The main source of evidence for psychoanalytic theory comes from the clinical situation. Yet recent empirical studies in verbal conditioning and the social psychology of persuasion indicate that psychoanalysts and therapists of other schools are speciously validating their own theories by unwittingly influencing their patients' behavior. In the light of this evidence it is small wonder that psychoanalysts consistently 'validate' psychoanalytic theory in their clinical practice while therapists of other schools 'validate' their own theories in their clinical practice. Although Freud (...) was not unaware of the problems of 'suggestion' and the conflicting evidence of rival schools of psychotherapy, he never met these problems successfully. Contemporary psychoanalysts have added little to Freud's original position. One recent attempt, by Fritz Schmidl, to formulate new criteria for the correctness of psychoanalytic clinical interpretations, does not completely escape the problem of suggestion and has new problems of its own. (shrink)

RésuméDans cet article, l'auteur se demande si les travaux des psychanalystes sont organisés par un paradigme au sens de Kuhn. Considérant le « paradigme » dans sa dimension évolutive, l'auteur propose dès lors aussi « quelques hypothèses pour une histoire de la psychanalyse ». Au passage, il soulève quelques questions générales au processus de l'histoire scientifique.L'article examine successivement: le terrain antérieur à la formation du paradigme psychanalytique, les signes d'émergence d'un paradigme dans la pratique scientifique de Freud, les critères de (...) l'identification du paradigme psychanalytique, le fonctionnement « normal » du paradigme psychanalytique dans la pratique scientifique des psychanalystes, les symptǒmes d'une crise possible du paradigme psychanalytique, liée à l'apparition d'anomalies au sein de l'activité instrumentale de la psychanalyse — le problème de l'interaction entre psychanalyse et forces sociales est alors discuté. (shrink)

This study is a philosophical critique of the foundations of Sigmund Freud's psychoanalysis. As such, it also takes cognizance of his claim that psychoanalysis has the credentials of a natural science. It shows that the reasoning on which Freud rested the major hypotheses of his edifice was fundamentally flawed, even if the probity of the clinical observations he adduced were not in question. Moreover, far from deserving to be taken at face value, clinical data from the psychoanalytic treatment setting are (...) themselves epistemically quite suspect. (shrink)

Using Grunbaum 1984 and 1993 as a springboard, Greenwood (this issue) claims to have offered several methodologically salubrious and exegetically illuminating theses on empirical evaluations of theoretical explanations of psychotherapeutic efficacy. According to his exegesis of Grunbaum's construction (1984, Ch. 2, Section C; 1993, 184-204) of Freud's "Tally Argument," that argument bespeaks a rife neglect of the epistemologically-significant distinction between empirical evaluations of the efficacy of psychotherapy and evaluations of theoretical explanations of that efficacy. Greenwood presents a defense of a (...) qualified version of Popper's critique of psychoanalysis against Grunbaum's objections to it (1984, Ch. 1B). Finally, Greenwood offers a clarification of the concept of a "placebo control" investigation, taking issue with Grunbaum's 1993 (84-87, 91-93). In the present paper, it is argued contra Greenwood that: (1) his purportedly "best" reading of Freud's Tally Argument and of its import founders, (2) the distinction that Greenwood bemoans as being neglected by mental health researchers actually is a commonplace in the literature on treatment-process and therapeutic outcome, (3) Greenwood's defense of Popper's critique of psychoanalysis is an anachronism, and (4) Greenwood's conceptual analysis of placebo controls is nebulous and misconceived. (shrink)

In this paper it is suggested that Freud's 'tally argument' (Grunbaum 1984) is not best interpreted as a risky claim concerning the efficacy of psychoanalytic therapy, but as a risky claim concerning the implications of theoretical psychoanalytic explanations of the efficacy of psychoanalytic therapy. Despite the fact that Freud never empirically established that these implications hold, the 'tally argument' does draw attention to a critical distinction that is too often neglected in contemporary empirical studies of psychoanalysis and other forms of (...) psychotherapy: between empirical evaluations of the efficacy of psychotherapy and empirical evaluations of theoretical explanations of the efficacy of psychotherapy, and the different forms of comparative enquiry relevant to each. It is argued that the contemporary neglect of this critical distinction, in conjunction with the common negative conception of placebo control treatments in psychotherapy research, has led to the epistemic impoverishment of experimental studies of the various professional psychotherapies. In consequence, although there is good empirical evidence for the efficacy of psychoanalysis and other forms of professional psychotherapy, there is no good empirical evidence for theoretical psychoanalytic explanations of the efficacy of psychoanalysis, or for traditional theoretical explanations of the efficacy of other forms of professional psychotherapy. (shrink)

