intersubjectivity

•        Bohleber, W. (2013). The Concept of Intersubjectivity in Psychoanalysis: Taking Critical Stock. Int. J. Psycho-Anal., 94(4):799-823

•        Destructiveness, Intersubjectivity and Trauma: The Identity Crisis of Modern Psychoanalysis, by Werner Bohleber, Karnac Books, 2010 (ProQuest Ebook Central, VGH)

•        Conci, M. (2013). Sullivan and the intersubjective perspective. Int. Forum Psychoanal., 22(1):10-16

•        Psychoanalytic Thinking: A Dialectical Critique of Contemporary Theory and Practice, by Donald L. Carveth, Routledge, 2018

•        Intersubjectivity in Psychoanalysis: A Model for Theory and Practice, by Lewis Kirshner, Routledge, 2017

•        Schwartz, H.P. (2012). Intersubjectivity and Dialecticism. Int. J. Psycho-Anal., 93(2):401-425

•        The Routledge Handbook of Psychoanalysis in the Social Sciences and Humanities, ed. by Anthony Elliott, Jeffrey Prager, Routledge, 2016

•        Robert D. Stolorow (2013) Intersubjective-Systems Theory: A Phenomenological-Contextualist Psychoanalytic Perspective, Psychoanalytic Dialogues, 23:4, 383-389

•        Founding Psychoanalysis Phenomenologically: Phenomenological Theory of Subjectivity and the Psychoanalytic Experience, ed. by Dieter Lohmar, Jagna Brudzinska, Springer, 2011

•        Subjectivity and Intersubjectivity in Modern Philosophy and Psychoanalysis, by Roger Frie, Rowman & Littlefield Publishers, 1997

•        Relational and Intersubjective Perspectives in Psychoanalysis: A Critique, by Jon Mills, Jason Aronson, Inc., 2005

•        A Primer of Clinical Intersubjectivity, ed. by Joseph Natterson, Raymond J. Friedman, Jason Aronson, Inc., 1995

•        Beyond Counter-Transference: The Therapist's Subjectivity in the Therapeutic Process, by Joseph M. Natterson, Jason Aronson Inc.. 1991

•        Contemporary Psychodynamic Psychotherapy for Children and Adolescents: Integrating Intersubjectivity and Neuroscience, by Sergio V. Delgado, Jeffrey R. Strawn, Ernest V. Pedapati, Springer, 2014

•        The Intersubjectivity of Time: Levinas and Infinite Responsibility, by Yael Lin, Duquesne University Press,2013

•        Relationality: From Attachment to Intersubjectivity (Relational Perspectives Book Series), by Stephen A. Mitchell, Routledge, 2003

•        Layers In Husserl's Phenomonology: On Meaning and Intersubjectivity (New Studies in Phenomenology and Hermeneutics), by Peter R. Costello, University of Toronto Press, 2015

•        Husserl’s Phenomenology of Intersubjectivity: Historical Interpretations and Contemporary Applications (Routledge Research in Phenomenology), ed. by Frode Kjosavik, Christian Beyer, Christel Fricke, Routledge, December 6, 2018

•        Apprehending the Inaccessible: Freudian Psychoanalysis and Existential Phenomenology, by Richard Askay and Jensen Farquhar, Northwestern University Press, 2006

•        Psychotherapy as a Human Science, by Daniel Burston, Roger A. Frie, Duquesne University Press, 2006

•        Beyond Doer and Done to, by Jessica Benjamin, Routledge, 2017 The Suffering Stranger: Hermeneutics for Everyday Clinical Practice, by Donna M. Orange, Routledge, 2011

•        Toward an Emancipatory Psychoanalysis: Brandchaft's Intersubjective Vision, by Bernard Brandchaft , Shelly Doctors, Dorienne Sorter, Routledge, 2010

