A response to Grünbaum's refutation of psychoanalysis.

Comments on the original article by Adolf Grünbaum (see record 2006-05420-004) regarding the relevance of Freud's psychoanalytic edifice to the 21st century. Adolf Grünbaum has been a staunch critic of psychoanalysis for over three decades. The general thrust of his attacks are unwavering in content and focus and regurgitate the redundant point that psychoanalysis is not a true science. I wish to offer a modest defense of psychoanalysis as a human science and argue that Grünbaum commits a category mistake in comparing psychoanalysis with the physical sciences, thus he upholds a standard of scientific inquiry that cannot be applied to our field. As a philosopher, he furthermore lacks a proper epistemology of knowing how to appropriately evaluate the validity of clinical data and focuses on select aspects of Freudian theory he uses as a straw man to unjustly refute the whole discipline of psychoanalysis itself. (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2010 APA, all rights reserved)     

A new view of developmental research for psychoanalysts

Three major epistemological perspectives in psychoanalysis are summarized, and the developmental research relevant to each is described. Not all research is useful for all psychoanalytic perspectives. The most historically recent of the three perspectives, exemplified by Winnicott, others in the British Independent Group, and the "relationists" in the United States, who focus on the experiential immediacy of the analyst-analysand interaction and emotions, presents new problems and challenges for meaningful dialogue with the developmental researcher. Research in extrapsychoanalytic disciplines has traditionally been posed as authoritative for the grounding of psychoanalytic "truth," and, unlike the earlier perspectives, this view explicity rejects any truth deriving from authority outside the psychoanalytic process itself. To illustrate how developmental research inquiry would be different for each epistemological perspective in psychoanalysis, the same study of infant development is described in three different ways as relevant to each perspective. Child development research has been changing as a field in ways parallel to psychoanalysis, each undergoing fundamental changes that encourage a new integration.     

Freud's forgotten evolutionary project.

In the last decades psychoanalysis has tended to recast itself as a hermeneutic discipline geared at the retelling of human lives, and Freud is recast as a great writer in the humanist tradition rather than as the scientist as which he saw himself. Although this reconceptualization has good reasons, it tends to obscure the fact that Freud primarily saw himself as a theorist of human nature. One of Freud's deepest convictions was that psychopathology needs to be explained on the basis of evolutionary biology. This paper argues that this may have been one of Freud's greatest ideas. The reason it has been "repressed" by psychoanalysis is that Freud based it on Lamarckian principles. The current flourishing of evolutionary psychology and psychiatry may well turn Freud into one of the precursors of the psychology of the future. (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2010 APA, all rights reserved)     

Grünbaum's questionable interpretation of inanimate systems: History and context in physics.

Investigates A. Grünbaum's (1984) analyses of electrodynamic systems and hysteresis effects, used to support assertions of the historicity and contextuality of inanimate systems, and arguments that psychoanalysis should be a science cast in the mold of physics. Grünbaum's claims are shown to be illusory and spurious, and consequently, his contention that psychoanalysis should be like physics loses force. This investigation introduces the concept of state or phase spaces (science's basic representational systems) and the impoverishing effects that necessarily follow their use in psychoanalysis. The problems encountered when one attempts to develop radically alternative representational frameworks are briefly considered. (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2010 APA, all rights reserved)     

Review of The death of desire. A study in psychopathology.

Reviews the book, The death of desire. A study in psychopathology by M. Guy Thompson (1985). Thompson has written an amiable book, filled with the spirit of ecumenism. A practising clinical psychologist, his thesis is that desire is the "foundation of the human subject," that it is "located in the heart of the unconscious," that, if once "situated in phenomenology," this unconscious can reveal "the nature of intersubjective relations." Accordingly, pathological phenomena would be attributable to the deadening of this desire—hence, the book's title. Thompson clearly intends a dialogue between phenomenology and psychoanalysis. The result is an attempt at synthesis that takes R. D. Laing on the one hand and Jacques Lacan on the other—two rather strange bedfellows—as his chief sources of inspiration. Taken as a whole, this book's reach outstretches its grasp. It really does not offer a cogent, coherent synthesis of phenomenology and psychoanalysis but seems rather to offer a congenial amalgam of the many insights experienced by a highly intelligent, versatile and sensitive man during the long, fecund years of his training. As such it is endlessly stimulating, if never quite convincing, and offers singular promise for the future work of its author. (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2010 APA, all rights reserved)     

Review of Desire, self, mind and the psychotherapies: Unifying psychological science and psychoanalysis.

