Bateman And Fonagy's Three Dimensions Of Mentalization

Bateman and Fonagy (2004) later defined Mentalization as “the mental process by which an individual implicitly and explicitly interprets the actions of himself and others as meaningful on the basis of intentional mental states such as personal desires, needs, feelings, beliefs and reasons” (Bateman & Fonagy, 2009). To effectively “mentalize”, one must imagine the thoughts and feelings of others; hence, mentalization is a mental process. Quality of mentalization is superior when one is genuinely aware that it is not possible to know what is in someone else’s mind (Bateman & Fonagy, 2004). Based on the content and process of mentalizing, Bateman and Fonagy (Bateman & Fonagy, 2004) categorized mentalization into three dimensions: firstly, two modes of functioning (i.e., implicit and explicit), secondly, two objects (i.e., self and other), and

Yet difference between mentalizing explicitly and implicitly seems hazy. This distinction is a gradual process of representational re-description from implicit to explicit, taking place during developmental stages and in clinical settings over the course of psychotherapy (Karmiloff-Smith, 1995). It is possible to alternate between these two modes and use them simultaneously as well (Choi-Kain et al., 2008). Mentalized affectivity is a core concept of psychodynamic psychotherapy. It is the identification and modulation of freedom to choose, with respect to object (self and others) a variety of expression for every kind of mental states including feelings, thoughts, motives, intentions, beliefs, desires, needs, etc. (Fonagy et al., 2004). The two objects in this framework i.e. self and others, mentalize interactively. While imagining one’s own thoughts and feelings, one determines one’s idea of what is in other’s mind and vice