•        Shelley R. Doctors (2017) Brandchaft’s Pathological Accommodation—What It Is and What It Isn’t, Psychoanalysis, Self and Context, 12:1, 45-59

 https://kellychang2713.blogspot.com/search?q=intersubjectivity

 https://drive.google.com/drive/folders/1LYmFOlAlFdvNcP8MdghH_c5jLl_pveyQ?usp=sharing

Husserl’s Phenomenology of Intersubjectivity: Historical Interpretations and Contemporary Applications (Routledge Research in Phenomenology) (ed. Frode Kjosavik, Christian Beyer, Christel Fricke 2018-12-6)

This collection examines the instrumental role of intersubjectivity in Husserl’s philosophy and explores the potential for developing novel ways of addressing and resolving contemporary philosophical issues on that basis. This is the first time Iso Kern offers an extensive overview of this rich field of inquiry for an English-speaking audience. Guided by his overview, the remaining articles present new approaches to a range of topics and problems that go to the heart of its core theme of intersubjectivity and methodology. Specific topics covered include intersubjectivity and empathy, intersubjectivity in meaning and communication, intersubjectivity pertaining to collective forms of intentionality and extended forms of embodiment, intersubjectivity as constitutive of normality, and, finally, the central role of intersubjectivity in the sciences. The authors’ perspectives are strongly influenced by Husserl’s own methodological concerns and problem awareness and are formed with a view to applicability in current debates – be it within general epistemology, analytic philosophy of language, philosophy of mind, meta-ethics or philosophy of science. With contributions written by leading Husserl scholars from across the Analytic and Continental traditions, Husserl’s Phenomenology of Intersubjectivity is a clear and accessible resource for scholars and advanced students interested in Husserl’s phenomenology and the relevance of intersubjectivity to philosophy, sociology, and psychology. (amazon) (kindle 2019-1-5)

Husserl, intersubjectivity and anthropology (Alessandro Duranti, Anthropological Theory, 2010-6-10)

Abstract

In this article, the notion of intersubjectivity is re-examined by going back to its original formulation by the philosopher Edmund Husserl at the beginning of the 20th century. On the basis of a careful reading of Husserl’s books and lecture notes, four claims are put forward that help clarify in what sense intersubjectivity is a broader and more fundamental notion than currently assumed in the social sciences. In particular, it is argued that for Husserl intersubjectivity is more than shared or mutual understanding and is closer to the notion of the possibility of being in the place where the Other is. Furthermore, intersubjectivity is the source of objectivity and not always or necessarily something to be achieved or negotiated through verbal communication or other means. In fact, in its most basic sense, Husserlian intersubjectivity includes a mode of participation in the natural and material world that does not even require an immediately perceivable human presence. Following this discussion, it is suggested that the full range of meanings of intersubjectivity found in Husserl’s writings can be used as the basis for a study of the human condition that has a chance to unite all subfields of anthropology as practiced in the US. With this goal in mind, six related but distinct domains of intersubjectivity are proposed.

Keywords anthropology and phenomenology, human sociality, intersubjectivity, mutual understanding

What are the primary, secondary, and tertiary intersubjectivity proposed by Wenda R. Trevathan? (ChatGPT, 2024-4-4)

Wenda R. Trevathan is an anthropologist and her work primarily focuses on human evolution and biocultural aspects of reproduction and childbirth. While she does not specifically propose a framework of primary, secondary, and tertiary intersubjectivity, these concepts are often associated with developmental psychology and social theory rather than anthropology. However, I can provide a general overview of these concepts:

1. Primary Intersubjectivity: This concept, often associated with infant development, refers to the earliest forms of shared experiences and communication between infants and their caregivers. It involves the mutual exchange of attention, emotion, and behavior, forming the foundation for later social and cognitive development. Primary intersubjectivity is characterized by the immediate, reciprocal, and spontaneous interactions that occur between infants and their caregivers, fostering emotional bonding and attachment.

