Človekova osebnost je kot objekt opazovanja ena najtežjih področij raziskovanja. Do danes tudi moderne znanosti niso razvozljale te enigme. Psihoanaliza, ta misteriozna psihologija v senci, se je v zadnjih tridesetih letih razvila do dokaj konstinentne in koherentne teorije. Skozi klinično prakso je ohranila svojo moč obnavljanja in tako nadaljevala pot iz klasične Freudove teorije preko ego psihologije do teorije objektnih odnosov. Tako je psihoanaliza postala obenem psihoanalitična razvojna teorija. Po Freudovi teoriji psihoseksualnega razvoja so teorijo objektnih odnosov kot drugo razvojno teorijo pogosto zoperstavljali Freudovi teoriji. Sprožili so prepir kaj je pomembnejše - zadovoljevanje potreb in doživljanje ugodja ali navezovanje kontakta. Danes smo presegli nivo tega prepira, podobnega vprašanju, kaj je pomembnejše - kokoš ali jajce. Vemo, da govorimo o dveh aspektih razvoja. Z vidika klinične prakse Freudova teorija psihoseksualnega razvoja predstavlja osnovo dinamično - interpretativne diagnoze, medtem ko teorija objektnih odnosov, povezana z ego psihologijo, predstavlja izhodišče razvojne diagnoze, ki osvetljuje strukturiranje ega in selfa. Prispevek vključuje diskusijo o najpomembnejših razvojnih linijah ter o možnosti integracije obeh - dinamične in razvojne diagnoze.Human personality, as an object of research is one of the most complicated fields of investigation. We can hardly say that this enigma has been resolved by modern science. Recently Psychoanalysis, the mysterious psychology in a shadow, has been paid all the attention as a rather consistent and coherent theory. Through its clinical practice psychoanalysis has kept its clinical practice psychoanalysis has kept its selfrenovating strenght. So - after Freud\u27s classical theory and Hartmann\u27s Ego psychology, we have been present to its third birth: to the birth of the theory of object relations or, in other words, psychoanalytic developmental psychology. After Freud\u27s theory of psychosexual development, the theory of object relations, as a second developmental theory, has been opposed to Freud\u27s theory. Nowadays as we have reached beyond the quarrel about what was the first and the most important - an egg or a hen - we know that we are talking about two aspects of a development. In terms of clinical practice, Freud\u27s theory of psychosexual development represents the basics of the Dynamic - Interpretative Diagnosis while, on the other hand, theTheory of Object Relations, linked to Ego psychology takes into consideration the developmental diagnosis concerning theprocess of structuring of the Ego and Self. The paper includes the discussion about the most important developmental lines and the possibility of the integration of both - the Dynamic and the Developmental Diagnosis
