Making sense Bion's nomadic journey R.D.

Hinshelwood

Bion spent his lifetime trying to make sense of human experiences. By the time he was 54, when he qualified as a psychoanalyst he had begun to make some progress. He made up for his late start with a varied and powerful contribution over the next 25 years. In fact one could say he made 4 quite separate contributions, the last of them in Los Angeles. By the time he emigrated here in 1968. however I think he was beginning to give up, at least he was giving up on the kind of sense he expected to make, which must have seemed for ever elusive. I shall argue that Bion was restless in his journey to achieve something, and to make sense of his Slide 1 experience, his patients' and of psychoanalysis in general. In the final phase of his search, he seemed to become resigned to seeking something unknowable, what he called 'O'. In my reading of his journey there were 3 phases prior to the Los Angeles one. In the 1940s he researched groups and reality; the 1950s were the schizophrenia decade; and in the 1960s he tried to squeeze together psychoanalysis, science and mathematics. When his book Attention and Interpretation was published in 1970 he had finished all that, and he was on the cusp of his move from London to Los Angeles, and on the cusp of whatever the internal changes that went along with, and provoked, that geographical relocation. However, I want to suggest that this pattern of packing up and moving on, recurred through his professional life as an analyst. In a sense, each of the three phases I mentioned, ended by running into the buffers as it were. Bion then moved onto the next phase. As Meltzer described Bion became familiar with caesuras from his own experience, Slide 2 ...the quality that distinguished Wilfred Bion, and which marks his passing from us with such serious consequences for psychoanalysisperhaps for the worldwas his capacity to tolerate caesura after caesura, to weather what he called 'Catastrophic Change' Meltzer 1981, p. 13 When he moved on from his group work at the end of the 1940s, he simply started in to the schizophrenia project with Klein, and with Segal and Rosenfeld, and others, with hardly a look over his shoulder. I say 'hardly' because there was a kind looking back, but it was a particular kind. It was not nostalgic. What he did when he reviewed his group work, was to take it as material which he could then re-examine in the light of his new interest that he was working on with his colleagues in the 1950s. That new interest was the second phase. It was the investigation of the primitive mechanisms underlying the phenomena of schizophrenia. So he set out to understand the group phenomena in terms of those primitive mechanisms too. I shall argue that the same kind of reviewing of the previous phase occurred again after the schizophrenia years, and then after the work of the third phase on science.

Slide 3

I want in this lecture to concentrate on the reviewing texts, one for each of the three phases I mentioned. These are the paper called 'Group dynamics: A review', written in 1952 and revised in 1955; the lengthy Commentary at the end of Second Thoughts, which reviews his work on schizophrenia; and Attention and Interpretation which rewrites his work on the philosophy of science and mathematics. The interesting thing about these re-writes is that a. they revise the work of the earlier phase b. They use the earlier phase material to enhance and illustrate the subsequent phase. Thus they are not bridging texts, they are what I am calling rewrites or reviews. This gives the body of work as a whole that sense of restlessness, and destroys any impression of smooth progress to Bion's work. They mark disjunctions. Group dynamics: A review

Slide 4

This paper was first written in 1952 when he was still in his analysis with Klein, and rewrote it in 1955 (Sanfuentes 2003). Here he reviewed his theory of basic assumptions rendering it in terms of the Kleinian theory of primitive mechanisms that cope with experiences of disintegration and annihilation. There is little doubt that such experience was very familiar to Bion from his war experience, and maybe his early separation from home at the age of 8 to go to an English boarding school. Whereas basic assumptions were part of the inherited disposition of the individual, selected as an evolutionary advantage of the species, a la Trotter in 1952, three years later, he speculated that being in a group is a psychotic experience defended against with the primitive mechanisms of splitting and projection that interrupt the proper appreciation of reality, just like psychosis in the individual.

