Psychoanalysis and science

Authors: Mokshantsev L.V. Published: 31.10.2018
Published in issue: #10(72)/2018  
DOI: 10.18698/2306-8477-2018-10-564  
Category: The Humanities in Technical University | Chapter: Philosophy Science  
Keywords: psychoanalysis, science, therapeutic success, hermeneutics, communication, procedural memory, neurobiology, cognitive psychology

The paper focuses on the problem of relation between psychoanalysis and science. The study shows that if we take advantage of the scientific criteria proposed in the framework of positivism, then we find that only modern physics and several other disciplines could be treated as the scientific ones. According to the criteria mentioned, psychoanalysis could not be considered a science. However, the using of blurry standards makes it possible to call anything a science, including psychoanalysis — a specific way of reality construction. The study stresses that in the nearest future the merge of psychoanalysis, neurobiology and cognitive psychology will result in the development of knowledge in the sphere of human mind

[1] Freud S. Beyond the pleasure principle. In: Complete Psychological Works. Vol. 18. London, Hogarth Press, 1955, pp. 7–64.
[2] Gay P. Freud: a life for our time. New York, W.W. Norton & Co., 1988, p. 796.
[3] Mokshantsev L.V. Gumanitarny vestnik — Humanities Bulletin of BMSTU, 2014, no. 9. DOI: 10.18698/2306-8477-2014-9-205
[4] Grunbaum A. The foundations of psychoanalysis: a philosophical critique. Berkeley, Univ. Calif. Press, 1984, 310 p.
[5] Freud S. Soobschenie ob odnom sluchae paranoi, protivorechashchem psikhoanaliticheskoy teorii. Navyazchivost, paranoya i perversiya [Report on one case of paranoia, contrary to psychoanalytic theory. Obsession, paranoia and perversion], Moscow, LLC «Firma STD» Publ., 2006. pp. 205–216. [In Russ.].
[6] Freud S. Introduction to Psychoanalysis: Lectures (1916–1917/1989) [Vvedenie v psikhoanaliz: lektsii (1916–1917/1989)]. Moscow, Nauka Publ., 1989, pp. 154–297. [In Russ.].
[7] Sulloway F. Freud, biologist of the mind: Beyond the psychoanalytic legend. New York, Basic Books, 1979, p. 275.
[8] Leahey T.H. A History of Modern Psychology. Prentice Hall PTR, 2000, 422 p. [In Russ.: Leahey T.H. Istoriya sovremennoy psikhologii. St. Petersburg, Piter Publ., 2003, 446 p.].
[9] Fisher S., Greenberg R.P. The scientific credibility of Freud’s theories and therapy. New York, Harvester Press, Basic Books, 1977, pp. 64–71.
[10] Avtonomova N.C. Poznanie i perevod. Opyty filosofii yazyka. [Cognition and translation. Tests of the philosophy of language]. Moscow, the Russian Political Encyclopedia (ROSSPEN) Publ., 2008, pp. 325–326.
[11] Kandel E.R. Obzor sovremennoy psikhiatrii (Review of modern psychiatry), 2000, no. 6, p. 6.
[12] Kandel E.R. A new intellectual frame work for psychiatry. American Journal of Psychiatry, 1998, vol. 155, no. 4, pp. 457–469.
[13] Freud S. On narcissism: an introduction. In: Complete Psychological Work. Vol. 14. London, Hogarth Press, 1957, pp. 67–102.
[14] Milner B., Scoville W.B. Loss of recent memory after bilateral hippocampus lesions. Journal Neural Neurosurgery Psychiatry, 1957, vol. 20, pp. 11–21.
[15] Clyman R. The procedural organization of emotion: a contribution from cognitive science to the psychoanalytic therapy of therapeutic action. Journal of the American Psychoanalytic Association, 1991, vol. 39, pp. 349–382.