Hostname: page-component-586b7cd67f-2brh9 Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-25T15:34:49.735Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

“Every Path Will End in Darkness” or: Why Psychoanalysis Needs Metapsychology

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  26 September 2008

José Brunner
José Brunner
Affiliation:
Department of Political ScienceTel Aviv University
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

This article focuses on the dialectic of metapsychology and hermeneutics in psychoanalysis. By combining the causal language of the former with the inten tional terminology of the latter, Freud's discourse continuously transgresses the narrowly conceived boundaries of scientific disciplines and places its stakes in both the humanities and the natural sciences. The argument is made that attempts to reduce psychoanalytic theory to either causal explanation or interpretation of meaning turn it into a closed thought system and rob it of its vitality. It is argued, moreover, that although Freud understood himself to be a scientist, by eschewing the dichotomous reductionism characteristic of both his orthodox followers and critics who tried and still try to turn psychoanalysis into either a natural-science- like discipline or a hermeneutics, Freud demonstrated that his self-understanding was far more sophisticated than admitted by either of these two groups. This argument is supported by a detailed discussion of Freud's epistemological pre mises, his conception of science and reality, and especially, the place he allocated to metapsychology in his interdisciplinary science. It is claimed that metapsy chology served Freud as a double-edged sword, both enabling creative and metaphorical thought about the mind's hidden reality and revealing the necessary incompleteness of hermeneutics. The article concludes with the claim that psy choanalysis needs metapsychology in order to pursue this dual task.

Type
Article
Information
Science in Context , Volume 7 , Issue 1 , Spring 1994 , pp. 83 - 101
Copyright
Copyright © Cambridge University Press 1994

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.)

