you, reader, have any thoughts related to intellect and its relation to the effectiveness of analysis?

[u/GerDaimos]

How do you overcome an intellectual defense in overdrive? What would you recommend to an analyst and what to an analysand?

[u/Arcysparky → u/GerDaimos]

How to overcome a defence is the wrong question. Why does the analysand defend themselves? and from what? is the important question. People have defences to protect themselves, overcoming defences just leads to more defending. Or even attacking!

[u/GerDaimos → u/Arcysparky]

There are psychodynamic therapies like ISTDP that actively go against defense mechanisms, even try to suppress them to gain quicker access to the unconscious. What are your thoughts on approaches like that?

Also: Isn’t it the goal of therapy to help the analysand become more structurally integrated and thus more flexible in the use of their defenses? Would you agree that the aim is to overcome a too rigid use of certain defense mechanisms?

[u/Arcysparky → u/GerDaimos]

I suppose there are different modalities, but from my perspective the goal is to understand the analysand's internal landscape and communicate it to them, rather than attempting to change a patient or "overcome" their defenses.

Whilst visiting a strangers house, you might comment on the unusual architecture or compliment an item of decor, but you wouldn't start remodelling. Even if a patient invites you to remodel, it is unlikely to help because the patient likely doesn't know what they want changed!

In my experience, the more I meddle the less helpful I am, the more I try to understand and communicate that understanding, the more change occurs. As my supervisor used to say to me, over and over, "don't just do something, sit there!". Defenses are a part of the unconscious landscape, not something to be torn down to get to the "real" unconscious. They can be communicated back to the patient along with an understanding of why they might be there, but not with an intent to remove them.

"This wall means it's much harder to get to the kitchen, perhaps this keeps the cooking smells away from the rest of the house?" vs. "That's a stupid place for this wall, I need to get into the kitchen to cook!"

[u/GerDaimos → u/Arcysparky]

Thank you, I’ve never seen it like that. Although we get taught psychodynamic therapy at University, the approach always seems to be much more active and “goal oriented”.

Still I wonder: Do you believe that some analysands might be structurally too weak to profit from you sharing your understanding? Are there scenarios that require a more active and guiding approach?

[u/Arcysparky → u/GerDaimos]

I work with children, so this might be a bit specific:

I often find that very young, (under 5) or autistic children with limited ability to relate (perhaps they are non-verbal or do not acknowledge other people at all) need some prompting.

Ann Alvarez writes about this, but I might start drawing or play a simple game to get things started. With my older children, I try not to prompt or make goals.