ABSTRACT
When we discuss a case in seminars it is fascinating to see how differently the candidates see the patient. ’e views are so divergent that one could gain the impression we are not talking about the same person. It is my task as supervisor to not let the enthusiasm of the participants turn into a competitive, or even destructive, battle about which view is true. ’e •ght over right and wrong can be defused by pointing out that all opinions expressed are
equally valuable inasmuch as the conclusions that are drawn are co-determined by the subjectivity of the observer. Once we desist from claiming to know the objective reality about the people we treat, we can enter into a constructive dialogue in which the variety of observations can enhance the complexity of our understanding of the patient. ’is does not mean that all observations are equally pertinent, but by understanding the seminar as an enlarged intersubjective •eld, over the course of the discussion we can arrive at a dialogically attained picture of the therapeutic process.
