It is in the best interest of psychoanalysis that new schools of thought (earlier examples of which are the classical, Kleinian, and self psychological perspectives) evolve. Generating a new school of thought, however, is almost impossible in this postmodern era. The postmodern paradigm in psychoanalysis (intersubjectivity, dialectical constructivism, two-person psychology) does not strive to generate a “true” theory of mind that claims to fit reality, nor does it claim to be another school of thought. The creators of the classical, interpersonal, self psychological, ego psychological, Kleinian, Bionian, Fairbairnian, Winnicottian, and other schools cannot be postmodernists, for they all believed that their theories corresponded to reality and were therefore true. A shortage of analysts who “know the truth” today will make it extremely difficult for new schools of thought to arise in psychoanalysis, or for new and compelling theories and descriptions of the human psyche to be constructed. What is required is for pluralistic psychoanalytic institutions to empower analysts who are actively involved in the pursuit of new ideas and theories in psychoanalysis.
Get full access to this article
View all access options for this article.
References
1.
Ahumada, J. (1994). Interpretation and creationism. International Journal of Psychoanalysis75:695—707.
2.
Aron, L. (1996). A Meeting of Minds: Mutuality in Psychoanalysis . Hillsdale, NJ: Analytic Press .
3.
Bass, A. (2000). Psychoanalysis in a new key: Commentary on paper by Randell Lehman Sorenson. Psychoanalytic Dialogues10:875—888.
4.
Benjamin, J. (1988). The Bonds of Love: Psychoanalysis, Feminism, and the Problem of Domination. New York: Pantheon.
5.
Cavell, M. (1999). Knowledge, consensus and uncertainty. International Journal of Psychoanalysis80:1227—1235.
6.
Chaikilin, S. (1992). From theory to practice and back again: What does postmodern philosophy contribute to psychological science? In Psychology and Postmodernism, ed. S. KvaleNewbury Park, CA: Sage Publications , pp. 194—208.
7.
Chodorow, N.J. (1999). The Power of Feelings. New Haven: Yale University Press.
8.
Davies, J.M., & Frawley, M.G. (1991). Dissociative processes and transference-countertransference paradigms in the psychoanalytically oriented treatment of adult survivors of childhood sexual abuse. Psychoanalytic Dialogues2:5—36.
9.
Douglas, M. (1978). Implicit Meanings: Essays in Anthropology. London: Routledge & Kegan Paul.
10.
Eagle, M. (2000). A critical evaluation of current conceptions of transference and countertransference. Psychoanalytic Psychology17:24—37.
11.
Elkana, Y. (1981). A programmatic attempt at an anthropology of science . In Sciences and Cultures, ed. E. Mendelshon & Y. Elkana. Dordrecht: Reidel, pp. 1—76.
12.
Elliott, A., & Spezzano, C. (1996). Psychoanalysis at its limits: Navigating the postmodern turn. Psychoanalytic Quarterly65:52—83.
13.
Freud, S. (1927). Postscript to a discussion on lay analysis. Standard Edition20:251—258.
14.
——— (1933). The question of a Weltanschauung, Standard Edition22:158—182.
15.
——— (1937). Constructions in analysis. Standard Edition23:257—269.
16.
Freudental, G. (1996). Pluralism or relativism. Science in Context9:151—163.
17.
Ghent, E. (1990). Masochism, submission, and surrender: Masochism as a perversion of surrender. Contemporary Psychoanalysis26:108—136.
18.
Hanly, C. (1990). The concept of truth in psychoanalysis. International Journal of Psychoanalysis71:375—383.
19.
——— (1995). On facts and ideas in psychoanalysis. International Journal of Psychoanalysis76:901—908.
20.
Hinshelwood, R.D. (1989). A Dictionary of Kleinian Thought. Northvale, NJ: Aronson.
21.
Hoffman, I. (1987). The value of uncertainty in psychoanalytic practice . Contemporary Psychoanalysis23:205—214.
22.
——— (1998). Ritual and Spontaneity in the Psychoanalytic Process: A Dialectical-Constructivist View. Hillsdale, NJ: Analytic Press.
23.
Kernberg, O. (1986). Institutional problems of psychoanalytic education . Journal of the American Psychoanalytic Association34:799—834.
24.
——— (1996). Thirty methods to destroy the creativity of psychoanalytic candidates. International Journal of Psychoanalysis77:1031—1040.
25.
Kirsner, D. (2000). Unfree Associations: Inside Psychoanalytic Institutes . London: Process Press.
26.
Kohut, H. (1984). How Does Analysis Cure?New York: International Universities Press.
27.
Kolakowski, L. (1972). Positivist Philosophy: From Hume to the Vienna Circle. Harmondsworth: Penguin.
28.
Kuhn, T.S. (1962). The Structure of Scientific Revolutions. 2nd ed. Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 1970.
29.
Laplanche, J. (1992). Interpretation between determinism and hermeneutics: A restatement of the problem. International Journal of Psychoanalysis73:429—445.
30.
——— & J.-B. Pontalis (1967). The Language of Psycho-Analysis , transl. D. Nicholson-Smith. New York: Norton, 1973.
31.
Laudan, L. (1977). Progress and Its Problems: Towards a Theory of Scientific Growth. Berkeley: University of California Press.
32.
Maki, U. (2001). Explanatory unification double and doubtful. Philosophy of the Social Sciences31:488—506.
33.
Mayes, L.C., & Spence, D.P. (1994). Understanding therapeutic action in the analytic situation: A second look at the developmental metaphor. Journal of the American Psychoanalytic Association42:789—817.
34.
Mitchell, S.A. (1988). Relational Concepts in Psychoanalysis: An Integration . Cambridge: Harvard University Press.
——— (1993). Hope and Dread in Psychoanalysis. New York: Basic Books.
37.
——— (1997). Influence and Autonomy in Psychoanalysis. Hillsdale, NJ: Analytic Press.
38.
Polkinghorne, D.E. (1992). Postmodern epistemology in practice. In Psychology and Postmodernism , ed. S. Kvale. Newbury Park, CA: Sage Publications, pp. 146—165.
39.
Ricoeur, P. (1977). The Question of proof in Freud's psychoanalytic writings. Journal of the American Psychoanalytic Association25:835—871.
40.
Rorty, R. (1989). Contingency, Irony, and Solidarity. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
41.
Ryle, G. (1971). Collected Papers. Vol. 2. London: Hutchinson.
42.
Sass, L.A., & Woolfolk, R.L. (1988). Psychoanalysis and the hermeneutic turn: A critique of narrative truth and historical truth. Journal of the American Psychoanalytic Association36:429—454.
43.
Spence, D.P. (1982). Narrative Truth and Historical Truth. New York: Norton.
44.
Spezzano, C. (1997). The emergence of an American middle school of psychoanalysis: Commentary on Karen Rosica's paper. Psychoanalytic Dialogues7:603—618.
45.
——— (1999). A relational model of inquiry and truth: The place of psychoanalysis in human conversation. Psychoanalytic Dialogues3:177—208.
46.
Stein, R. (1995). Reply to Chodorow. Psychoanalytic Dialogues5:301—310.
