{'fraction_non_alphanumeric': 0.017473607571896616, 'fraction_numerical': 0.0, 'mean_word_length': 5.175280898876404, 'pattern_counts': {'":': 0, '<': 0, '<?xml version=': 0, '>': 0, 'https://': 0, 'lorem ipsum': 0, 'www.': 0, 'xml': 0}, 'pii_count': 0, 'substrings_counts': 0, 'word_list_counts': {'cursed_substrings.json': 0, 'profanity_word_list.json': 0, 'sexual_word_list.json': 0, 'zh_pornsignals.json': 0}}
Analytical Setting: Time, Relation, and Complexity

The definition of the psychotherapeutic setting has never been entirely delineated on the one hand because of the various guidelines that tend to give preference to one element or the other in turn, and on the other hand because of the complexity of the topic. As a matter of fact, according to many well-informed opinions, the setting in classical analysis would be very different from the one that is generally created in psychotherapy, even though the setting represents one of the criteria for deciding what is analysis and what is not. Freud faced this problem, but not systematically. The rules that he indicated are still used today, although not as rigidly, and they are represented by an internal and an external aspect; that is to say, a benevolent neutrality—the flowing attention that means not wanting to concentrate on anything specific and the rule of abstinence that means abstaining from giving the person being analyzed any indications that are not relevant to the purely psychoanalytical situation. On the other hand, the codified frequency of the sessions, the constancy of the timetable, the modality of payment, and the use of the analytical bed are still all part of the external conditions. As we pointed out initially, some differences exit in the settings, but we can still find some common elements: the psychoanalytic setting is regarded as a container in which the dynamics of the relation between therapist and patient are elaborated, the anxieties, the distances, the functions, and the way to perceive reality and unknown. But in the definitions of setting, whatever they are, it seems possible to establish rather a general idea involving a list of behaviors rather than a set of rules for functioning within a structure of relations that are absolutely decisive for the therapeutic goals. Taking a step backward, we have to remember that analytical therapy, and therefore all psychotherapeutic treatments, was born and evolved from an overimplified deterministic conception of the world. The evolution of the complexity changed the background that was typical of Freud’s period, and it introduced new ideas about the phenomena that psychiatrists and psychotherapists study: the elements that constitute the psyche, such as verbal and body language, depend on complex cognitive structures that are hardly reducible to simple dynamics. In other words, we have witnessed a complication of the variables we meet in relational dynamics: the complexity of the world constituting of a bio-psycho social whole in many cases does not follow linear dynamics, and therefore complications and deterministic chaos can cause behaviors for which the output is not proportional