Abstract
Psychoanalysis is one of the most prominent and most intensely discussed research programs of the twentieth century. One important debate in the philosophy of medicine centers around the question of whether or not psychoanalysis is a scientific research program. The paradigm case for the evaluation of this question is the theory of Sigmund Freud, who – in contrast to Carl G. Jung, Alfred Adler, and other proponents of psychoanalytic theory – regarded his theoretical efforts as a scientific project throughout his whole life. His project was continued by researchers in psychology and medicine, as well as practitioners in clinical psychotherapy and psychiatry. In order to give a more elaborate answer to the question of the extent to which this project is judged to be successful in contemporary science, it is necessary to differentiate between psychoanalytic theory, psychodynamic therapy, and the research methodology applied in the Freudian tradition.
Even if Freud himself took psychoanalysis to be a scientific, validated theory, his own research methodology faces serious problems. From the perspective of contemporary science, it constitutes the most “unscientific” aspect of his whole conception, because it is generally seen as falling victim to the post hoc ergo propter hoc fallacy. It is therefore deemed inappropriate for producing any substantial scientific evidence. But – contrary to Popper’s prominent critique – it cannot be denied that many claims of psychoanalytic theory are empirically testable and that since the 1950s, a remarkable body of evidence that fulfills scientific research standards has been generated with the aim of confirming the central theoretical claims of psychoanalysis and the efficacy of psychoanalytic therapy. Therefore, in a processual or methodological sense, today’s psychoanalysis is without any doubt a scientific research program. But at the same time, it is an open question whether the scientific endeavor to confirm the central claims of psychoanalysis will turn out to be successful. The generally accepted theorems that form the common core of today’s psychoanalytic theorizing are – in sharp contrast to Freud’s original theory – rather carefully formulated and are not particularly specific. For this reason, the relevance of psychoanalysis for the further development of psychology and medicine and the question of the efficacy and effectiveness of an autonomous psychodynamic therapy are matters of a deep and ongoing controversy.
Similar content being viewed by others
References
Black DM (2011) Why things matter. The place of values in science, psychoanalysis and religion. Routledge, Hove/New York
Blagys MD, Hilsenroth MJ (2000) Distinctive features of short-term psychodynamic-interpersonal psychotherapy: a review of the comparative psychotherapy process literature. Clin Psychol Sci Pract 7(2):167–188
Brenner C (1973) An elementary textbook of psychoanalysis. International Universities Press, New York
Chiesa M (2010) Research and psychoanalysis: still time to bridge the great divide? Psychoanal Psychol 27(2):99–114
Ellis A (1956) An operational reformulation of some of the basic principles of psychoanalysis. In: Feigl H, Scriven M (eds) The foundations of science and the concepts of psychology and psychoanalysis. University of Minnesota Press, Minneapolis, pp 131–154
Erdelyi MH (2006) The unified theory of repression. Behav Brain Sci 29:499–551
Esterson A (1996) Grünbaum’s tally argument. Hist Hum Sci 9(1):43–57
Eysenck H-J (1952) The effects of psychotherapy: an evaluation. J Consult Psychol 16(5):319–324
Fisher S, Greenberg RP (1977) The scientific credibility of Freud’s theories and therapy. Basic Books, New York
Fisher S, Greenberg RP (1996) Freud scientifically reappraised: testing the theories and therapy. Wiley, New York
Freud S (1895) Entwurf einer Psychologie (Project for a scientific psychology). Quoted from: Freud S (1987) Gesammelte Werke Nachtragsband. Fischer, Frankfurt am Main, pp 375–486
Freud S (1900) Die Traumdeutung (The interpretation of dreams). Quoted from: Freud S (1941) Gesammelte Werke, vols 2 & 3 (GW II & III). Imago Publishing Co, London
Freud S (1909) Analyse der Phobie eines fünfjährigen Knaben (Analysis of a Phobia in a five-year-old boy). Quoted from: GW VII, pp 241–377
Freud S (1916/1917) Vorlesungen zur Einführung in die Psychoanalyse (Introductory lectures on psychoanalysis). Quoted from: GW XI
Freud S (1923) “Psychoanalyse” und “Libidotheorie”. Quoted from: GW XIII, pp 209–233
