著者

遠藤 利彦

出版者

東京大学教育学部

雑誌

東京大学教育学部紀要 (ISSN:04957849)

巻号頁・発行日

no.29, pp.p229-241, 1989

---

The term "transitional object" was first used by Winnicott (1953) to refer to inanimate objects, e. g. a soft toy or blanket, often specially used to provide comfort or solace in infancy and early childhood. A number of psychoanalysts and empirical researchers have followed Winnicott, and today it is generally accepted that infant's attachment to a transitional object is universal on the basis of the "good-enough" relationship of mother and infant, and that its absence or misuse is associated with psychopathy, later cognitive or character disorders. Nevertheless there appear to be some logical fallacies in this conceptualization and important unanswered questions about the origin and meaning of transitional objects, which need further consideration. In this paper, a theoretical contradiction of Winnicott's thesis is pointed out and an alternative interpretation of the origin and meaning of transitional objects is submitted.