As a result, quite brilliantly he takes the rather tired analogy of the social group as a surrogate family, and completely regenerates it by arguing that the group is experienced as a mind in pieces trying to get the pieces into some tolerable relation to each other: The more disturbed the group, the more easily discernible are these primitive phantasies and mechanisms; the more stable the group, the more it corresponds with Freud's description of the group as a repetition of family group patterns and neurotic mechanisms. But even in the stable group the deep psychotic levels should be demonstrated, though it may Slide 5 involve temporarily an apparent increase in the illness of the group (Bion 1955, p. 458) Instead of a radical disjunction around the end of the 1940s, Bion makes a valiant attempt to create this joined up review. The new perspective in 1955 is from his second period, analysing schizophrenics, and follows the end of his analysis with Melanie Klein. When he says such things as, The impulse to pair may now be seen to possess a component derived from psychotic anxiety associated with primitive dipal conflicts working on a foundation of part-object relationships (Bion 1955, p. 457). he is indicating the conversion of a basic assumption pairing to the functioning of the partobject level of the Oedipus complex. He is trying to get the pieces - groups and psychosis - into relation with each other. Quite properly he did conclude it was a review of one in terms of the other.

The recent editing of a series of 29 letters written by Bion to his first analyst, John Rickman, between 1939 and 1951 (Vonofakos and Hinshelwood 2012), give us a view of Bion as he was evolving through this period, both in his professional life and in his contribution to WW2 as a psychiatrist. In parallel, the was developing confidence in himself. His relation to Rickman was persistent and appears to be idealisation, coupled therefore with a self-idealisation. The letters show a transition over more than a decade from analysand, to student, to collaborator, and finally to independent colleague. This transition in some detail probably resembles a similar evolution of his relationship with Klein as can be gleaned from his letters to his wife. There is a sense of his trying to gain a sense of himself as an independent thinker. Francesca wrote of 'His determination not to be moulded into a shape congenial to others' (Bion 1985, p. 239). The struggle to find a mould which is his own personal shape if very evident in these letters during this phase.

Schizophrenia and thought disorder By the time he wrote that review paper, he was coming to an end of his own analysis with Melanie Klein in 1953. He joined the group of Segal and Rosenfeld. His review of group theory was conducted in the midst of a powerful commitment to exploring Klein's discoveries. He gave his first paper on schizophrenia to the London Congress in July 1953 shortly after his analysis finished. Klein herself came to Bion's presentation at the Congress. In fact she kept her notes of comments she made in the discussion after his presentation. She commented on the characteristic violence in the transference, which resulted in a corresponding characteristic countertransference. It is certain she saw his paper beforehand and probably had a hand in steering him towards the violence in schizophrenia, as she was on her way at that time to writing her own envy paper . At first Bion was casting about for a theory of schizophrenia. In the absence of the theory of envy he turned to Klein's projective identification. The theory of envy had not be publicly announced by Klein until 1955, in a paper to the British Society in that year. Bion followed this up with papers on language in schizophrenia (a modification of the 1953 paper), and on the psychotic and non-psychotic parts of the self, (1956). The latter focussed on self-destructiveness, which takes the form especially of an attack on reality via an attack on the ego functions that sustain the link with reality - the perceptual apparatus thus causing perceptual problems, hallucinations. In this paper on the divided ego in psychosis he, in effect, takes Freud's theory of splitting of the ego as in the fetishist (Freud 1926). Freud's notion was that different parts of the ego use different defences one, repression of id impulses, and one, disavowal of reality. Bion's version was characteristically his own - more or less.... He regarded the different parts of the ego as Slide 7 suffering different anxieties, which of course still led to different defences against the anxieties. In the psychotic part of the ego, the anxiety is fear of annihilation, with the consequence of fragmentation, as Klein described in 1946. The non-psychotic part of the ego or neurotic part is occupied by conflict for which the usual neurotic defences are used.

