Cultic Studies Review, Vol. 9, No. 1, 2010, Page 50
words, ―we are not our feelings.‖ This filling by the leader causes a weakening of the
member‘s capacity to think, feel, symbolize, and therefore create subjective
meaning. Creativity is suppressed when lack is denied and devalued and the capacity
for psychic fluidity within the unfilled gap is lost (Milner, 1987 Winnicott, 1971
Lacan, 1973).
4. Tolerance of Uncertainty. Uncertainty exists at two poles. At the creative end of
uncertainty the psychic gap is unfilled and lack is tolerated, thus allowing
spontaneous flashes of creativity to be communicated through symbol in the form of
humor, metaphor, play, reverie, and so on. At the traumatic end of uncertainty, the
gap necessary for spontaneity is overcome by defenses that protect the psyche from
experiencing intolerable and unsymbolizable—i.e., traumatic, feelings. Folie á deux is
one such defense that negates uncertainty via rigid mirroring. Inability to tolerate
uncertainty, though not unique to former members, is a common symptom of the
former member who first presents in treatment, perhaps reflecting the defensive
need to fill the psychic gap rather than engage in symbolic and creative psychic
processes (Milner, 1957 Bion, 1962 Winnicott, 1971 Lacan, 1973, Meltzer and
Harris Williams, 1988).
These four criteria necessary for creativity all relate to the mechanism of projective
identification. Central to that mechanism is the core psychoanalytic concept of splitting.
Psychoanalytic thinking is based upon the theory that the human psyche operates on more
than one level simultaneously. Freud‘s (1925) concept of negation states that unconscious
hidden laws split the subject‘s psyche fundamentally. One level—the conscious level—allows
the subject to experience reality as linear, concrete, rational, situated in time and space,
and characterized by certainty and the recognition of difference. ―This is not that.‖ ―The cult
leader is not God.‖ This level allows us to function in the external world since it orders
experience. The other level is the unconscious level where symbols formed by condensation
or displacement fluidly bridge different components of the unconscious to make meaning
out of human experience that may be characterized by binary oppositions such as love-
hate, tall-small, black-white, full-empty, animate-inanimate, and that our psyches attempt
to negotiate.
Deri notes that ―creative symbolization, which connects, is the antidote for splitting,‖ and
that ―psychoanalysis is directed toward stimulating the symbolizing, order-making capacity
of the patient‘s mind‖ (1984, p. 291).
It is interesting to note Lifton‘s (1961) thoughts about psychoanalysis in this regard:
The ethos of psychoanalysis and of its derived psychotherapies is in direct
opposition to that of totalism. Indeed, its painstaking and sympathetic
investigations of single human minds place it within the direct tradition of
those Western intellectual currents which historically have done most to
counter totalism: humanism, individualism, and free scientific inquiry.
Because of its continuing concern for individual differences and for flexible
personal development, it is no surprise that psychoanalytic work has never
been permitted under totalitarianism (or political totalism).‖ (p. 246)
He states further that ―[p]sychoanalysis is able to look critically at itself, to experiment,
correct, and change‖ (p. 448).
Turning to other psychoanalysts who address the function of symbol, Milner asks, ―Are we
not rather driven by the internal necessity for inner organization, pattern, coherence, the
basic need to discover identity in difference without which experience becomes chaos?‖
(1952, p. 181). Segal (1994) notes that ―symbol formation captures the capacity to
communicate,‖ while Abraham and Torok (1987) suggest that trauma damages the capacity
words, ―we are not our feelings.‖ This filling by the leader causes a weakening of the
member‘s capacity to think, feel, symbolize, and therefore create subjective
meaning. Creativity is suppressed when lack is denied and devalued and the capacity
for psychic fluidity within the unfilled gap is lost (Milner, 1987 Winnicott, 1971
Lacan, 1973).
4. Tolerance of Uncertainty. Uncertainty exists at two poles. At the creative end of
uncertainty the psychic gap is unfilled and lack is tolerated, thus allowing
spontaneous flashes of creativity to be communicated through symbol in the form of
humor, metaphor, play, reverie, and so on. At the traumatic end of uncertainty, the
gap necessary for spontaneity is overcome by defenses that protect the psyche from
experiencing intolerable and unsymbolizable—i.e., traumatic, feelings. Folie á deux is
one such defense that negates uncertainty via rigid mirroring. Inability to tolerate
uncertainty, though not unique to former members, is a common symptom of the
former member who first presents in treatment, perhaps reflecting the defensive
need to fill the psychic gap rather than engage in symbolic and creative psychic
processes (Milner, 1957 Bion, 1962 Winnicott, 1971 Lacan, 1973, Meltzer and
Harris Williams, 1988).
These four criteria necessary for creativity all relate to the mechanism of projective
identification. Central to that mechanism is the core psychoanalytic concept of splitting.
Psychoanalytic thinking is based upon the theory that the human psyche operates on more
than one level simultaneously. Freud‘s (1925) concept of negation states that unconscious
hidden laws split the subject‘s psyche fundamentally. One level—the conscious level—allows
the subject to experience reality as linear, concrete, rational, situated in time and space,
and characterized by certainty and the recognition of difference. ―This is not that.‖ ―The cult
leader is not God.‖ This level allows us to function in the external world since it orders
experience. The other level is the unconscious level where symbols formed by condensation
or displacement fluidly bridge different components of the unconscious to make meaning
out of human experience that may be characterized by binary oppositions such as love-
hate, tall-small, black-white, full-empty, animate-inanimate, and that our psyches attempt
to negotiate.
Deri notes that ―creative symbolization, which connects, is the antidote for splitting,‖ and
that ―psychoanalysis is directed toward stimulating the symbolizing, order-making capacity
of the patient‘s mind‖ (1984, p. 291).
It is interesting to note Lifton‘s (1961) thoughts about psychoanalysis in this regard:
The ethos of psychoanalysis and of its derived psychotherapies is in direct
opposition to that of totalism. Indeed, its painstaking and sympathetic
investigations of single human minds place it within the direct tradition of
those Western intellectual currents which historically have done most to
counter totalism: humanism, individualism, and free scientific inquiry.
Because of its continuing concern for individual differences and for flexible
personal development, it is no surprise that psychoanalytic work has never
been permitted under totalitarianism (or political totalism).‖ (p. 246)
He states further that ―[p]sychoanalysis is able to look critically at itself, to experiment,
correct, and change‖ (p. 448).
Turning to other psychoanalysts who address the function of symbol, Milner asks, ―Are we
not rather driven by the internal necessity for inner organization, pattern, coherence, the
basic need to discover identity in difference without which experience becomes chaos?‖
(1952, p. 181). Segal (1994) notes that ―symbol formation captures the capacity to
communicate,‖ while Abraham and Torok (1987) suggest that trauma damages the capacity