2. Secondary Intersubjectivity: As children grow and develop, their capacity for intersubjective communication expands beyond dyadic interactions to include group dynamics and shared social experiences. Secondary intersubjectivity involves the ability to understand and participate in shared social contexts, such as joint attention, cooperative play, and collaborative problem-solving. It encompasses the shared understanding of social norms, roles, and cultural practices within a group or community.

3. Tertiary Intersubjectivity: This concept extends beyond individual interactions and group dynamics to encompass broader cultural and societal processes. Tertiary intersubjectivity involves the shared construction and negotiation of meaning within cultural frameworks and symbolic systems. It encompasses the transmission and exchange of cultural knowledge, beliefs, values, and practices across generations, shaping collective identity and social cohesion within a society.

While these concepts are not directly attributed to Wenda R. Trevathan's work, they draw upon theories of intersubjectivity and social development that are relevant to understanding human interaction and communication within cultural contexts.

（2026-11-16）is intercoporeality embodied intersubjectivity

 Yes, intercorporeality is essentially a foundational, bodily form of embodied intersubjectivity.

While intersubjectivity (主體間性) is a broad philosophical term for how separate minds understand each other, intercorporeality (身體間性) is the specific phenomenological argument that this shared understanding is inherently rooted in our flesh and bodies, rather than through abstract mental calculations.

To understand their exact relationship, it is helpful to look at how they differ and connect:

1. Intersubjectivity vs. Intercorporeality

Concept	Core Question	Mechanism
Intersubjectivity (General Term)	How do two separate subjects understand or relate to one another?	traditionally viewed as a cognitive, linguistic, or psychological alignment of minds.
Intercorporeality (Merleau-Ponty's view)	How do two living bodies perceive and resonate with each other?	An immediate, pre-reflective flesh-to-flesh connection that happens before abstract thought.

2. Why it is "Embodied Intersubjectivity"

Before Maurice Merleau-Ponty, many philosophers treated intersubjectivity as a cognitive puzzle: "I am locked in my mind, and you are locked in yours; how do I know what you are thinking?"

They assumed we must logically deduce other people's mental states by observing their outer behavior.

Intercorporeality flips this concept completely by making it embodied:

• Direct Perception: You do not look at a friend crying, mentally recall what sadness is, and then deduce they are sad. Your own body directly registers and echoes their sadness through posture, facial tension, and breath.
• The "Flesh" (Le Chair): Merleau-Ponty argues that we are made of the same sensory fabric as the world and other people. Because we are both perceivers and things that can be perceived, our bodies form an open, overlapping circuit with others.

In short, intercorporeality provides the bodily groundwork that makes any higher level of social, emotional, or intellectual intersubjectivity possible in the first place.

Would you like to explore how this concept of embodied intersubjectivity is applied today, such as in neuroscience (like mirror neurons) or in psychotherapy and developmental psychology (like mother-infant bonding)?

Intersubjectivity And Analytic Field Theory (Giuseppe Civitarese, 2021)

Civitarese, G. (2021) Intersubjectivity and Analytic Field Theory. Journal of the American Psychoanalytic Association 69:853-893

Abstract

Intersubjectivity is the central concept of the relational paradigm, the most widely employed in contemporary psychoanalysis. Yet we do not have a clear definition of it. Usually it is synonymous with “the interpersonal” and thus indicates the interaction that takes place between two already constituted subjects. In this sense it has little to do with the radical social theory of subjectivation suggested by the term, at least originally, in Husserl’s philosophy. In the original meaning of intersubjectivity, as handed down by Husserl and later developed by Merleau-Ponty, the binary opposition between subjectivity and intersubjectivity is dissolved and transformed into a dialectic relationship. To formulate a clear and distinct, but above all specific, definition of intersubjectivity, we need to reclaim this intuition and translate it into coherent principles of technique. It is also essential to verify whether the models of psychoanalysis proffered as intersubjective actually satisfy this parameter. On the basis of these two simple principles, the variants of psychoanalysis that are labeled intersubjective can be placed along a continuum. Examples are given of “weak” and “strong” intersubjectivity. Paradigmatic of the latter pole is the post-Bionian theory of the analytic field.

