In my response to Katie Gentile’s “Kittens in the Clinical Space,” (this issue) I address the early twenty-first century critical theory and the works of indigenous knowledge that Gentile references in the challenge she puts to psychoanalysts to think beyond human privilege, its relationship to racio-specieism, colonialism, and settler-colonialism. She suggests that psychoanalysts instead consider what she calls the human-more-than-human assemblage. In doing so, Gentile not only argues for the inseparability of the human from the more-than-human; she also argues that the clinical space be understood in the terms of this assemblage. In further expanding Gentile’s argument, I introduce the technoecological. A technoecological perspective is necessary, I argue, in order to recognize the other-than-human agencies or capacities of the animal but also those of the environmental and the technological. As the technoecological contributes to a refashioning of the social, it also needs to inform psychoanalytic thinking and practice—a welcoming of Gentile’s intervention.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Patricia Ticineto Clough (2021) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: