PSYCHE, 1967, Jg. 21, Ausgabe 7

Introduction and Part I: The group of psychoanalysts working at the Sigmund Freud Institute of Frankfurt/Main, when pooling their experiences with outpatients, were impressed by the fact that almost regularly in the circumscribed situation of the initial interview unconscious phenomena would emerge. A first difficulty in evaluating these observations is the unexpected abundance and the numerous layers of data which have to be arranged in some kind of order if one wants to form a picture of the patient and within that relatively sketchy frame discern the specific weight of the emerging unconscious gestalt phenomena. How this can be done (and might the taught) is shown by rendering the verbatim discussions of a group of relatively unprepared investigators (students, trainees of the Sigmund Freud Institute, general practitioners). Part II: As a result of their experiments the group came to the conclusion that in view of the many-layered material they ought to focus on some special center of crystallization. One reason supporting such a procedure is the fact that the initial interview in psychotherapy is a »Grenzsituation«, a situation in which questioning and observations are no Ionger serving the discovery of mere facts, but become part of the interview dynamics. At some crucial point in the initial interview the unconscious conflicts converge in a focal conflict due to the spontaneous transference developing in the doctor-patient relationship. By verbalizing this conflict the analyst gives the answer to the question of what has happened in this situation. Three short case reports are given for illustration. The dynamic focus can then easily be traced into the finer branchifications of the personality structure. What the patient expresses of his personality is the answer to the question which are the specific phenomena he elaborates in the here and now situation. This gives us a relatively stable structural frame to be filled with the various up to now ununderstandable data. Moreover the model allows to deduce metapsychological concepts for a scientific elaboration of the individual case. By relating the actual unconscious dynamics emerging in the interview with the patient's personality structure, we detect, ein the continuous flow of one or several interviews, a process which is by no means accidental but is determined by analyzable elements. Rigidity or resilience of structure is demonstrated by two clinical examples. The observation focusses on unconscious micro-action precasting the configurations and dynamics to be expected in a subsequent treatment. Part III: As contrasted to this approach of differentiating the personality structure of the individual patient, another method we are investigating is that of generalisation. Certain groups of patients will shape the interview situation in a typical way dependent on their unconscious motivations or expectations. This seems to allow the derivation of certain types which again would permit predictions as to suitability for treatment, outcome etc. This approach is still in a pilot stage. When re-examining the technical problems of their study the investigators were struck by a recurring observation. In the regular interview conferences the interviewed patient tended to »reappear as an induction phenomenon«. This problem is presented in the unbiassed experimental situation of a group consisting of general practitioners. They came to the conclusion that they were faced with an interaction between the patient's unconscious conflict introduced by the reporting interviewer by way of his identification with his patient, and the unconscious group process. It is suggested that this phenomenon might be employed as a new center of integration permitting a deeper understanding of the patient in question.

The history of religions shows that the figure of Satan developed originally out of numerous demons and evil spirits in the course of the monotheistic development. With the decline of the Evil One there seems to be a return of the many out of which he had grown. The former conceptions of the devil have not entirely dis- appeared. They live on in the same way as infantile drives continue to play a role in the unconscious of the grown-up, and, in special circumstances, demand satisfaction. The devil develops from the ambivalence of the drives, from the need to preserve the loved object and to find an object for the hostile drives. If one can throw all the guilt on the Evil One, he feels free of guilt. If the function of the devil in the unconscious is recognised, the success of Hitler’s propaganda loses something of its puzzling nature. He understood, from his own unconscious, to tap a reservoir which is only superficially covered by the cultural development. In the religious ideas of former times the devil and the Jew always merged with one another. As Satan could appear in any shape, so in Hitler’s propaganda the Jew appeared in all possible shapes, as capitalist or bolshevik etc., without harming the propaganda through its contradictions. In the group, as Freud described it, the individual superstructure is removed, the unconscious foundation becomes effective, hence the need for the devil can always be misused for political purposes. The enlargement of group-psychological experiences due to modern technical communications increases the dangers of primitive reactions.