The incommensurability of psychoanalysis and history

History and Theory 51 (1):63-83 (2012)
  Copy   BIBTEX


ABSTRACTThis article argues that, although psychoanalysis and history have different conceptions of time and causality, there can be a productive relationship between them. Psychoanalysis can force historians to question their certainty about facts, narrative, and cause; it introduces disturbing notions about unconscious motivation and the effects of fantasy on the making of history. This was not the case with the movement for psychohistory that began in the 1970s. Then the influence of American ego‐psychology on history‐writing promoted the idea of compatibility between the two disciplines in ways that undercut the critical possibilities of their interaction. The work of the French historian Michel de Certeau provides theoretical insight into the uses of incommensurability, while that of Lyndal Roper demonstrates both its limits and its value for enriching historical understanding.



    Upload a copy of this work     Papers currently archived: 76,140

External links

Setup an account with your affiliations in order to access resources via your University's proxy server

Through your library

Similar books and articles


Added to PP

67 (#180,460)

6 months
1 (#447,993)

Historical graph of downloads
How can I increase my downloads?

Citations of this work

L’histoire culturelle et ses voisins.Peter Burke & Brigitte Rollet - 2019 - Diogène n° 258-259-260 (2):12-24.
Considering Emma.Clare Hemmings - 2013 - European Journal of Women's Studies 20 (4):334-346.
L’histoire culturelle et ses voisins.Peter Burke & Brigitte Rollet - 2019 - Diogène n° 258-259-258 (2-4):12-24.

Add more citations

References found in this work

Psychohistory and Intellectual History.Gerald Izenberg - 1975 - History and Theory 14 (2):139-155.

Add more references