John Greenwood (this issue) claims that neglect of an important methodological distinction has contributed directly to the "epistemic impoverishment" of empirical studies of all forms of professional psychotherapy. I challenge this claim, as well as other important claims he makes about the efficacy of psychoanalysis and other forms of psychotherapy.

tries to elucidate some of the rational considerations that determine the standing and value of psychoanalysis. He is sceptical about much of the positive evidence, but he also tries to provide some support for Freudian doctrines. I examine his supporting arguments and try to show that they have serious weaknesses.

In his The Foundations of Psychoanalysis (1984) Grunbaum compliments Freud on the development of the Tally Argument as an answer to a number of serious methodological criticisms, "The epistemological considerations that prompted Freud to enunciate (this argument) make him a sophisticated methodologist" (p. 128). In contrast to this position I argue that the Tally Argument and the considerations for it are hardly sophisticated: They would equally well go to demonstrate the methodological sophistication of modern-day evangelists. Furthermore, I argue that the (...) Tally Argument does not play the crucial role that Grunbaum assigns to it. It is one of many arguments Freud used to counter criticism, but not one to which Freud gave pride of place. (shrink)

Those who are interested in Freud and psychoanalysis will be familiar with questions such as ‘Is Freudian psychology pseudo-scientific?’ ‘Is Freudian psychology falsifiable?’ ’Is unfalsifiability an adequate criterion of pseudo-science?’, and they might naturally suppose that it is these questions of which Erwin has attempted a ‘final accounting’. Surprisingly, these questions hardly feature in Erwin's book. Though at the outset Peter Medawar's notorious judgment that psychoanalysis is ‘the most stupendous intellectual confidence trick of the twentieth century’ is cited, Erwin does (...) not seem to think it is part of his final accounting to say either whether he thinks it justified or, if not, why someone of Medawar's distinction should nevertheless have thought so. (shrink)

Operationalism and theoretical entities. The thesis of the“theory ladenness” of observation leads to an antinomy. In order to solve this antinomy a technical operationalism is sketched, according to which theories should in principle not contain anything that cannot be reduced to technical procedures. This implies the rejection of Quine's underdeterminacy thesis and of many views about the theoretical-observational distinction, e.g. neopositivistic views, van Fraassen's view, Sneed-Stegmüller's view. Then I argue for the following theses: 1. All scientific concepts are theory laden (...) in the sense that they allow us to anticipate possible experiences, but they have to be in principle fully observable, i.e. integrally convertible into operational-technical applications. 2. The observation/theory distinction can be maintained as a historical one: what is observable depends on the instruments that are available at any stage of the development of science. 3.In principle theoretical entities are empirically real in Hacking's sense. However, some aspects of Hacking's realism are to be criticized. Theoretical entities are to be resolved into the totality of the interrelated properties accessible to us by means of theoretical points of view embodied in scientific instruments. (shrink)

Detailing this development, with particular attention to the role of self-analysis in the Freudian myth and the evidential drawbacks of the case study genre, Spence shows how psychoanalysis was set on its present course and how rhetorical maneuvers have taken the place of evidence.

"Well over one half of this brilliant new Monograph constitutes a major sequel to Professor Grunbaum's highly influential 1984 book The Foundations of Psychoanalysis: A Philosophical Critique, which was labeled "magisterial" by Frank J. Sulloway, and "the most important book ever written on Freud's status as a scientist" by J. Allan Hobson. The importance of the present Monograph lies in the extent to which the author now goes beyond that earlier volume to offer new original ideas on fundamental themes." "Validation (...) in the Clinical Theory of Psycho-analysis: A Study in the Philosophy of Psycho-analysis contains Adolf Grunbaum's new basic critique of the psychoanalytic theory of transference in its role of an etiologic theory; it turns out that etiologic transference interpretations rest on fallacious causal inferences from so-called "meaning connections" between mental states: moreover, just these unsound inferences are the stock-in-trade of the "hermeneutic" reconstruction of psychoanalysis, which charges Freud with a "scientistic self-misunderstanding."" "This volume joins the issue with Marshall Edelson's defenses of the investigative viability of the single-subject case study method. As a spin-off from the import of the serious placebo challenge to psychoanalysis, this Monograph presents the author's widely recognized new account of the placebo concept across all of medicine and psychotherapy. Whereas Foundations of Psychoanalysis objected that Freud's dream theory was evidentially ill-founded, the burden of the present book is to give two new basic reasons for presuming the theory to be false. It also develops the import of the author's appraisal of psychoanalytic theory for the scrutiny of Freud's triadic psychology of religious belief in theism." "Since Sir Karl Popper's most detailed charge of pseudoscience against psychoanalysis in 1983 could not be examined for inclusion in the 1984 book, the present monograph shows in what ways it is wide of the mark as an incoherent diagnosis of the scientific liabilities of psychoanalytic theory. In addition, four important papers that had antedated Foundations by a few years and were scattered over diverse publications have been updated and integrated with the other chapters herein."--BOOK JACKET.Title Summary field provided by Blackwell North America, Inc. All Rights Reserved. (shrink)

