Abstract
This article is an extension of earlier discussion in the present journal regarding feelings in literature and, more broadly, the distinction between literary and scientific discourse. Valid though this distinction may be on some level, it is argued herein that it owes its very existence, in part, to a problematically narrow view of what constitutes science, one that not only eschews the life of feeling but that fails to abide by the primary obligation of the scientific endeavor—namely, to practice fidelity to the phenomena of concern. In this respect, it might plausibly be said that much of contemporary psychological science is not scientific enough and that, consequently, a more open and capacious conception is called for. More specifically, it is suggested that a portion of the discipline move in the direction of what might be called poetic science, a form of science that, in its very art-fulness, can do justice to the ambiguity, complexity, and depth that characterizes lived experience.
This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.
Similar content being viewed by others
References
Clegg, J. (2010). Uncertainty as a fundamental scientific value. Integrative Psychological and Behavioral Science, 44, 245–251.
Freeman, M. (1997). Why narrative? Hermeneutics, historical understanding, and the significance of stories. Narrative Inquiry, 7, 169–176.
Freeman, M. (2002). The burden of truth: Psychoanalytic poiesis and narrative understanding. In W. Patterson (Ed.), Strategic narrative: New perspectives on the power of personal and cultural stories (pp. 9–27). Lanham: Lexington Books.
Freeman, M. (2003). Data are everywhere: Narrative criticism in the literature of experience. In C. Daiute & C. Lightfoot (Eds.), Narrative analysis: Studying the development of individuals in society (pp. 63–81). Beverly Hills: Sage.
Freeman, M. (2007a). Wissenschaft und Narration (Science and story). Journal für Psychologie. 15 (2). Retrieved October 25, 2007, from http://www.journal-fuer-psychologie.de/jfp-2-2007-5.html.
Freeman, M. (2007b). Psychoanalysis, narrative understanding, and the meaning of “science”. Psychoanalytic Inquiry, 27, 583–601.
Freud, S. (1955). Studies on hysteria. Standard Edition, II. London: Hogarth Press (originally 1893–1895).
Heidegger, M. (1977). The question concerning technology and other essays. New York: Harper Torchbooks.
Innis, R. E. (2010). Minding feeling. Integrative Psychological and Behavioral Science, 44, 197–207.
Johansen, J. D. (2010). Feelings in literature. Integrative Psychological and Behavioral Science, 44, 185–196.
Langer, S. (1953). Feeling and form: A theory of art. New York: Scribner’s.
Neumann, Y. (2010). Empathy: from mind reading to the reading of a distant text. Integrative Psychological and Behavioral Science, 44, 235–244.