A Primer of Clinical Intersubjectivity (ed. Joseph Natterson, Raymond J. Friedman 1995)

This unique book makes an important contribution to the field of analytic therapy. Utilizing a question-and-answer approach that immediately engages the reader, the authors explicate the history, development, and clinical uses of intersubjectivity. Written in a simple, comprehensible, and yet clinically sophisticated style, this is a book that will enrich the skills of anyone engaged in the therapeutic encounter. (amazon) 

Under the rubric of 'intersubjectivity,' Natterson and Friedman range all those contemporary psychoanalytic perspectives in which therapist and patient are both portrayed as real people having complex conscious and unconscious impact on one another. This book will come as a great relief to many mental health professionals because it explains not only why every therapist has unavoidable emotional reactions to every patient, but how, if the therapist studies these reactions, they can actually become the most crucial took in furthering the therapeutic process. The Primer's tone is informal and down to earth and the text is packed with discussions of the kind of clinical dilemmas any practicing therapist faces daily. (Donnel B. Stern, Ph.D., William Alanson White Institute and New York University Postdoctoral Program in Psychotherapy and Psychoanalysis)

This unique book makes an important contribution to the field of analytic therapy. Utilizing a question-and-answer approach that immediately engages the reader, the authors explicate the history, development, and clinical uses of intersubjectivity. Written in a simple, comprehensible, and yet clinically sophisticated style, this is a book that will enrich the skills of anyone engaged in the therapeutic encounter. (Theodore J. Jacobs, M.D, training and supervising analyst, New York Psychoanalytic Institute and New York University Psychoanalytic Institute)

Natterson and Friedman have given us a straightforward, clear, and clinically useful introduction to the crucial subject of intersubjectivity. They selectively review a vast literature sensibly and efficiently, and their presentation of the central concepts related to intersubjectivity unfolds with easy-to-follow logic. A Primer of Clinical Intersubjectivity is an impressive and readable summary of current thinking about the interplay and mutual influence between therapists' and patients' psychologies. This book establishes a platform that any psychotherapist can use to consider his or her clinical experience from an intersubjective perspective. (Owen Renik, M.D., editor, Psychoanalytic Quarterly) (amazon) (abebooks, reordered, 2018-12-7)

（2026-11-16）Would you like an explanation of how interobjectivity differs practically from intersubjectivity?

 Yes, I would be happy to explain the practical differences between these two concepts!

To understand them in daily life, think of intersubjectivity as the invisible mental agreements between people, while interobjectivity is the tangible physical network that holds those agreements in place.

Here is a direct comparison of how they differ practically:

Feature	Intersubjectivity (之間主體性)	Interobjectivity (之間客體性)
Core Focus	Shared human psychology, thoughts, and mutual understanding.	The relationship between humans and non-human objects/tools.
How Order is Kept	Through communication, empathy, and social norms.	Through physical architecture, technology, and materials.
The "Glue"	"We both understand what a promise means."	"The traffic light physically stops me from driving."

A Practical Example: A University Classroom

• Intersubjectivity in Action: The students and the professor have a shared understanding of roles. Students know they should listen, and the professor knows they should teach. If a student wants to speak, they raise their hand because of a shared social norm. It exists purely in their minds and behaviors.
• Interobjectivity in Action: The lecture cannot happen without the physical setup. The rows of chairs facing forward force
  the students to look at the projector screen. The microphone amplifies the professor's voice so it overrides others. The physical walls block out noise from the hallway. These objects are actively shaping and enforcing the social interaction.

Why the Difference Matters

Philosophers like Bruno Latour argued that human social life would completely collapse if we only relied on intersubjectivity. Humans are fickle; we forget rules, change our minds, and misunderstand each other.

Interobjectivity is what stabilizes society. We delegate our social rules to objects. For instance, instead of relying on drivers to politely agree on who goes first at an intersection (intersubjectivity), we install a physical traffic light (interobjectivity) to frame and enforce the behavior.