Slide 6

There are two interesting points to make about this paper. First is the fact that splitting is used in two different senses; as a coherent split into two ego parts, and second the fragmentation into multiple incoherent parts. The other point is that this paper brings out a significant notion, the parallel existence of a psychotic and a non-psychotic part of a single personality. However, it Slide 8 seems significant to me that at that panel where Bion gave his first schizophrenia paper, in London in 1953, a paper was also presented, by Moritz Katan, entitled 'The importance of the non-psychotic part of the personality in schizophrenia'. Can there be a coincidence that Bion's later paper had such a similar title. He makes reference to Katan for the idea. Why? Although there is a reference in another paper to Katan's idea (Bion 1955, p. 225). Katan's thesis is somewhat different in fact; the two parts of the ego are operating one at the Oedipal level, and one at the pre-Oedipal level. Not altogether different, but not quite the same. Then, in 1959, the highly original paper on attacks on linking first described what would eventually be known as containing. In 1959, his papers ran dry on schizophrenia, and a new phase started on thinking and containing. In the paper, the linking he considers is of a particular kind, it is one in which one element enters the other, an idea that has clearly been described by Klein and others, as projective identification. However, Bion considers this from the angle of a link rather than as evacuation, and first uses the term containing to describe this aspect of projective identification. Commentary in Second Thoughts: So, on republishing the papers as Second Thoughts, he reflected extensively on the problems encountered in the 1950s papers in a 10,000 word Commentary. The book contained other papers, including the first one on the imaginary twin (1950), his membership paper (also papers on hallucination, and on arrogance). But the body of the work is on the clinical phenomena of schizophrenia, and the disruption of two kinds of links; first the link with reality which succumbs to an attack as Freud described, and second the inward link between mental contents, or the links that hold together the 'constant conjunctions' as Hume called the basic associations that constitute a mind. The commentary to Second Thoughts, in 1967, used ideas of this body of work,not to advance the understanding of schizophrenia. Instead, he had a new interest. He takes the first of the papers, on the imaginary twin, and discussed it at length in fact a third of the Commentary about the problems of writing a case history in such a way that it can be communicated to another psychoanalyst. The problem of linking between two professional analysts then leads him to the whole conception of the nature of science and knowledge, which can be passed on, and passed around. What sort of links go on in one mind that can be transmitted with a conviction of truth to another mind. In a sense the purpose of science is to link the knowledge and minds of separate researchers. But that purpose depends so much on the nature of knowledge, and formulation in some form of notation such that it may be transmitted with precision and conviction. It is not so much a Commentary on Phase 2 as an introduction, even primer, to the new phase, Phase 3. But more than that, it comes, in 1967, in the middle of phase three, and is doing that work taking the schizophrenia papers as exemplars of thought, disorders of thought, and how that experience can contribute to understanding the nature of knowledge and science. Bion's

Slide 9

reconsideration of the schizophrenia papers is partly therefore to consider the kind of knowledge which is to be expected. He was troubled that psychoanalysis is not about sensuous experience. What the psychoanalyst deals with is non-sensuous; he can only intuit his patient, not sense or feel him/her, no measurement and no objectivity. Although he is adamant that this severs psychoanalysis from a continuity with other disciplines, there is a unique knowledge attributable to psychoanalysis if it is discovered properly. Now proper discovery is by intuition, rather than perception, Such realisations are specifically of the psychoanalytic setting, even though the results may resemble hallucinations, he says, not ordinary observations. As Grotstein summarises, ...the truth drive functions in collaboration with an unconscious consciousness that is associated with the faculty of attention, which is also known as intuition (Grotstein 2004, p. 1081) Slide 10 At the end of the Commentary, he introduces his next book as an elucidation of 'thoughts without a thinker'. That next book is Attention and Interpretation, but before going on to that, I still need to recognise the body of work that constitutes the third bean/phase, of which Attention and Interpretation is the finale.

Science and mathematics The third phase, Bion's interest in the philosophy of science, mathematical theory and epistemology, comprises a treatise on knowledge, and through psychoanalytic knowledge an understanding of knowledge in general. Slide 11 It is composed of the book texts, Learning from Experience (1962) [although the final of the eight papers, 'A theory of thinking', in the previous phase, is a short prcis of Learning from Experience.], Elements of Psychoanalysis (1963), and Transformations (1965). We might also add two short texts to this sequence 'Memory and desire', and 'Catastrophic change'. The final text in the series of this phase, is Attention and Interpretation, and as the last it can also be regarded as a kind of summing up review of that decade.

May I simply gloss the first three books of this period by saying that 1. The first one, Learning from Experience, is about alpha-function as the key conversion Slide 12 process of the interaction between the contents and its container, a function that complemented Klein 's projective identification, and laid the ground for the notion of linking, and attacks on links,. 2. The second, Elements of Psychoanalysis, is the development for classifying occurrences in a psychoanalytic process for the purpose of communicating with other psychoanalysts, and with oneself, and 3. Transformations is about vertices and the invariants, that which does not vary as one changes vertex. The hopeful start to this period was vested in the way that philosophy, science and mathematics established the robustness of their knowledge. And he simply made an attempt to perch psychoanalytic knowledge on the same foundations. As we have seen, the use of the mathematical notions of factors and functions in the development of alpha-function, encouraged him. And he established what he hoped would be a foundational notion based on the grid, a