References

Anderson, O. 1962. Studies in the Prehistory of Psychoanalysis. Norstedts, Sweden: Bokvoörlaget.Google Scholar
Bettelheim, B. 1984. Freud and Man's Soul. New York: Vintage.Google Scholar
Brandt, L. W. 1980. “Some Notes on English Freudian Terminology,” Journal of the American Psychoanalytic Association 28:461–75.Google Scholar
Brunner, J. n.d. Freud and the Politics of Psychoanalysis. Oxford: Basil Blackwell. Forthcoming.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Davidson, D. 1980. “Action, Reasons and Causes,” in his Essays on Actions and Events. Oxford: Clarendon Press.Google Scholar
Davidson, D. 1982. “Paradoxes of Irrationality.” In Philosophical Essays on Freud, edited by Wollheim, R. and Hopkins, J.. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Eagle, M. N. 1984. Recent Developments in Psychoanalysis: A Critical Evaluation. Cambridge, Mass.: Harvard University Press.Google Scholar
Elkana, Y. 1985. “Borrowing the Concept of Energy.” In Comparative Social Dynamics: Essays in Honor of S. N. Eisensiadt, edited by Cohen, E., Lissak, M., and Almagor, U. Boulder, Colo.: Westview Press.Google Scholar
Eysenck, H. 1986. Decline and Fall of the Freudian Empire. Harmondsworth: Penguin.Google Scholar
Forrester, J. 1980. Language and the Origins of Psychoanalysis. London: Macmillan.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Forrester, J. 1986. “Hardly.” Isis 77.Google Scholar
Foucault, M. 1970. The Order of Things: An Archeology of the Human Sciences. New York: Vintage.Google Scholar
Freud, S. 1953–74. Standard Edition of the Complete Psychological Works of Sigmund Freud, 24 vols. Edited by Strachey, James. London.: Hogarth Press. Hereafter cited as SE.Google Scholar
Freud, S. With Breuer, J.. [1895]. Studies on Hysteria. SE, 2.Google Scholar
Freud, S. [1900]. The Interpretation of Dreams, SE, 4:1–338. 5:339–621.Google Scholar
Freud, S. [1911]. “Formulations on the Two Principles of Mental Functioning.” SE, 12:218–26.Google Scholar
Freud, S. [1913]. “The Claims of Psycho-Analysis to Scientific Interest.” SE, 13:165–90.Google Scholar
Freud, S. [1914]. “On the History of the Psycho-Analytic Movement.” SE, 14:7–66.Google Scholar
Freud, S. [1915]. “The Unconscious.” SE, 14:166–204.Google Scholar
Freud, S. [1916–1917]. Introductory Lectures on Psycho-Analysis. SE, 15:15–239, 16:243–463.Google Scholar
Freud, S. [1920]. Beyond the Pleasure Principle. SE, 18:7–64.Google Scholar
Freud, S. [1925]. An Autobiographical Study. SE, 20:3–70.Google Scholar
Freud, S. [1927]. “Postscript to The Question of Lay Analysis.” SE, 20:251–58.Google Scholar
Freud, S. [1933]. New Introductory Lectures on Psycho-Analysis. SE, 22:5–182.Google Scholar
Freud, S. [1937]. (Analysis Terminable and Interminable.) 23:216–53.Google Scholar
Freud, S. [1939]. Moses and Monotheism. SE, 23:7–137.Google Scholar
Freud, S. [1940a]. An Outline of Psycho-Analysis. SE, 23:144–207.Google Scholar
Freud, S. [1940b]. “Some Elementary Lessons in Psycho-Analysis.” SE, 23:281–86.Google Scholar
Freud, S. [1985]. The Complete Letters of Sigmund Freud to Wilhelm Fliess, 1887–1904. Edited by Masson, J. M. Cambridge, Mass.: Harvard University Press.Google Scholar
Fromm, E. 1973. “Freud's Model of Man and Its Social Determinants.“ In his The Crisis of Psychoanalysis. Harmondsworth: Penguin.Google Scholar
Galaty, D. H. 1974.“The Philosophical Basis of Mid-Nineteenth-Century Reductionism.” Journal of the History of Medicine 29:295–316.Google ScholarPubMed
Gill, M. M. 1976. “Metapsychology Is Not Psychology.” In Psychology versus Met apsychology, edited by Gill, M. M. and Holzman, P. S.. New York: International Universities Press.Google Scholar
Grünbaum, A. 1984. The Foundations of Psychoanalysis: A Philosophical Critique. Berkeley: University of California Press.Google Scholar
Habermas, J. 1978. Knowledge and Human Interest. London: Heinemann.Google Scholar
Hartmann, H. 1958. “Comments on the Psychoanalytic Theory of the Ego.” In Essays in Ego Psychology. New York: International Universities Press.Google Scholar
Hartmann, H. 1959. “Psychoanalysis as a Scientific Theory.” In Psychoanalysis, Scient Method, and Philosophy, edited by Hook, S.. New York: New York University Press.Google Scholar
Holt, R. R. 1976. “A Review of Freud's Biological Assumptions and Their Influence on His Theories.” In Psychoanalysis and Current Biological Thought, edited by Greenfield, N. S. and Lewis, W. C.. Madison: University of Wisconsin Press.Google Scholar