Reviews the book, Desire, self, mind and the psychotherapies: Unifying psychological science and psychoanalysis by R. Coleman Curtis (see record 2008-14956-000). It seems that the current drumbeat of attack against psychoanalysis and its contributions has, as Paul Stepansky (2009) states, put psychoanalysis “at the margins.” It is this question that has become the sine qua non. And it is this question that R. Coleman Curtis attempts to answer in her new book. For many years, Curtis has dedicated her work to the integration of psychoanalysis with other disciplines within psychology and psychotherapy. In her book, Curtis hypothesizes that advances in psychoanalysis and in the broader field of psychology make it possible to achieve common ground between disciplines. The goal of integration is clearly a passion for her, and she infuses the book with a hope that there can be mutual recognition of the contributions of psychoanalysis with the rest of the field of psychology in a way not possible before two major trends: the “affective revolution” and the recognition across disciplines of unconscious processes. She argues that this is necessary for both disciplines. Curtis’ work is an elaborate and impressively researched volume that carefully lays out the argument that psychoanalysis must abandon dated ideas and instead must present relevant science to support key suppositions. For psychology in general, she argues that acknowledging seminal findings regarding unconscious motivation and emotional processing will make the field more dynamic and relevant to people’s lives. (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2011 APA, all rights reserved)     

Toward an epistemology of clinical psychoanalysis

Epistemology emerges from the study of the ways knowledge is gained in the different fields of scientific endeavor. Current polemics on the nature of psychoanalytic knowledge involve counterposed misconceptions of the nature of mind. On one side clinical psychoanalysis is under siege from philosophical "hard science" stalwarts who, upholding as the unitary model of scientific knowledge of Galilean model of science built around the "well-behaved" variables of mechanics and cosmology, argue clinical psychoanalysis does not meet empirical criteria for the validation of its claims. On the other side, its empirical character is renounced by hermeneuticists who, agreeing with "hard science" advocates on what science is, dismiss the animal nature of human beings and hold that clinical psychoanalysis is not an empirical science but a "human" interpretive one. Taking Adolf Grünbaum's critique as its referent, this paper examines how, by ignoring the differences between "exact" and observational science, the "hard science" demand for well-behaved variables misconstrues the nature of events in the realm of mind. Criteria for an epistemology fit for the facts of clinical psychoanalysis as an empirical, observational science of mind are then proposed.     

Research and psychoanalysis: Still time to bridge the great divide?

The interface between psychoanalysis and scientific research has been characterized by controversies and polarizations that have made a constructive debate very difficult. It is argued that the roots of the controversies are better understood as stemming from an uncompromising position within the psychoanalytic field that holds that scientific research and psychoanalysis are inherently incompatible and that the only research admissible is one that takes place within the psychoanalytic encounter. A critique of this rejectionist position, still tenaciously held by a sizable minority within the psychoanalytic community, is offered, and the repercussions of adhering to such view are discussed. It is argued that the theoretical fragmentation present in psychoanalysis has mostly stemmed from the sole reliance of a theory formation based on the single-case clinical study and that the refusal to engage in scientific studies has contributed to the progressive decline that psychoanalysis has been suffering over the last 20 years. Integration of scientific research with psychoanalytic practice and building bridges with other neighboring disciplines such as psychology, psychiatry, and neuroscience may help reestablish psychoanalysis as a relevant discipline in the university and mental health field. (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2010 APA, all rights reserved)     

Heinz Kohut and Carl Rogers: A timely comparison.

