Overcoming O: Dewey and the Problem of Bion's Metaphysics.

TL;DR: Whether Bion’s technique with a less speculative philosophy is provided with a pragmatist theory of aesthetics is inquires, which begins with reviewing the similarities between the two writers’ methods, highlighting their shared emphasis on openness to the unknown.

Abstract: Bion guides us to eschew memory, desire, and understanding in order to become one with O-the ultimate reality of the analytic moment. However, his directions are valid only to the extent that such a meta-reality actually exists. Otherwise there is nothing to unite with and no reason to shun memory or desire. The present work inquires whether we may provide Bion's technique with a less speculative philosophy, specifically Dewey's pragmatist theory of aesthetics. It begins with reviewing the similarities between the two writers' methods, highlighting their shared emphasis on openness to the unknown. Yet listening to their intonations reveals that they actually convey opposite ideas as to what this "unknown" may be. Whereas Dewey sanguinely portrays the possibilities of the "yet-unknown," Bion emphasizes the dread of our inescapable encounter with the unknowable. This dread is embodied in his concept of O. Thus, rather than being merely a metaphysical speculation, O communicates Bion's conviction that fear forms the core of our existence. Banishing O from the counseling room may indeed aid his method in becoming accessible to a wider audience; at the same time, however, doing so might also deprive it of the very context that gives it meaning.