device he used till the end of this phase in 1970. From the notes that Bion made to himself, collected by Francesca as Cogitations we see that from 1958 he read Poincar and Braithwaite on science and was intent on trying to understand what psychoanalytic knowledge is. At the same time, he was aware that the psychoanalytic work on schizophrenia could also contribute through emphasising what the elements of thinking, which are highlighted by the problems caused when they go wrong. He also drew on mathematical theory, the notion of functions and factors, model theory as developed by Tarski, and the ideas of transformations and invariants of Sylvester and Cayley. It seems likely that Bion was helped by Eric Temple Bell's Men of Mathematics, which inspired a lot of Bion's generation, including the 'beautiful mind' of John Forbes Nash. The product as we know was a series of new psychoanalytic terms and concepts alpha-function, the grid, invariants, and 'O'. By 1965 he was working on the problems of communication analysts make amongst themselves about their conviction of their knowledge, and he pointed as we saw to the way psychoanalysts communicate their clinical experience as more basic than the idle communication of theory. The grid in 1963 was intended for this purpose, as a notion for identifying the categories of communication from the patient in the flow of material. But in '65, discovered the notion of transformation. Transformations: When Bion made his discovery of transformations, he had a powerful conceptual tool for understanding the relation between different points of view. It also was a tool for understanding the the patients' points of view in contact with the psychoanalysts', and moreover in the encounter of psychoanalysts with each others' points of view. At the sane time it seems likely that he stressed this precisely because it gave him a grasp of his own chopping and changing of his interests and views. The idea is that changing a point of view can still carry across something similar to each. A drawn circle on a piece of paper, if turned to an angle appears as an ellipse. However something of the circle remains. A map is different from the geography it is a map of, but the relation of the distance from London to New York compared with the distance from London to Los Angles is the same ratio on a map as on the ground and the lengths between the two are the same proportion even though different actual lengths. A painting of poppies in a field continues to bear a relation to the real thing, the poppy-field. As Bion says there is some 'invariant' that is carried from one point of view to the other. If an invariant exists then the move from one to the other is a transformation Likewise a patient's conviction in the voices he hears, and the analysts 'take' on this as a hallucination, are different points of view, but there is an invariant in the content of the dream, and the psychoanalyst looks for a meaning that is in his point of view similar to that in the patient. As mentioned, Bion had also established a principle for his own capacity to make sense of his field of study, groups, psychoanalysis, science and human communication (private and public). His reviewing of groups, for instance, is a transformation from a genetic, Trotter point of view, to a psychoanalytic and Kleinian one. Then his Commentary on his schizophrenia papers in the

Slide 13

1950s is a transformation of those clinical reports into a point of view about human communication between patient and analyst, between psychoanalysts, and between parts of the self and internal objects.

Attention and Interpretation However, it is still as if things did not work properly for him, and restlessly, he began to to worry about the experience in psychoanalysis as inherently different from that in science. In his Commentary in Second Thoughts (1967) he reviews the old work in terms of psychoanalytic observations as distinct from scientific ones. He has begun to discover this during his research into science, and has come to the conclusion that psychoanalytic observations are not sensuous. And he 'preferred this term [intuited] to 'observed' or 'heard' of 'seen', as it does not carry the penumbra of sensuous association' (Bion 1967, p. 134). Whilst those in science are sensuous, psychoanalytic 'observations' are not, and do not derive directly from the perception of the senses, by which we can experience material measurable objects in ordinary science. So, the analogy between psychoanalysis and science became more and more difficult for him to sustain. This is the problem with which he started Attention and Interpretation. The short paper, 'Memory and desire' (Bion 1967) lead into the 1970 book, which deals extensively with this deliberate technique for enabling intuition rather than obsevation. Like the previous review-summaries, Attention and Interpretation already has a foot in the next phase, that beyond 1970. Whilst he retained the 'grid' as his end-pieces to the book, he began with a contrast between science (he chose medical science) and psychoanalysis. In particular he discussed the difference between pain felt in the body, and psychic pain. One has to be cured, and the other needs a very different approach psychic pain has to be 'suffered'. Whereas the decade (up to 1970) had been about 'knowing' the pain and therefore suffering it, his reconsideration at this point was to go beyond knowing, beyond K. This puts a completely different complexion on things, captured in the ringing phrase, 'the abandonment of memory and desire', which he supported with quotations from St John of the Cross, Keats and others. And this is a repeated refrain throughout Attention and Interpretation. It is a kind of summation of Bion's conclusions on learning from experience, plus the problems that led to abandoning it, and yet another caesura.. I once came across a jokey rebuttal of Bion's principle. It went like this. If you go for a swim on a beach in California, and see a notice saying, 'Beware Sharks. Do Not Swim'. You do not decide to reject received advice in order to learn from your own experience. That could be literally fatal ! But, of course, Bion did not mean it like that. The example of swimming with sharks is ordinary knowledge of the scientific kind which cannot be devalued for what it is. Bion was interested in non-sensuous 'facts' of observation and you do that by abandoning memory and desire. That is the royal road to the kind of intuitive knowledge that Bion thought psychoanalysis is. All through this period Bion uses the initial 'K' to indicate knowledge, the desire for knowledge, and the complex relationship with knowledge. He began to become doubtful of psychoanalysis

