Abstract
Psychoanalysis has often been attacked by experimental psychologists as “anecdotal” and “unscientific.” This paper attempts to show that the correct position is the exact reverse. Psychoanalysis as a theoretical structure should be regarded as a scientific systematic psychology. Its major ingredients are naturalistic observation and integration of material from many different sources. When looked at in this way, it is seen that psychoanalysis really represents the heart of psychology; without some reference to psychodynamics no psychological statement makes complete sense. A careful examination of some recent psychological literature shows that current “scientific psychology” as usually seen by academicians is often either irrelevant or trivial or erroneous. A total rethinking of the science in the light of psychoanalytic psychology is essential. Then it will be clear that psychology, based on psychoanalysis, also embraces history, anthropology, economics, literary criticism and all the other sciences that deal with man.
Get full access to this article
View all access options for this article.
