One, Two, Too Many

  • Felipe Massao Kuzuhara
Part of the Studies in the Psychosocial book series (STIP)


Felipe Massao Kuzuhara begins by noting that the negative status of psychoanalysis as science is well established, yet an evaluation of the nature of psychoanalytic knowledge remains open. Does denying it scientific status restrict psychoanalysis to purely subjective knowledge and the question of validation? Against this, psychoanalysis keeps invoking science in its self-presentation, for example in relation to internal controversies and the struggle to determine the general status of newly posited findings. What if this insistence on calling upon science reveals a more profound problem? Using both contemporary Actor Network Theory investigations and an exploration of Freud’s case study procedures, Kuzuhara points to the ethical, clinical, and political consequences that knowledge production in psychoanalysis invites us to confront.


  1. Beauvoir, S. (2010). The Second Sex (C. Borde & S. Malovany-Chevallier, Trans.). New York: Knopf.Google Scholar
  2. Butler, J. (1990). Gender Trouble: Feminism and the Subversion of Identity. New York: Routledge.Google Scholar
  3. Chertok, L., & Stengers, I. (1989). A Critique of Psychoanalytic Reason: Hypnosis as a Scientific Problem—From Lavoisier to Lacan. Stanford: Stanford University Press.Google Scholar
  4. Deleuze, G., & Guattari, F. (1972). Anti-Oedipus: Capitalism and Schizophrenia. London: Continuum.Google Scholar
  5. Freud, S. (1919). ‘A Child Is Being Beaten’: A Contribution to the Study of the Origin of Sexual Perversions. In J. Strachey (Ed.), The Standard Edition of the Complete Psychological Works of Sigmund Freud, Volume XVII (1917–1919): An Infantile Neurosis and Other Works (175–204). London: Hogarth.Google Scholar
  6. Forrester, J. (1996). If p, Then What? Thinking in Cases. History of the Human Sciences, 9, 1–25.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Forrester, J. (2007). On Kuhn’s Case: Psychoanalysis and the Paradigm. Critical Inquiry, 33, 782–819.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Gould, S. J. (1977). Ontogeny and Phylogeny. Cambridge: Harvard University Press.Google Scholar
  9. Green, A. (2001). The Passion of History Confronted with the Failure of Psychoanalytic Historical Thinking. In R. Steiner & J. Johns (Eds.), Within Time and Beyond Time: A Festschrift for Pearl King (pp. 25–38). London: Karnac Books.Google Scholar
  10. Grosz, E. (1994). Volatile Bodies: Toward a Corporeal Feminism. Bloomington: Indiana University Press.Google Scholar
  11. Grunbaum, A. (1984). The Foundations of Psychoanalysis: A Philosophical Critique. Berkeley and Los Angeles and London: University of California Press.Google Scholar
  12. King, P., & Steiner, R. (Eds.). (1991). The Freud-Klein Controversies 1941–45. London and New York: Routledge.Google Scholar
  13. Knorr Cetina, K. (1992). The Couch, the Cathedral, and the Laboratory: On the Relationship between Experiment and Laboratory in Science. In A. Pickering (Ed.), Science as Practice and Culture. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.Google Scholar
  14. Krause, M., & Guggenheim, M. (2013). The Couch as a Laboratory? The Spaces of Psychoanalysis Knowledge-Production Between Research, Diagnosis and Treatment. European Journal of Sociology, 54, 187–210.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. Kuhn, T. (1962). The Structure of Scientific Revolutions. Chicago: Chicago University Press.Google Scholar
  16. Laplanche, J. & Pontalis, J. B. (1973). The Language of Psychoanalysis. London: Karnac Books.Google Scholar
  17. Latour, B. (1987). Science in Action. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.Google Scholar
  18. Latour, B. (1988). The Pasteurization of France (A. Sheridan & J. Law, Trans.). Cambridge: Harvard University Press.Google Scholar
  19. Latour, B. (1999). Pandora’s Hope: Essays on the Reality of Science Studies. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.Google Scholar
  20. Latour, B. (2003). The Promises of Constructivism. In D. Idhe (Ed.), Chasing Technology: Matrix of Materiality (pp. 27–46). Bloomington: Indiana University Press.Google Scholar
  21. Latour, B. (2005). Reassembling the Social: An Introduction to Actor-Network-Theory. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
  22. Popper, K. (1959). The Logic of Scientific Discovery. New York: Basic Books.Google Scholar
  23. Popper, K. (1969). Conjectures and Refutation (3rd ed.). London: Routledge and Kegan Paul.Google Scholar
  24. Popper, K. (1985). Realism and the Aim of Science (2nd ed.). New York: Routledge.Google Scholar
  25. Roazen, P. (2002). The Trauma of Freud: Controversies in Psychoanalysis. New Brunswick and London: Transaction Publishers.Google Scholar
  26. Stengers, I. (1997). Power and Invention: Situating Science (P. Bains, Trans.). Minneapolis and London: University of Minnesota Press.Google Scholar
  27. Stengers, I. (2000). The Invention of Modern Science (D. W. Smith, Trans.). Minneapolis and London: University of Minnesota Press.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© The Author(s) 2019

Authors and Affiliations

  • Felipe Massao Kuzuhara
    • 1
  1. 1.LondonUK

Personalised recommendations