States that H. Kohut (1971, 1978, 1984) has succeeded in integrating many of C. R. Rogers's (1951, 1961, 1980) concepts of humanistic psychology into his version of psychoanalysis. The similarities and differences between the 2 approaches are described. One important similarity concerns the therapist's attitude during the psychotherapeutic situation, with both authors stressing the value of empathy and openness. An important difference is that Kohut has theorized that the goal of psychotherapy, and of human development in general, is strengthening the structure of the self, rather than widening of the consciousness. The means by which Kohut has been able to provide a bridge between psychoanalysis and humanistic psychology are discussed, and the implications of Kohut's ideas for the practice of psychotherapy are considered. (27 ref) (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2010 APA, all rights reserved)     

Review of Cognitive psychodynamics: From conflict to character.

Reviews the book, Cognitive psychodynamics: From conflict to character by Mardi J. Horowitz (see record 1998-07469-000). It has been said that in forging a common ground between psychoanalysis and cognitive science, Mardi Horowitz has gone where others fear to tread. A masterful integration of all of his previous theoretical work, Cognitive psychodynamics represents his most ambitious attempt to map this prohibited terrain in which these two often-opposing domains of inquiry are joined. His goal is to build an integrated, cognitive-dynamic model of personal identity, interpersonal relationships, and individual character. His means of accomplishing this integration is to interweave three basic theoretical concepts: (a) states of mind that mark the experience of heightened emotional conflict; (b) unconscious defensive control processes that mediate shifts between states of mind; and, most important, (c) person schemas, which for Horowitz are his role relationship models (RRMs), which organize the states of mind as interactive, self-other configurations. The strength of this book is its clear and coherent presentation of each of these three theoretical concepts. These concepts are brought to life by brief, illustrative clinical examples, and the chapters move back and forth between conceptual exposition and clinical illustration in a manner that is mutually informing. The major criticism to be made of the book is that it fails to consider and speak to matters of fundamental theoretical contention between the psychodynamic and cognitive models of the mind at the moments they arise in the construction of this integrated model. (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2010 APA, all rights reserved)     

Further issues in the psychology of affect and motivation: A developmental perspective.

Affect has always occupied a place of central importance in psychoanalysis, from Freud's early writings and revisions, to more recent contributions of many others, and into the current era of theoretical pluralism. Following Darwin and Freud, Silvan Tomkins (1911-1991) explored clinical and theoretical aspects of affect and motivation for over four decades; however, Tomkins' work is often misunderstood and rarely discussed comprehensively, particularly his more recent and posthumous elaborations. Tomkins is best viewed as presenting a developmental psychology of affect, and the theoretical and clinical aspects of Tomkins' work relevant to psychoanalysis are examined here with particular emphasis on his more recent revisions and additions. Tomkins and his colleagues described in detail the nature of affects and their triggering mechanisms; the development and transformations of the affect system; the potential for virtually unlimited ideo-affective structures resulting from this system; the relationships between affects, motivation, and other mental functions (e.g., drives and cognition); and various clinical implications. (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2010 APA, all rights reserved)     

Review of Dispatches from the Freud wars: Psychoanalysis and its passions and Truth games: Lies, money and psychoanalysis.

