Skip to main content
Scientific Meeting | Saturday October 17, 2:00PM - 4:00PM
Topic: Graduate Society Scientific Meeting

Global Theories, Regional Deafness: Non-conscious Internalized Cultures Across Transatlantic Divides - Revisiting Donald Winnicott’s 1968 Encounter and the Ongoing Limits of Regional Psychoanalysis

The history of psychoanalysis since Freud has been marked by fragmentation into multiple theoretical schools, often with limited dialogue across them. M. Nasir Ilahi, LLM, LP’s paper examines the deeper reasons for such failures of communication—focusing on schools that originate across transatlantic traditions, specifically the US and the UK. It proposes that these failures cannot be explained solely in terms of intellectual divergence, but must also be understood in relation to “internalized psychoanalytic cultures”—the non-conscious cultural value systems that shape the development, reception, and practice of analytic theories within a given geographical culture. Focusing on the reception of D.W. Winnicott’s “The Use of an Object” paper at NYPSI in 1968, Ilahi illustrates how a lack of awareness of differing underlying cultural frameworks and implicit worldviews—especially between British Object Relations theory and American Ego Psychology—obstructed meaningful dialogue despite a shared professional language on the surface. Whereas British approaches emphasize the preverbal mind, unconscious phantasy, and early object relations, American ego psychology privileged adaptation, verbal processes, and later developmental stages. These transatlantic confusions continue to the present day, as will be briefly illustrated by the case of Thomas Ogden, where despite an explicit affinity at the level of theoretical statements, clinical work remains firmly—and unknowingly—rooted in North American traditions. These divergences demonstrate that theories in psychoanalysis migrate unevenly across cultural contexts, often undergoing unconscious transformations. While recognizing the influence of such internalized cultures—rather than assuming universal agreement on psychoanalytic concepts—may create anxieties that our theories are not free of local values (and thus not totally “scientific”), it nevertheless offers a way forward for more genuine dialogue across schools and geographies, helping to differentiate what is regional versus universal in our theories. The paper argues that without acknowledging the cultural and non-conscious foundations of theoretical orientations, psychoanalysis risks perpetuating confusion, false consensus, and seriously missed opportunities for growth and global relevance.
Register

Event Location

Scientific Meeting | Saturday October 17, 2:00PM - 4:00PM

About the Event.

The history of psychoanalysis since Freud has been marked by fragmentation into multiple theoretical schools, often with limited dialogue across them. M. Nasir Ilahi, LLM, LP’s paper examines the deeper reasons for such failures of communication—focusing on schools that originate across transatlantic traditions, specifically the US and the UK. It proposes that these failures cannot be explained solely in terms of intellectual divergence, but must also be understood in relation to “internalized psychoanalytic cultures”—the non-conscious cultural value systems that shape the development, reception, and practice of analytic theories within a given geographical culture. Focusing on the reception of D.W. Winnicott’s “The Use of an Object” paper at NYPSI in 1968, Ilahi illustrates how a lack of awareness of differing underlying cultural frameworks and implicit worldviews—especially between British Object Relations theory and American Ego Psychology—obstructed meaningful dialogue despite a shared professional language on the surface. Whereas British approaches emphasize the preverbal mind, unconscious phantasy, and early object relations, American ego psychology privileged adaptation, verbal processes, and later developmental stages. These transatlantic confusions continue to the present day, as will be briefly illustrated by the case of Thomas Ogden, where despite an explicit affinity at the level of theoretical statements, clinical work remains firmly—and unknowingly—rooted in North American traditions. These divergences demonstrate that theories in psychoanalysis migrate unevenly across cultural contexts, often undergoing unconscious transformations. While recognizing the influence of such internalized cultures—rather than assuming universal agreement on psychoanalytic concepts—may create anxieties that our theories are not free of local values (and thus not totally “scientific”), it nevertheless offers a way forward for more genuine dialogue across schools and geographies, helping to differentiate what is regional versus universal in our theories. The paper argues that without acknowledging the cultural and non-conscious foundations of theoretical orientations, psychoanalysis risks perpetuating confusion, false consensus, and seriously missed opportunities for growth and global relevance.

About Our Speaker.

Nasir Ilahi LLM LP

M. Nasir Ilahi, LLM, LP is a Fellow of the British Psychoanalytic Society, Training and Supervising Analyst, Psychoanalytic Association of New York (PANY), Affiliated with NYU Medical School, Honorary Member, New York Psychoanalytic Society Institute, and Editorial Board member of the International Journal of Psychoanalysis and formerly Chair, Board of Directors of PEP. He is the recipient of the 2026 Outstanding Contribution to Disseminating Psychoanalysis (OCDP) award by the British Psychoanalytical Society and earlier the Sigourney Award as member of PEP’s Board. Nasir Ilahi has authored and lectured internationally in areas dealing with primitive mental states and non-neurotic aspects of disturbance as well as cross cultural and comparative psychoanalysis.

Learning Objectives.

At the end of this presentation, participants will be able to:

 

1. Summarize some of the main underlying, implicit/ unarticulated elements of theory and technique shared by all North American schools of psychoanalysis, despite their considerable outward variations, when compared to the various object relations schools as practiced in the UK.

 

2. Describe how these factors, unless made explicit, continue to contribute to an abject failure in communication, not only historically at Winnicott’s 1968 NYPSI presentation but to the present day, between proponents of psychoanalysis from the different sides of the Atlantic.

 

3. Differentiate between universal psychoanalytic principles and regionally specific, culturally bound clinical assumptions when evaluating contemporary psychoanalytic literature and cross-Atlantic school dialogues.

Register

CME/ CE Statement.

ACCME Accreditation Statement
This activity has been planned and implemented in accordance with the accreditation requirements and policies of the Accreditation Council for Continuing Medical Education (ACCME) through the joint providership of American Psychoanalytic Association and Psychoanalytic Association of New York. The American Psychoanalytic Association is accredited by the ACCME to provide continuing medical education for physicians.

AMA Credit Designation Statement
The American Psychoanalytic Association designates this live activity for a maximum of 2 AMA PRA Category 1 Credits™. Physicians should claim only the credit commensurate with the extent of their participation in the activity.

Disclosure Statement
The APsA CE Committee has reviewed the materials for accredited continuing education and has determined that this activity is not related to the product line of ineligible companies and therefore, the activity meets the exception outlined in Standard 3: ACCME's identification, mitigation and disclosure of relevant financial relationship. This activity does not have any known commercial support. 

Psychoanalytic Association of New York (affiliated with NYU Grossman School of Medicine) is recognized by the New York State Education Department’s Board for Psychology as an approved provider of continuing education for licensed psychologists #PSY-0112.

Psychoanalytic Association of New York, affiliated with NYU School of Medicine is recognized by the New York State Education Department's State Board for Social Work as an approved provider of continuing education for licensed social workers #SW-0124.

Psychoanalytic Association of New York is recognized by the New York State Education Department's State Board for Mental Health Practitioners as an approved provider of continuing education for licensed psychoanalysts #P0064.

Psychoanalytic Association of New York is recognized by the New York State Education Department's State Board for Mental Health Practitioners as an approved provider of continuing education for licensed mental health counselors. #MHC-0304.

CME/ CE Credits Available: 2
Register

Citations.

Register

Sign up for our newsletter.

Sign up