Marshall Edelson identifies the core theory of psychoanalysis and shows how free association and the case study method can provide rational grounds for believing its clinical inferences about the causal role of unconscious sexual fantasies. "Dr. Edelson has committed himself with gusto, persistence and intelligence [to] a spirited defense of psychoanalysis as science—not necessarily as it is, but as it can be in the best of hands as it should be.... It is a defense that I hope can resonate strongly (...) in psychoanalytic ranks. It is also a message that I hope would receive a warm reception in that wider intellectual world where ideas matter and where enlightened social policy and cultural cachet are fostered."—Robert Wallerstein, New York Times Book Review. (shrink)

"Should be of considerable interest to a wider public, since it proposes a radical reformulation of psychoanalytical theory which, if accepted, would render outmoded almost all the analytical jargon that has crept into the language of progressive, enlightened post-Freudian people."-Charles Rycroft, The New York Review of Books "Schafer's arguments have considerable cogency. The tendency to over-theorize so that the translation of abstractions into the language of ordinary discourse between analyst and patient has become increasingly difficult is a fault; Schafer goes (...) a long way towards redressing it, and his efforts to include meaning and the person in the form of his language is an achievement."-Michael Fordham, The Times Higher Education Supplement. (shrink)

Ais Binswanger einmal Freud gegenuber gesprachsweise erwahnte, daB gewisse an Neurose erkrankte Menschen "gerade den letzten, ent scheidenden Schritt psychoanalytischer Einsicht... nicht mehr tun kon nen" und somit "allen bisherigen Anstrengungen und technischen Fort schritten zum Trotz in ihrem Elend... verharren", hierauf aber auch die Moglichkeit erwog, "daB solches Scheitem unserer Kranken doch nur zu verstehen sei aus etwas, das man ganz allgemein nicht anders bezeichnen konne als einen,Mangel an Geistigkeit"', als ein "Unvermogen" zu ",gei stiger Kommunikation' mit dem Arzt", (...) "von der aus sich ihnen der Blick auf die bestimmte,unbewuBte Triebregung' offnen und die Selbstuber win dung, auch noch den letzten entscheidenden Schritt zu tun, ermogli chen lassen muBte", solI Freud darauf geantwortet haben: "fa, Geist ist alles. " Binswanger gesteht: "Ich traute meinen Ohren kaum, als ich... " diese "Antwort vernahm..., wenn ich auch anzunehmen geneigt war, daB unter Geist hier doch noch so etwas wie Intelligenz verstanden wurde. " Dann aber soIl Freud bemerkt haben: "Die Menschheit hat ja gewuftt, daft sie Geist hat; ich muftte ihr zeigen, daft es auch Triebe gibt...,,1 Eine weitere AuBerung Freuds mochten wir hier dieser noch bei fugen: "In dem Zweifel, ob Ich und Uber-Ich selbst unbewuBt sein oder nur unbewuBte Wirkungen entfalten konnen, haben wir uns mit guten Grunden fur die erstere Moglichkeit entschieden. Ja, groBe Anteile des Ichs und Uber-Ichs konnen unbewuBt bleiben, sind normalerweise unbe wuBt. (shrink)

This work continues the debate on whether psychoanalysis can be treated as a cognitive science, providing an epistemological rationale for the field's scientific validity, as well as an ethical rationale for its humanism. The authors reject the humanist and empiricist constructions of various theories as "foundationalist," and develop a philosophical foundation which they term "cognitivist." They address issues related to social science and society, and to psychotherapeutic research. Annotation copyright by Book News, Inc., Portland, OR.

One of 15 volumes in this series, this title is part of a plan to generate non-specialist Freud titles for a wide readership - beyond the institutional/clinical ...