Freud S (1940) Abriß der Psychoanalyse (An outline of psychoanalysis). Internationale Zeitschrift für Psychoanalyse 25:7–67. Quoted from: GW XVII, pp 63–138
Grawe K (1998) Psychologische Therapie. Hogrefe, Göttingen
Grawe K, Donati R, Bernauer F (1994) Psychotherapie im Wandel. Von der Konfession zur Profession. Hogrefe, Göttingen
Greenwood JD (1996) Freud’s ‘tally’ argument, placebo control treatments, and the evaluation of psychotherapy. Philos Sci 63(4):605–621
Grünbaum A (1979) Is Freudian psychoanalytic theory pseudo-scientific by Karl Popper’s criterion of demarcation? Am Philos Q 16(2):131–141
Grünbaum A (1984) The foundations of psychoanalysis. University of California Press, Berkeley
Gyler L (2010) The gendered unconscious. Can gender discourses subvert psychoanalysis? Routledge, London/New York
Habermas J (1968) Erkenntnis und Interesse. Suhrkamp, Frankfurt am Main
Hilgard ER (1952a) Psychoanalysis as science. Eng Sci 16:11–17
Hilgard ER (1952b) Experimental approaches to psychoanalysis. In: Hilgard ER, Kubie LS, Pumpian-Mindlin E (eds) Psychoanalysis as science. Greenwood Press, Westport, pp 4–45
Kitcher P (1992) Freud’s dream. A complete interdisciplinary science of mind. The MIT Press, Cambridge, MA/London
Kline P (1981) Fact and fantasy in Freudian theory, 2nd edn. Methuen, London/New York
Köhler T (2000) Das Werk Sigmund Freuds. Entstehung – Inhalt – Rezeption. Pabst Science Publishers, Lengerich/Berlin/Riga
Kupfersmid J (1995) Does the Oedipus complex exist? Psychother Theory Res Pract Train 32(4):535–547
Lakatos I (1978) Falsification and the methodology of scientific research programmes. In: Worrall J, Currie G (eds) The methodology of scientific research programmes. Philosophical papers, vol 1. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, pp 8–101
Levy RA, Ablon JS (2009) Evidence-based psychodynamic psychotherapy. Bridging the gap between science and practice. Humana Press, New York
Luborsky L, Singer B, Luborsky L (1975) Comparative studies of psychotherapy. Arch Gen Psychiatry 32:995–1008
Mancia M (2006) Psychoanalysis and neuroscience. Springer, Milan
Masling JM (ed) (1983) Empirical studies of psychoanalytical theories, vol 1. Analytic Press, Hillsdale
Newman WR, Grafton A (2001) Secrets of nature. Astrology and alchemy in early modern Europe. MIT Press, Cambrdige, MA/London
Pongratz LJ (1973) Lehrbuch der klinischen Psychologie. Psychologische Grundlagen der Psychotherapie. Hogrefe, Göttingen
Popper KR (1935) Logik der Forschung. Mohr Siebeck, Tübingen
Popper KR (1963) Conjectures and refutations: the growth of scientific knowledge. Basic Books, New York
Ricœur P (1965) De l’interpretation: essai sur Freud. Edition du Seuil, Paris
Ruse M (1982) Creation science is not science. Sci Technol Hum Values 7(40):72–78
Shedler J (2010) The efficacy of psychodynamic psychotherapy. Am Psychol 65(2):98–109
Smith ML, Glass GV, Miller TI (1980) The benefits of psychotherapy. Johns Hopkins University Press, Baltimore
Strachey J (1966–1974) Standard edition of the complete works of Sigmund Freud. Vol. I-XXIV. Vintage, London
Tschuschke V, Bänninger-Huber E, Faller H et al (1998) Psychotherapy research – how it should (not) be done. An expert reanalysis of comparative studies by Grawe et al. (1994). Psychother Psychosom Med Psychol 48(11):430–444
Uleman JS (2005) Introduction: becoming aware of the new unconscious. In: Hassin RR, Uleman JS, Bargh J (eds) The new unconscious. Oxford University Press, Oxford/New York, pp 3–15
Wallerstein RS (1986) Forty-two lives in treatment: a study in psychoanalysis and psychotherapy. Guilford Press, New York
Westen D (1998) The scientific legacy of Sigmund Freud: toward a psychodynamically informed psychological science. Psychol Bull 124(3):333–371
Wolpe J, Rachman S (1960) Psychoanalytic “evidence”: a critique on Freud’s case of Little Hans. J Nerv Ment Dis 130(8):135–148
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Editor information
Editors and Affiliations
Rights and permissions
Copyright information
© 2015 Springer Science+Business Media Dordrecht
About this entry
Cite this entry
Hoffmann, M. (2015). Psychoanalysis as Science. In: Schramme, T., Edwards, S. (eds) Handbook of the Philosophy of Medicine. Springer, Dordrecht. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-94-017-8706-2_41-1
Download citation
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-94-017-8706-2_41-1
Received:
Accepted:
Published:
Publisher Name: Springer, Dordrecht
Online ISBN: 978-94-017-8706-2
eBook Packages: Springer Reference Religion and PhilosophyReference Module Humanities and Social SciencesReference Module Humanities