Holt, R. R. 1981. “The Death and Transfiguration of Metapsychology.” International Review of Psychoanalysis 8:129–43.Google Scholar
Holt, R. R. 1985. “The Current Status of Psychoanalytic Theory.” Psychoanalytic Psychology 2:289–315.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Jones, E. 1953–1957. The Life and Work of Sigmund Freud, 3vols. New York: Basic Books.Google Scholar
Kitcher, P. 1992. Freud's Dream: A Complete Interdisciplinary Science of the Mind. Cambridge, Mass.: MIT Press.Google Scholar
Klein, G. S. 1973. “Is Psychoanalysis Relevant?” In Psychoanalysis and Contem porary Science, vol. 2, edited by Rubinstein, B.. New York: Macmillan.Google Scholar
Klein, M. H. 1989. “Throwing Out the Baby with the Bathwater: A Historical Analysis of the Antimetapsychology Movement.” Psychoanalysis and Con-temporary Thought 12:565–98.Google Scholar
Kovel, J. 1988. “Things and Words: Metapsychology and the Historical Point of View.” In his The Radical Spirit: Essays on Psychoanalysis and Society. London: Free Association Books.Google Scholar
Lacan, J. 1977. “The Agency of the Letter in the Unconscious or Reason since Freud.” In écrits: A Selection. New York: W. W. Norton.Google Scholar
Lacan, J. 1978. The Four Fundamental Concepts of Psychoanalysis. New York: W. W. Norton.Google Scholar
Leary, D. E. 1980. “German Idealism and the Development of Psychology in the Nineteenth Century.” Journal of the History of Philosophy 18:299–313.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Leski, E. 1965. Die Wiener Medizinische Schule im 19. Jahrhundert. Graz-Köln:Hermann Böhlaus.Google Scholar
Masson, J. M. 1984. Freud: The Assault on Truth: Freu's Suppression of the Seduction Theory. London: Faber.Google Scholar
Meissner, W. W. 1981. “Metapsychology: Who Needs It?” Journal ofthe American Psychoanalytic Association 29:921–38.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Modell, A. H. 1981. “Does Metapsychology Still Exist?” International Journal of Psycho-Analysis 62:391–402.Google ScholarPubMed
Ornston, D. 1982. “Strachey's Influence: A Preliminary Report.” International Journal of Psycho-Analysis 63:409–26.Google ScholarPubMed
Ornston, D. 1985. “Freud's Conception Is Different from Strachey's.” Journal of the American Psychoanalytic Association 33:379–412.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Ornston, D., ed. 1992. Translating Freud. New Haven: Yale University Press.Google Scholar
Rapaport, D. 1960. The Structure of Psychoanalytic Theory: A Systematizing Attempt. New York: International Universities Press.Google Scholar
Rapaport, D., and Gill, M. 1959. “The Points of View and Assumptions of Metapsychology.” International Journal of Psycho-Analysis 40:153–62.Google ScholarPubMed
Ricoeur, P. 1970. Freud and Philosophy: An Essay on Interpretation. New Haven:Yale University Press.Google Scholar
Ricoeur, P. 1977. “The Question of Proof in Freud's Psychoanalytic Writings.” Journal of the American Psychoanalytic Association 25:835–71.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Rycroft, C. 1981. The Innocence of Dreams. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Schafer, R. 1976. A New Language for Psychoanalysis. New Haven, Conn.: Yale University PressGoogle Scholar
Spence, D. P. 1982. Narrative Truth and Historical Truth: Meaning and Interpre tation in Psychoanalysis. New York: Norton.Google Scholar
Sulloway, F. J. 1979. Freud, Biologist of the Mind: Beyond the Psychoanalytic Legend. London: Burnett/ André Deutsch.Google Scholar
Thornton, E. M. 1986. The Freudian Fallacy: Freud and Cocaine. London: Paladin.Google Scholar
Timms, E., and Segal, N., eds. 1988. Freud in Exile: Psychoanalysis and Its Vicissitudes. New Haven, Conn.: Yale University Press.Google Scholar
Turner, R. S. 1977. “Hermann von Helmholtz and the Empiricist Vision.”Journal of the History of the Behavioral Sciences 13:48–58.3.0.CO;2-L>CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Weber, S. 1987. “The Blindness of the Seeing Eye: Psychoanalysis, Hermeneutics, Entstellung.” In his Institution and Interpretation. Minneapolis: University of Minnesota Press.Google Scholar
Wolfenstein, V. E. 1990. “A Man Knows Not Where to Have It:Haberinas, GrUnbaum and the Epistemological Status of Psychoanalysis.” International Review of Psycho-Analysis 17:23–45.Google Scholar