ABSTRACT
X said . .. well, what? He used words in such a way that they seemed to indicate that his mother or relatives had cut off supplies; that he could sell out £500 of shares and go to the cottage, in which case there would only be £50 and that just could not buy food. “That’s all there is to it.” I attempted to draw attention to the fact that even while there was an opportunity for analysis, he could make no use of it. He defends by taking this as an accusation in which he is to blame and thus denies the existence of a very bad obstructive object. The rational comes in, therefore, not as the product of an elucidation, but as a defence against the elucidation. If I put to him that his mother is a very dangerous object denying him food, then I am giving him material to defend himself against the common sense view, and am myself felt to be disturbed to an extent which makes me unable to see the common-sense view.