Slide 14

as the search for K. In a typically ironic Bionian note, he introduces his papers from Phase three (in Seven Servants): I must have understood what I meant when I wrote it, but I do not understand what it means now, As the poet replied when asked what he meant by Sordello, Once God and Robert Browning knew, now, only God knows (Bion 1977, p. ii). At this stage, he gradually introduced another initial, 'O', supposedly after Kant''s the thing-initself. At the limits of K, there begins O. The Kantian 'O' is what we can come to a perceptually distorted understanding of. Bion uses 'O' to mean the experience of another person, not knowable by sensory perception, but only by approximation through intuition. He related his own Bionian 'O' to the notion of suffering, and 'being' the pain. The notion of the limit of K is somewhat disconcerting, for instance, it undermines the whole process of psychoanalysis. And it, no doubt, disheartened Bion. This was the full-stop he came to with Attention and Interpretation. It required a complete rethink of what psychoanalysis is, and what human experiencing is. The reconsideration he has been coming to is that psychoanalysis is no longer about cure, but an attempt to know something inherently unknowable, 'O'. And human endeavour in general and psychoanalysis in particular are aligned as one on that project. Meg Harris Williams (2010) claims that Bion changed tack during his Los Angeles phase, as a result of the influence of a patient Roland Harris, a poet. Roland Harris was her father, and whether or not Meg's claim is true, it is clear that Bion was moving his scientific sensibility towards the ineffable and unknown, of which poetry and the arts are one expression.. He went in search of the non-sensuousness in other disciplines as well, notably the abstractness of mathematics, a line without breadth a plane without depth.. He seems to be enabled to develop these quasi-religious, or aesthetic, or abstract mathematical approaches because he now has the versatility that is given by the notion of a vertex, which provides a certain kind of domain of invariants that are common to various vertices. Not just science (or medical science), but art, mathematics, religious faith all exist as democratically equivalent perspectives, or vertices on the existential 'becoming' of the human person. Each domain has unique qualities, that which can be apprehended from each specific vertex. So, he had turned to the most fundamental of transformations, from K to O. Non-sensuous 'knowledge' or perhaps he now thinks of it as 'non-knowledge', was first touched on 2 years earlier in Transformations, where he began his turn to the manifestations of mystical writing including St John of the Cross (refers to faith, the route to travel in the dark), and ultimately his Los Angeles literary endeavours.. Conclusions So I have not concentrated perhaps as much as you would like on Attention and Interpretation, but it is impossible in my view to address its contribution without the long, long run-up of Bion's fractured and nomadic phases and caesuras. It is altogether Bion's journey to make sense. Of course he did not know what he had to make sense of, until he had made sense of it. But it seems to me he never reached that point of knowing he had made the final sense he needed. In that sense Bion's journey was a failed one. His destination was denied to him, and he ended in a void somewhere in which the only way to proceed was to 'become', as he puts it, rather than to know.

