The first chapter of Death instinct and knowledge <\/i>(Fagioli, 2019) introduces original research.\u00a0 Starting from the common observation of a non conscious or behavioural patient’s reaction to the suspension of sessions in the context of the clinical routine, Massimo Fagioli deduces and writes: \u00a0 \u00abThe analyst is absent; The patient experiences frustration.\u00bb (Fagioli, p.15). The author explains the patient\u2019s reaction to the physical absence of the psychotherapist introducing the concept of \u00ab psychological absence\u00bb, defined in a new way as a \u00abconcept of non- being, of disappearance\u00bb (p.18).\u00a0 The definition of this concept opens innovative research on the therapist and their clinical praxis, which results crucial in the historical context of the moment. In fact, in 1966 Kiesler had already defined \u201cmyth\u201d the assumption, shared until then, of the uniformity of the therapist qualifying as \u00abdevastating<\/i>\u00bb the praxis of the psychotherapy research which selected psychotherapists\u00a0 for a research design, on the basis of the conjecture that these last would have been more similar than different, between each other. What could happen in the so-called real relationship, <\/i>that is at a countertransference level in the therapist and in a feedback circuit in the patient\u2019s mind, has been \u00a0\u00a0<\/i>finally theorized only in 1971 with Death instinct and knowledge.\u00a0 <\/i>Fagioli hypothesized in it a causal relationship between the concept of the psychological absence and the concept of frustration, making, however, a further specification. Indeed, he distinguishes the frustration of the \u201cneeds\u201d of the patient, intended as a partial activity in the relationship, tending towards a direct satisfaction, determined by a pulsional activity aimed to not consider the human reality of the therapist, from the patient\u2019s \u201crequirements\u201d of knowledge and psychic development. \u00a0 The opposition of the therapist to the patient\u2019s needs satisfaction has been defined by Fagioli as \u201cpsychological presence \u201cand \u201cfrustration-interest\u201d towards the last one and on the contrary, the non- response <\/i>to the human requirements of development of their mental reality is enucleated as \u201cpsychological absence\u201d and \u201cfrustration-aggressiveness” toward them. This \u201cnon-response”, clarifies the author, \u00ab is not the lack of something but, rather, it is actively directing a pulsion, <\/i>the death instinct, against<\/i> the external object\u00bb (Fagioli 2019, p.24). \u00a0\u00a0\u00a0The recognition of this dynamic of relationship \u00a0 allows definitively to understand what determines the difficulty to respond to the exigencies of development of the patient\u2019s mental reality. \u00a0 Non- responsive because psychologically absent, it is therefore the therapist who \u00ab gives up comprehending and interpreting to take on the role of the Good Samaritan or of a pedagogue\u00bb (Fagioli 2019, p.23), or in their flexibility, do not realize that they are not opposing the satisfaction of needs.\u00a0 Their psychologically absence is the annulment pulsion against the psychic reality of the other. To know what determines not only the quality of the relationship that the patient has with their therapist, but also the relationship that the therapist is able to manage in respect of the patient is an essential element to understand the psychotherapeutic process and its outcome. \u00a0 Therefore, the principal objective of this work is to show how the theoretical definition of the death instinct as the annulment pulsion against the human reality of the other, can shed light on outstanding questions regarding psychotherapy research. Between them, the question of the responsiveness <\/i>and the flexibility, <\/i>which are aspects strictly linked in literature to the question of the effective<\/i> therapist<\/i> (Constantino, Boswell & Coyne, 2021). In literature,\u00a0 the most important achievement regarding this topic of research \u00a0 has been\u00a0 the effort to identify the characteristics or the actions of \u201cthe effective therapist \u201c, but remaining\u00a0 at a level of investigation which does not consider the non conscious relationship between therapist and patient. The research regarding countertransference, even considering its current pan-theoretical meaning, has not historically gone beyond the possibility that in the relationship with the patient, the\u00a0 therapist’s internal and external reactions, exclusively due to unsolved internal conflicts, could be implicated. Therefore, the original knowledge introduced by Death instinct and knowledge <\/i>sheds light on the crucial problem underlying the non- responsiveness, <\/i>with important implications regarding the training of the future psychotherapists, as well as the intervention on mental health.<\/p>\n
<\/p>\n
References<\/strong><\/p>\n\n