To explore this further, let me know:

• Would you like to see how this applies to modern social media and algorithms?
• Are you writing an essay or preparing for a presentation on social theory?

Can we compare the observer effect to intersubjectivity? (ChatGPT, 2024-4-25)

Drawing parallels between the observer effect in quantum mechanics and intersubjectivity in the social sciences or philosophy can offer an interesting perspective, but it's important to recognize that they operate in different domains and contexts.

The observer effect in quantum mechanics refers to the phenomenon where the act of observation or measurement affects the system being observed. In quantum mechanics, this effect is fundamental and arises from the probabilistic nature of quantum states. The observer effect challenges classical intuitions about the independence of the observer from the observed system.

Intersubjectivity, on the other hand, is a concept often discussed in the social sciences and philosophy, particularly in fields like sociology, anthropology, and phenomenology. It refers to the idea that knowledge and understanding are shaped by social interactions and shared experiences among individuals. In other words, intersubjectivity emphasizes the role of social context and communication in shaping our understanding of the world.

While there are some parallels between the two concepts, they operate at different levels of analysis and in different contexts:

1. Level of analysis: The observer effect in quantum mechanics operates at the level of individual particles or quantum systems, where the act of measurement influences the behavior of the system. Intersubjectivity operates at the level of human cognition, communication, and social interaction, where shared meanings and interpretations are constructed through dialogues and interactions among individuals.

2. Context: The observer effect is specific to the realm of quantum mechanics and the behavior of subatomic particles, where the principles of quantum physics govern the behavior of systems. Intersubjectivity is a concept more relevant to the social sciences and humanities, where it pertains to the construction of knowledge and meaning within social and cultural contexts.

While both concepts involve the relationship between observer and observed, they do so in fundamentally different ways and within different frameworks of inquiry. Nonetheless, exploring the parallels between them can be illuminating in understanding how perspectives and contexts shape our understanding of reality, whether at the level of subatomic particles or human societies.

Therefore, can we include attachment theory and intersubjectivity theory in this broader trend in psychoanalytic theory towards a greater recognition of the importance of the interpersonal context in psychological development, and a move towards two-person psychology ? (ChatGPT)

Yes, attachment theory and intersubjectivity theory can also be included in this broader trend in psychoanalytic theory towards a greater recognition of the importance of the interpersonal context in psychological development, and a move towards two-person psychology.

Attachment theory, developed by John Bowlby and Mary Ainsworth, emphasizes the importance of early attachment relationships in shaping emotional development and interpersonal behavior. Attachment theory emphasizes the mutual influence and co-creation of experience within the interpersonal space between the child and caregiver, and highlights the importance of the caregiver's sensitivity and responsiveness to the child's needs in facilitating healthy attachment.

Intersubjectivity theory, developed by Robert Stolorow and George Atwood, emphasizes the importance of the mutual and co-constructed nature of psychological experience, and highlights the importance of the therapeutic relationship in shaping individual experience and behavior. Intersubjectivity theory emphasizes the role of the therapist as an active participant in the therapeutic process, and emphasizes the importance of attunement and mutual recognition within the therapeutic relationship.

Both attachment theory and intersubjectivity theory can be seen as part of a broader trend in psychoanalytic theory towards a greater recognition of the importance of the interpersonal context in shaping individual experience and behavior. These theories emphasize the mutual influence and co-creation of experience within the interpersonal space between individuals, and emphasize the importance of sensitivity, responsiveness, and attunement in facilitating healthy development and relationships.

Overall, these theories can be seen as contributing to the development of a more nuanced and comprehensive understanding of the role of the interpersonal context in psychological development, and a move towards two-person psychology in psychoanalytic theory.