Reviews the books, Dispatches from the Freud wars: Psychoanalysis and its passions by John Forrester (see record 1997-08548-000) and Truth games: Lies, money and psychoanalysis by John Forrester (see record 1997-36555-000). Although psychoanalysis has been attacked since its inception, the nature of the assaults has varied. Right now, it is being assailed in terms of the new trinity of race, class, and gender, to say nothing of its problematic position as a science, in a world that increasingly values technology. Even as a narrative system, it is accused of lacking credibility and causing damage more than cures. In Dispatches From the Freud Wars: Psychoanalysis and Its Passions, John Forrester, the philosopher and historian of science, provides a welcome cease-fire. Although his title refers to the current Freud wars, Forrester does not engage in any violent skirmish himself. Rather, he stands on the edge of battle, sending back reports from the defense as well as the enemy camp. His position is civilized rather than combative: balanced, measured, and a triumph of reason over id, perhaps too much so. Although the passions of Forrester's subtitle refer to the passions within psychoanalytic theory itself, the passions that it treats, and the passions that it arouses in its defendants as well as its opponents, Forrester himself is calm. Yet it is clear whose side he is on. Not that his book is only about the wars—in this sense, the title is misleading—for it treats such varied subjects as envy and justice, Ferenzi's love relationships, and Freud as a collector of artifacts as well as dreams. Readers coming to Forrester's most recent book, Truth Games: Lies, Money and Psychoanalysis, hoping to learn about the lies psychoanalysis reputedly tells (or the money it wrongly accrues) are going to be disappointed. This book grounds itself on the integrity of psychoanalysis. It never raises the question so prominent today of whether psychoanalytic theory is itself based on deception and fraud. While accepting that human beings lie and that patients' lies are somehow connected to psychoanalytic truth (insofar as they are revealing), it ignores the possibility of the lying analyst. In relation to truth, lies, and memory, Forrester writes that recognition of the importance of the transference led Freud to conclude that "success was achieved whether patient and analyst worked with memories or with impulses in the here and now" (Forrester, 1997, p. 77). He found "in free association and the analyst's withholding of belief and unbelief a means of isolating his practice from the problem of lying and deception" (p. 79). Following Lacan, Forrester notes that although psychoanalysis is predicated on the patient's telling the truth, its very techniques, such as free association, encourage the opposite. (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2010 APA, all rights reserved)     

Prospects for psychoanalysis in the 21st century.

This article is responding to the question: what is it that will enrich and sustain the discipline of psychoanalysis during the remainder of the twenty-first century. I argue that continued vitality requires that analysis demonstrate its value and utility in relation to other psychologically relevant fields of human inquiry. Analysis cannot afford to remain isolated within the private confines of the analytic consulting room, but it must also dare to cast its lot with the uncertainties of ongoing research and understanding arising in other related fields. I begin analysis of these problems by discussing first some organizational issues that might facilitate such collaboration and communication, and then some issues related to interdisciplinary collaborative research. I focus particularly on questions related to the dialogue between psychoanalysis and religious thought and between psychoanalysis and neuroscience. These are only two among a multiplicity of fields in which interdisciplinary opportunities arise, but they exemplify the basic challenges to continued psychoanalytic progress and innovation. I finish with some thoughts about the diversity of analytic theoretical conceptualizations and their implications for facilitating or inhibiting such interdisciplinary efforts. (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2010 APA, all rights reserved)     

Review of Dialogues on difference: Studies of diversity in the therapeutic relationship.

Reviews the book, Studies of diversity in the therapeutic relationship by J. Christopher Muran (see record 2006-11731-000). This book has taken the opportunity to begin with dialogue among clinicians with different theoretical perspectives on issues of diversity, including psychoanalytic, cognitive– behavioral, and humanistic viewpoints. In introducing the book, Muran sets the stage for the dialogues with an open discussion of his own culturally diverse background. He also describes the diversity characterizing his professional training in cognitive– behavioral psychotherapy and psychoanalysis, which in part contributed to his recognition of a need for this dialogue across perspectives. The book is divided into eight dialogues consisting of one psychoanalytically oriented writer or set of writers, followed by comments on this essay by two theorists from different and overlapping theoretical points of view. The final component of each dialogue consists of the author’s reply to the comments. The dialogues address eight separate topics including race, social privilege and multiple identities, homosexuality, intersection of race and gender in psychotherapy with African American men, identity in psychotherapy with Latino clients, role of stereotypes in psychotherapy with Asian Americans, Middle Eastern identity and psychotherapy, and communication and metacommunication in psychotherapy. One of the intriguing features of this book is that the dialogue is in written form, giving the reader the advantage of reading it several times to better engage with each author’s point of view. Because the format resembles that of an oral presentation of a single paper followed by discussions of the paper, I found myself wanting to ask questions of each of the authors. Several of the authors appear to have been enriched through this dialogue,because the very nature of this exchange parallels the concept of mutual influence that lies at the heart of relational psychoanalysis. The quality of dialogue across the different sections of this book is rich and complex and highlights the critical need for ongoing dialogue on cultural difference and similarity in the discipline of psychology, not to mention our broader society. (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2010 APA, all rights reserved)     

Review of The foundations of psychoanalysis: A philosophical critique.

