What is your Freudian personality style

Maren Lammers

"Emotion-related psychotherapy of feelings of shame and guilt" (2016)

Léon Wurmser

"Masks of Shame" (1981)

466 pages, 8 figures, 17 tables

13 chapters (189 pages on practice, central 63)

119 summaries, 17 digressions

38 illustrative case vignettes

8 practical tips, 13x tips on "how to proceed"

Material collections, various exercises (eight of them also as code-protected PDF, as well as questionnaires, the bibliography and illustrations). Four contributions by Isgard Ohls go deeper into cultural history.

Unfortunately no directory of persons.

491 pages

16 chapters

14 summaries

19 illustrative case vignettes, some of which have been picked up several times, plus factory vignettes

Less “to-go” -like presentation / manualization, stylistically more like the “old” guard, which seems to strive to contribute abstractly to the intellectual history without “facilitating manual access”.

Integrativecross-school (with proximity to schema therapy). Micha Hilgers ’book on shame affects is recognized and Wurmser is mentioned twice.

Psychodynamics (especially Anna Freud, Otto Fenichel, Paul Gray)

Base of shame and guilt are a lack of opportunities basic needs (Attachment, control, self-worth, desire, consistency) to satisfy.

If this kind of shadow casts itself over the emotions, the assessment of mental health should not simply follow the classifying descriptions, but initially stick with the more basic needs: anyway, shame underlies almost all psychiatric illnesses.

An addition to starting with the needs: According to the well-known psychoanalytic sexualization of objects, this form of centralization of needs would experiment with being a completing medium for the satisfying person somewhere: this would possibly be a completely taboo one in the repertoire practice a valuable hysterical attitude.

Base of shame Shoots and conflicts, escapes from explanations in borderline and psychosis diagnoses therefore appear mostly superfluous.

The focus on shame gives the psychoanalysis, which already has associations and basic structures, a further sharpening of the eye:

when confronted with the signs, the “masks of shame”, one should pay more attention than usual to the individual measure of the “permitted” superego approach.

Starting from the beginning with too much and too little gaze as a sexually special object is a more direct approach to shame. In excess, it showed itself more in power games than in the classic “macho” search for climaxes. The work on this level, which wants to adjust enough of the good (with regard to the gaze fetish), would be work on perverse features against this background.

empathy downtown:

Mentalization, cognitive relocation and emotional resonance is the basis of feelings of guilt and shame,

Mirror neurons program us to want to be a “human soundboard” of a “common multiple”.

empathy downtown:

More than usual, shame requires signs that the individual is seen as such: therapeutically and generally interpersonal, the analyst should therefore be tactful, analytically intelligent and curious.

Guilt is a basic social emotion that attributes (ascribes cause or “causer”) and fuses cognitions with appeals and takes them hostage until the relationship with the other is examined. So the remorse works by means of counterfactual thinking (“What if I had done it differently?”) Quite positively on social skills.

Guilt - it is mentioned but not differentiated. Perhaps knowing that there are plenty of discussions devoted to this in the various superego discourses of psychoanalysis.

shame activates self-regulation in a highly culturally dependent manner, positives dignity and one's own limits - is “Freud's blind spot”. According to the relevant distinction made by Helen Lewis in 1971, it always affects the whole person - sometimes even disguising the view of guilt - and not wrongdoing that can ever be repaired.

Shame wants to be heard as a signal and can then be a “lesson” in the best sense of the word. But it also has a generalization tendency that has the effect of causing disease (then addressed as "secondary").

shame occurs incognito.

"Main masks": depersonalization, depression, transient eating disorders or thought disorders. Shame is derogatory, mostly veiled narcissism companion, resulting in shame fear (inhibition), actual shame and / or character armor (attitude). With the former, there is even more clearly a before-something and a before-someone (being ashamed) that doesn't even stop at self. Actually, however, it is a snail-shell-like protection of the ability to true love: in letting go, in granting protection-free moments, it acts as a sublimation engine.

shamelessness is also dependent on a constant understanding of oneself. Creating shame-free zones is normal, but there is a limit to what is harmful and pathological.

shamelessness/ Coolness is the dialectical downside that promotes a return of the repressed, just playing with the source of pleasure in letting go.

technology: It is important that the therapist has dealt with his own guilt and shame and cultivated a reflective, “understanding” attitude, with specific shame-relieving “goals” in mind.

Shame-specific psychoeducation can also be important, later on it is about access to emotions in general, specifically to guilt and shame, and even more deeply to assumed shame-generating, buried needs (various multi-step manuals want to help the therapist here).

In general, it is important to use resources and deal skilfully with the assumed "emotion-phobic conflict". This can be achieved, for example, through a hypnotherapeutic personification of shame or through the development of an internal opponent. It also helps to give childish cognitions a voice where it is difficult for the client to assume responsibility for the retreat or defiance, which only worsens everything - all of this in the service of a subsequent satisfaction of needs (one becomes, as it were, a "detective" for tracking down the real ones Needs).

technology: in order to minimize instructive countertransference, one should know oneself and one's shame well.

When working with the patient, start on the surface, first pay attention to defense mechanisms against the content of the conflict, paying particular attention to allowing the observer and self-expression (whether the other person is in "peepshows" or shows himself, weaker: himself in the boulevard and Everyday gossip wallows), and know the typical concealment strategies.

Immediately consider how the “shame crack” in subject architecture can be cemented: how to support a damaged bridgehead only locally, or how to realign the entire construction?

Shame is mainly metaphorized here as fear of the evil eye, so psychodynamic acumen must reckon with shame in front of insight.

Training: systematically alternating between the induced shaman's flow and its analysis for yourself and the patient. Ideally even initiate a kind of transcendent experience, as great art succeeds: not for a “regression”, but for “magic in the service of the self”.

Conclusion: the stronger the shame, the more one should assume that objects (people, affections, actions) were missing, especially early in life. To "see" this later and to practice seeing again very understandingly is better than looking away again and again ...

Conclusion: Bans that curb instinctual life should be particularly easy to plunge into conflicts that cannot be clearly shown. As long as the person somehow wants to look according to his fantasies and show himself, reflected, well-timed and then magically shared "permission" helps further ...