One question which is not answered, is why this lifelong persistence. Why could Bion not just settle to being a good psychoanalyst, as most of us. Maybe the easy answer is that it is an insatiable curiosity, like the elephant's child, in Kipling's Just-So story, a story which by the way is a warning about the risks of curiosity. But we cannot help but wonder if there was some special spur to Bion's curiosity. As Roper (2011) repeatedly noted in his study of Bion's War experience in relation to that of other WW1 survivors, there is a constant repetition in his autobiographical writings of the inability to think, notably in the terror of tank battles, and the confrontation with desperately mutilated and dying comrades. One could say he proceeded from one phase to another, but equally it could be said he proceeded from one caesura to another, one rebirth to another, in his hunt for a continuity, for an integration, for an integrity, even. Did, one can ask ,that primal experience of being devoid of the capacity to think and mind his war experience, set in train this nomadic intellectual life from one conceptual oasis to another?

References

SLIDES Slide 1 Phases Phase 1 Phase 2 Groups and reality Schizophrenia

Phase 3 Psychoanalysis, science and mathematics Phase 4 Intuition and 'O'

Slide 2 Caesuras ...the quality that distinguished Wilfred Bion, and which marks his passing from us with such serious consequences for psychoanalysisperhaps for the world was his capacity to tolerate caesura after caesura, to weather what he called 'Catastrophic Change' Meltzer 1981, p. 13 Slide 3 Reviewing texts Phase 1 Group dynamics: A review (1952) 1955 Phase 2 Commentary in Second Thoughts 1967 Phase 3 Attention and Interpretation 1970

Slide 4

Group dynamics: A review 1952 contributed to the symposium in the International Journal of Psychoanalysis to celebrate Melanie Klein's 70 birthday 1955 rewritten version in New Directions in Psychoanalysis 1961 rewritten version published as Final Chapter in Experiences in Groups

Slide 5

The more disturbed the group, the more easily discernible are these primitive phantasies and mechanisms; the more stable the group, the more it corresponds with Freud's description of the group as a repetition of family group patterns and neurotic mechanisms. But even in the stable group the deep psychotic levels should be demonstrated, though it may involve temporarily an apparent increase in the illness of the group (Bion 1955, p. 458) The impulse to pair may now be seen to possess a component derived from psychotic anxiety associated with primitive dipal conflicts working on a foundation of part-object relationships (Bion 1955, p. 457).

Slide 6 1953 Finished analysis 1952 First paper on schizophrenia 1955 Klein's 'Envy and gratitude' read to BPAS 1955 Language and the schizophrenic 1956 Differentiation of the psychotic from the nonpsychotic personalities 1957 Klein's Envy and Gratitude published

Side 7 (a) (b)

Splitting Coherent (Freud) Incoherence (Klein)

Slide 8

Bion and Katan Bion (a) Coherent splitting (b) Incoherence (Klein) Katan (a) Oedipal conflict (b) Pre-Oedipal conflict

Slide 9

Attacks on links (a) attacking the link with reality (b) attacking the inward link between mental contents (the 'constant conjunctions' Hume)

Slide 10

Intuition ...the truth drive functions in collaboration with an unconscious consciousness that is associated with the faculty of attention, which is also known as intuition Grotstein 2004, p. 1081

Slide 11

Phase 3 'A theory of thinking' (1962) Learning from Experience (1962) Elements of Psychoanalysis (1963) Transformations (1965) 'Memory and desire', (1967) 'Catastrophic change'. Attention and Interpretation (1970)

Slide 12

1.

1. The first one, Learning from Experience, is about alpha-function as the key conversion process of the interaction between the contents and its container, a function that complemented Klein 's projective identification, and laid the ground for the notion of linking, and attacks on links,. 2. The second, Elements of Psychoanalysis, is the development for classifying occurrences in a psychoanalytic process for the purpose of communicating with other psychoanalysts, and with oneself, and 3. Transformations is about vertices and the invariants, that which does not vary as one changes vertex.

Slide 13 1. 2. 3.

Mathematical concepts Functions and factors The model theory as developed by Tarski Transformations/invariants Sylvester and Cayley.

Eric Temple Bell's Men of Mathematics

Slide 14 Phase 1 Groups

Phases and caesuras

Caesura and of klian analysis Phase 2 Schizophrenia Caesura Linking and 'K' Phase 3 Science and mathematics Caesura Intuition

Slide 15 I must have understood what I meant when I wrote it, but I do not understand what it means now, As the poet replied when asked what he meant by Sordello, Once God and Robert Browning knew, now, only God knows (Bion 1977, p. ii).