John Shotter (1937-2016) (自體的心理學）（negativity vs vitality)

https://www.theguardian.com/education/2016/dec/29/john-shotter-obituary

https://www.taosinstitute.net/about-us/people/in-memoriam/john-shotter

https://kellychang2713.blogspot.com/search?q=Interobjectivity&max-results=20&by-date=false

起因是 interobjectivity / intraobjectivity

Chapter 3. From inter-subjectivity, via inter-objectivity, to intra-objectivity: from a determinate world of separate things to an indeterminate world of inseparable flowing processes (JOHN SHOTTER, 2013) In Understanding the Self and Others Explorations in intersubjectivity and interobjectivity, ed. by Gordon Sammut, Paul Daanen and Fathali M. Moghaddam, Routledge, 2013

What did John Shotter mean by from intersubjectivity to interobjectivity to intraobjectivity? (ChatGPT, 2024-11-9)

John Shotter, a prominent social psychologist, explored the progression from intersubjectivity to interobjectivity, and ultimately to intraobjectivity, to deepen our understanding of human interactions and the construction of reality.

Intersubjectivity refers to the shared understanding that emerges between individuals during interactions. It emphasizes how personal experiences and perspectives are aligned through communication, leading to mutual comprehension. Traditional psychology often focuses on this aspect, examining how individuals negotiate meanings to achieve common ground.

Interobjectivity, a concept introduced by Bruno Latour and further developed by Shotter, shifts the focus to the role of objects and artifacts in mediating social interactions. It suggests that shared understandings are not solely the product of direct interpersonal communication but are also shaped by the material and cultural artifacts present in our environment. These objects carry embedded meanings and affordances that influence and structure our interactions, facilitating a form of shared reality that transcends individual subjectivities. 

Intraobjectivity delves deeper into the internalization of these shared meanings and practices. It examines how the external world, including social norms and material artifacts, becomes internalized within individuals, shaping their perceptions, thoughts, and behaviors. This concept highlights the process by which external, socially constructed realities are absorbed into one’s internal cognitive and emotional frameworks, influencing how individuals experience and engage with the world.

By tracing this trajectory from intersubjectivity to interobjectivity and intraobjectivity, Shotter aimed to illustrate the complex interplay between individual cognition, social interactions, and the material world. He argued that understanding human behavior and social reality requires acknowledging not only the direct interpersonal exchanges but also the broader socio-material contexts that shape and are shaped by these interactions. 

Was John Shotter influenced by Karen Barad in formulating his ideas of interobjectivity and intraobjectivity? (ChatGPT, 2024-11-9)

John Shotter’s concepts of interobjectivity and intraobjectivity were developed independently of Karen Barad’s work. Shotter’s exploration of these ideas is rooted in his engagement with social constructionism and dialogical practices, focusing on how shared understandings and meanings emerge through interactions among individuals and objects. While both Shotter and Barad delve into the relational aspects of reality, their theoretical frameworks and influences differ. Barad’s agential realism, for instance, is heavily informed by quantum physics and the philosophy of science, emphasizing the entanglement of matter and meaning. In contrast, Shotter’s work is more aligned with social psychology and the philosophy of language, particularly drawing from thinkers like Wittgenstein and Bakhtin. Therefore, while there are thematic overlaps in their attention to relationality, Shotter’s development of interobjectivity and intraobjectivity was not directly influenced by Barad’s theories.

What does quantum entanglement mean? (ChatGPT, 2024-11-9)

Quantum entanglement is a phenomenon in quantum physics where two or more particles become linked, such that the state of one particle instantly influences the state of the other, regardless of the distance separating them. This connection is so strong that even if the particles are separated by vast distances, changing one particle’s properties (like its spin) will result in an immediate, corresponding change in the other particle’s properties.

This phenomenon challenges our classical understanding of how objects interact over distances and has been experimentally confirmed, but it also raises profound questions about the nature of reality and locality. Quantum entanglement is a foundational concept in quantum mechanics, playing a critical role in emerging technologies like quantum computing and quantum cryptography.

The idea was famously referred to as “spooky action at a distance” by Einstein, who found it troubling because it seemed to defy the limits of information transfer as described by the speed of light.