Reviews the book by A. Grünbaum, a work of importance in the current, apparently ever-widening, debates about the "scienticity" of psychoanalysis. Grünbaum makes it clear that the inquiry moves toward a verdict of unproven with respect to the scientific claims of psychoanalytic clinical theory, perhaps even the stronger verdict of unprovable in the terms in which it is traditionally cast. Yet Grünbaum is not hospitable to the promiscuous reconstructions that set psychoanalysis apart from the mainstream of scientific endeavor, whether on subjectivist or phenomenological or hermeneutical grounds. As Grünbaum sees it, Freud rightly claimed that psychoanalysis was to be judged as a science in its study of human processes. Grünbaum's respect for Freud is given body by examining how Freud at various stages of his development formulated the logic of his own position and the structure of objections which he was setting out explicitly to answer. The first third of the book deals with broader philosophical foundations, the remainder with the specific critique of psychoanalytic clinical theory. Grünbaum's critique taps the deeper issues of the comparison of the sciences of nature and those of man, of the relation of science and the humanities. (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2010 APA, all rights reserved)     

Comments on the responses to the special section.

Replies to comments on the Special Section in Psychoanalytic Psychology, Vol 12 (1) by J. Benjamin, K. Marshall, and S. A. Mitchell (see records 83-14390, 83-14401, and 83-14402, respectively). The author addresses conflict theory, Kuhnian paradigms, principles of critique, and the need to focus on clinical issues rather than on theoretical differences when comparing the 2 strains of psychoanalysis. (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2010 APA, all rights reserved)     

Congress looks at science.

Congress "has been inviting the nation's top scientists… to come to the witness table… . Congress is not trying to crack down on science; rather it is trying… to equip itself for its constitutional role in an area where it has heretofore been rather laggard." The "Federal Government has been extremely generous to science." Science "has become terribly expensive in recent years… . Congress is beginning to demand, in effect, that the scientific community vouch for it productivity… . Congress is aware of its own inadequacy, which is why the scientific community should be pleased, rather than distressed, by the sudden rush of investigations and studies. They present a splendid opportunity for the nation's scientists to help the political process adopt itself to the needs of science." (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2010 APA, all rights reserved)     

The identity of psychoanalysis and psychoanalysts.

Psychoanalysis has been in a constant uninterrupted debate about its identity as a discipline and as a social institution. This article considers the place of science in psychoanalysis, on the one hand, and the hermeneutic nature of our discipline, on the other. The aim is to articulate a typology of psychoanalytic knowledge that characterizes psychoanalysis as a form of therapy, an intellectual movement, and a theoretical system. This typology considers psychoanalysis as a thought collective that influences its members by exchanging and maintaining ideas. To be a well-rounded psychoanalytic thinker or practitioner one must be able to move easily among three realms of knowledge--the humanities, the social sciences, and the natural sciences. Each realm has its own criteria of truth and the challenge is to know when to employ which criteria. (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2010 APA, all rights reserved)     

Psychoanalysis as the Idiosyncratic Science of the Individual Subject.

The author examines the scientific status of psychoanalysis from a new angle. Two questions guide the inquiry: what a science is and what psychoanalysis is the science of. If it is supposed to be a global science of mind, where mind is shared by and generalizable over the population of human individuals, its status as science is vulnerable to challenge. The challenge can be circumvented by reconceptualizing psychoanalysis as a set of local theories (metatheoretically linked) applicable to idiosyncratic cases. Every patient is a new world, whose laws it is the task of the analyst to establish and apply. (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2010 APA, all rights reserved)