<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
	
	>
<channel>
	<title>
	Comments on: For What It’s Worth: Response to “A Roundtable Discussion on Psychoanalytic Training” Colloquium	</title>
	<atom:link href="https://manhattanpsychoanalysis.com/blog-post/response-colloquium/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>https://manhattanpsychoanalysis.com/blog-post/response-colloquium/</link>
	<description></description>
	<lastBuildDate>Fri, 17 Jan 2020 14:22:29 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<sy:updatePeriod>
	hourly	</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>
	1	</sy:updateFrequency>
	<generator>https://wordpress.org/?v=7.0</generator>
	<item>
		<title>
		By: Steve Kirschner		</title>
		<link>https://manhattanpsychoanalysis.com/blog-post/response-colloquium/#comment-564</link>

		<dc:creator><![CDATA[Steve Kirschner]]></dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 07 Feb 2019 18:29:21 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">https://manhattanpsychoanalysis.com/?post_type=blog_post&#038;p=7862#comment-564</guid>

					<description><![CDATA[Regarding Blair’s question, I think the status of psychoanalysis has been under siege for several decades. It may be hard to see it from the confines of NYC but in many parts of the country Psychoanalysis is something of an endangered species.]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Regarding Blair’s question, I think the status of psychoanalysis has been under siege for several decades. It may be hard to see it from the confines of NYC but in many parts of the country Psychoanalysis is something of an endangered species.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
		
			</item>
		<item>
		<title>
		By: deboraworth		</title>
		<link>https://manhattanpsychoanalysis.com/blog-post/response-colloquium/#comment-563</link>

		<dc:creator><![CDATA[deboraworth]]></dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sat, 02 Feb 2019 17:55:19 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">https://manhattanpsychoanalysis.com/?post_type=blog_post&#038;p=7862#comment-563</guid>

					<description><![CDATA[Thanks, Pio!

In response to Blair&#039;s thoughts: 
Actually I don’t think that psychoanalysis has a higher status or respectability in the larger culture at all now; in fact, perhaps the opposite. I don’t think the change is about that, I think it’s a shift in our society in general. Today there seems to be a more widespread tendency to less philanthropy and to a more transactional attitude towards work, and possibly towards life in general. Some of this has to do, I think, with changes in the economy as a whole, and some to do with other social and political changes. When I went to college - and granted I was a white, educated, middle-class privileged person going to an elite school - the attitude that I was steeped in was that one went to college to get a good, broad education and to find your passion, and that if you loved your work you’d somehow be able to make a living and survive. And for the most part that was true for me and for most of my cohort. We believed that we could change the world, and we were deeply involved in trying to do just that. I certainly understand that I had opportunities and safety nets that many, many didn’t. But that mindset is no longer true even for the privileged middle classes. It is much harder for all but the super-rich to survive financially now than it was in the 60’s, especially in NYC. I think that tends to make people more consumed with just managing their own lives, and less interested in, and able to, give back to the community. This seems to be true across the board and not just in our institute.]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Thanks, Pio!</p>
<p>In response to Blair&#8217;s thoughts:<br />
Actually I don’t think that psychoanalysis has a higher status or respectability in the larger culture at all now; in fact, perhaps the opposite. I don’t think the change is about that, I think it’s a shift in our society in general. Today there seems to be a more widespread tendency to less philanthropy and to a more transactional attitude towards work, and possibly towards life in general. Some of this has to do, I think, with changes in the economy as a whole, and some to do with other social and political changes. When I went to college &#8211; and granted I was a white, educated, middle-class privileged person going to an elite school &#8211; the attitude that I was steeped in was that one went to college to get a good, broad education and to find your passion, and that if you loved your work you’d somehow be able to make a living and survive. And for the most part that was true for me and for most of my cohort. We believed that we could change the world, and we were deeply involved in trying to do just that. I certainly understand that I had opportunities and safety nets that many, many didn’t. But that mindset is no longer true even for the privileged middle classes. It is much harder for all but the super-rich to survive financially now than it was in the 60’s, especially in NYC. I think that tends to make people more consumed with just managing their own lives, and less interested in, and able to, give back to the community. This seems to be true across the board and not just in our institute.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
		
			</item>
		<item>
		<title>
		By: bcasdin		</title>
		<link>https://manhattanpsychoanalysis.com/blog-post/response-colloquium/#comment-562</link>

		<dc:creator><![CDATA[bcasdin]]></dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Fri, 01 Feb 2019 21:21:44 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">https://manhattanpsychoanalysis.com/?post_type=blog_post&#038;p=7862#comment-562</guid>

					<description><![CDATA[Hi Debby - Something I’ve been thinking about since the roundtable, and in reading your blog, is whether there’s been a shift in the “cause” of psychoanalysis. Is it the case that in the early days (define as you wish!) there might have been a stronger desire to make a case for psychoanalysis in the general culture? And now that we have achieved equal-ish status/respectability in the larger culture that the “cause” has been replaced by the business of psychoanalysis? To put it another way...do candidates choose to train, get licensed, and go out and practice on their own vs. be a part of the psychoanalytic movement? If so, then there would be less motivation to participate in the running of the institute than in the “old days.” I’m curious what changes you and others have observed and think about this... Thanks!]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Hi Debby &#8211; Something I’ve been thinking about since the roundtable, and in reading your blog, is whether there’s been a shift in the “cause” of psychoanalysis. Is it the case that in the early days (define as you wish!) there might have been a stronger desire to make a case for psychoanalysis in the general culture? And now that we have achieved equal-ish status/respectability in the larger culture that the “cause” has been replaced by the business of psychoanalysis? To put it another way&#8230;do candidates choose to train, get licensed, and go out and practice on their own vs. be a part of the psychoanalytic movement? If so, then there would be less motivation to participate in the running of the institute than in the “old days.” I’m curious what changes you and others have observed and think about this&#8230; Thanks!</p>
]]></content:encoded>
		
			</item>
		<item>
		<title>
		By: Pio Cabada		</title>
		<link>https://manhattanpsychoanalysis.com/blog-post/response-colloquium/#comment-561</link>

		<dc:creator><![CDATA[Pio Cabada]]></dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Fri, 01 Feb 2019 19:54:24 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">https://manhattanpsychoanalysis.com/?post_type=blog_post&#038;p=7862#comment-561</guid>

					<description><![CDATA[Thank you. Great read.]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Thank you. Great read.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
		
			</item>
	</channel>
</rss>
