The spatial metaphor, action language and psychoanalytic object relations theory : an alternate view

An integration of Kuhn's concept of scientific revolution, Wittgenstein's philosophy of language and Roy Schafer's action language is presented. It is suggested that, despite the changes introduced by object relations theorists to traditional psychoanalysis, the inconsistencies of the natural science model used by Freud are apparent throughout the psychoanalytic object relations literature. It is shown that none of the object relations theorists discussed ever questioned Freud's basic paradigm, nor did they question his premise that psycho analysis should be based upon the model provided by 19th century physics. The maintenance of the spatial metaphor and the reification of constructs from Freud through Guntrip and Fairbairn is demonstrated. It is found that, just as Klein, with her retention of the concepts of drives and the id, did not carry the implications of her concept of object relations to its logical conclusion, so, too, Fairbairn and Guntrip, with their retention of such concepts as ego, libido and internal objects, did not carry out the implications of their formulations.

It is concluded that a scientific revolution, in Kuhn's sense of a paradigm shift, has not occurred within the psychoanalytic object relations literature, but that such a shift is possible through the application of Schafer's action language to psychoanalytic object relations theory. In this way, the paradigm conflict between phenomenology and psychoanalysis may be resolved.

Lastly, resistance in the field to eliminating the reified metaphors and anthropomorphism of the natural science model is addressed. It is postulated that those in the field maintain this pseudo-scientific way of viewing people's behavior and development for historical, intellectual, psychological and emotional reasons.