On the analyst's neutrality.

Abstract

It is by the application of the principle of neutrality, born of his respect for the essential otherness of the patient, that the analyst focuses the dyadic analytic work in the service of the patient's growing self-analytic capacity. Thus, the general principle of neutrality is distinguished from the technical tactic of abstinence, the latter being a specific function utilized to facilitate and foster analytic regression. Neutrality can be defined as it applies to the major subfunctions of the analyst's work ego. Perception of the patient's intrapsychic processes (both empathically and cognitively) requires a neutrality of appearance on the analyst's part in order to minimize the distortion of the unfolding transference neurosis. Integration and understanding of the patient's communications require mastery and neutralization of the analyst's own internal processes in order to minimize countertransferential distortions. Appropriate interpretive intervention requires neutrality of action, i.e., mastery of impulses related to power, neutralizing them into the service of the analytic work; tact is defined as a specific psychoanalytic function in this regard. Collaborative ignorance is examined as a specific instance of false neutrality. In this an analytic guise serves to mask a countertransferential conflict. Neutrality serves as an overriding technical principle, not an imperative for perfectionism . Factors intrinsic to the analytic process also influence the application of this principle.