I n his paper, Michael Diamond wants to “reconcile dissociation, splitting, and repression within contemporary, pluralistic approaches to psychoanalysis,” thinking of dissociation in the analytic relationship with patients who suffer from severe early trauma in which dissociation “operates to attack on linkages and disrupt symbolization . . .” (p. 840). He would like to lessen rifts and “build bridges between unnecessarily segregated units of theoretical (and technical) understanding” (p. 845). His interest appears timely in that it addresses dissociation, an area that I consider crucial to the development of contemporary psychoanalysis. While appreciating his contribution, at the same time I would like to express a point of view that complements his thinking and that may offer the reader the possibility of observing this area of investigation from different observational points. While Diamond privileges more developed dynamics, for my part I would shift the focus to more archaic phenomena, in line with my research on the body-mind relationship (see, e.g., Lombardi 2018b). Diamond considers dissociation on the level of a process of working through in which the patient’s capacity to think is considered substantially intact—presupposing, for example, that the patient’s mind launches

中文翻译：

---

重度分离治疗中关注患者身心关系：钻石评述

在他的论文中，迈克尔戴蒙德想要“在当代多元的精神分析方法中调和分离、分裂和压抑”，思考与遭受严重早期创伤的患者的分析关系中的分离，其中分离“用于攻击联系并破坏符号化。. 。” （第 840 页）。他希望减少分歧并“在不必要的分离的理论（和技术）理解单元之间架起桥梁”（第 845 页）。他的兴趣在它解决分离问题上显得很及时，我认为这是一个对当代精神分析发展至关重要的领域。在欣赏他的贡献的同时，同时，我想表达一个观点，补充他的思想，并可能为读者提供从不同观察点观察这一研究领域的可能性。虽然 Diamond 优先考虑更发达的动力学，但就我而言，我会将重点转移到更古老的现象上，这与我对身心关系的研究一致（参见，例如，Lombardi 2018b）。戴蒙德认为分离是在一个工作过程的层面上进行的，在这个过程中，患者的思考能力被认为基本上完好无损——例如，假设患者的思维启动