Hostname: page-component-586b7cd67f-gb8f7 Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-22T04:42:18.223Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Explanation in Psychoanalysis and History

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  14 March 2022

Edward H. Madden
Edward H. Madden*
Affiliation:
State University of New York at Buffalo
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

A number of authors recently have pointed out what they think are enlightening similarities between psychoanalysis and history. In stressing such similarities they are usually trying to justify their own particular characterization of psychoanalysis. I show wherein I think these characterizations go wrong and at the same time try my own hand at clarifying the nature of psychoanalytic propositions.

Type
Research Article
Information
Philosophy of Science , Volume 33 , Issue 3 , September 1966 , pp. 278 - 286
Copyright
Copyright © 1966 by The Philosophy of Science Association

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

Footnotes

∗

(Read at the Symposium on Psychoanalysis and History at the annual meeting of the American Philosophical Association, Western Division, Chicago, April, 1965).

References

[1] Boring, E. G., History, Psychology, and Science: Selected Papers, New York, 1963, pp. 218-21.Google Scholar
[2] Erikson, Erik H., “The Nature of Clinical Evidence,” in Daniel Lerner, ed., Evidence and Inference, New York, 1959.Google Scholar
[3] Farrell, B. A., “The Status of Psychoanalytical Theory,” Inquiry, 7 (1964), pp. 104–23.10.1080/00201746408601394CrossRefGoogle Scholar
[4] Flew, Antony, “Motives and the Unconscious,” in volume I of Minnesota Studies in the Philosophy of Science, pp. 155–73.Google Scholar
[5] MacIntyre, A. C., The Unconscious, London, 1958.Google Scholar
[6] Madden, E. H., Philosophical Problems of Psychology, New York, 1962, Chapter 4.Google Scholar
[7] Martin, Michael, “The Scientific Status of Psychoanalytic Clinical Evidence”; Sidney G. Margolin, “Rejoinder”; and Bjorn Christiansen, “Comments” Inquiry, 7 (1964), pp. 13–79.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
[8] Meyerhoff, Hans, “On Psychoanalysis as History,” Psychoanalysis and the Psychoanalytic Review, 49 (1962), pp. 3–20.Google ScholarPubMed
[9] Moore, Asher, “Psychoanalysis, Man, and Value,” Inquiry, 4 (1961), pp. 53–65.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
[10] Peters, R. S., The Concept of Motivation, London, 2nd Ed., 1960.Google Scholar
[11] Salmon, Wesley, “Psychoanalytic Theory and Evidence,” in Sidney Hook, ed., Psychoanalysis, Scientific Method, and Philosophy, New York, 1959.Google Scholar
[12] Strachey, Lytton, Portraits in Miniature, New York, 1931, pp. 193-94.Google Scholar
[13] Toulmin and Flew articles on psychoanalysis in M. Macdonald, ed., Philosophy and Analysis, Oxford, 1954.Google Scholar