Why is psychoanalysis not a pseudoscience? On the new epistemological bases of psychoanalysis
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.25118/2763-9037.2022.v12.283Keywords:
psychoanalysis, epistemology, scienceAbstract
Introduction: The discussion about the scientific character of psychoanalysis persists throughout these more than one hundred years of its emergence from the work of Freud. Freud himself maintained that psychoanalysis was a science. However, psychoanalysis gained new contours and generally abandoned scientificity as its central point. Objective: In this paper I want to show that this moves psychoanalysis away from a status of pseudoscience and invites us to think about its epistemic basis in new epistemological approaches. Method: To accomplish this task, I will discuss the article by Ferreira CMC, which argues that psychoanalysis is a pseudoscience, to show its epistemic and semantic limits. Conclusion: I will show that psychoanalysis is a form of theoretical and clinical knowledge that is associated with a philosophy of desire whose development focuses on a hermeneutic analysis of the way we organize our libidinal economy.
Downloads
Metrics
References
FERREIRA CMC. Será a psicanálise uma pseudociência? Reavaliando a doutrina utilizando uma lista de multicritério. Debates em Psiquiatria. 2021;11:1-33 https://doi.org/10.25118/2763-9037.2021.v11.58
POPPER K. A demarcação entre ciência e metafísica. In: CARRILHO, MM, organizadores. Epistemologia: Posições e Críticas. Lisboa: Fundação Calouste Gulbekian; 1999.
HANSSON SO. Defining Pseudoscience and Science. In: PIGLIUCCI, M., BOUDRY, M, editores. Philosophy of Pseudoscience: Reconsidering the Demarcation Problem. Chicago e London: The University of Chicago Press; 2013. p. 6178. https://doi.org/10.7208/chicago/9780226051826.001.0001
FREUD S. Projeto para uma psicologia cientifica (1895). In: ______. Obras psicológicas completas de Sigmund Freud. Rio de Janeiro: Imago; 1996. (Edição Standard Brasileira, v. 1, p. 381-517).
ASSOUN P. Introdução à epistemologia freudiana. Rio de Janeiro: Imago; 1983.
BEZERRA B. Projeto para uma psicologia científica: Freud e as neurociências. São Paulo: Civilização brasileira; 2013.
SCHLICK M. Positivismus und Realismus. Erkenntnis. 1932;3:1-31. https://doi.org/10.1007/BF01886406
QUINE WVO. Two dogma of empirism. The Philosophical Review. 1951;60(1):20-43. https://doi.org/10.2307/2181906
FRAASSEN B. A imagem ciência. Tradução Luiz Dutra. São Paulo: Unesp; 2007.
KUHN TS. A estrutura das revoluções cientificas. São Paulo: Perspectiva; 2006.
HUME D. Investigação do entendimento humano. São Paulo: Hedra; 2021.
MEZAN R. O Tronco e os ramos. São Paulo: Companhia das Letras; 2015.
LOPARIC, Z. De Freud a Winnicott: aspectos de uma mudança paradigmática. Winnicott E-Prints. 2006;5(1):1-29. http://www.interleft.com.br/loparic/zeljko/pdfs/freuwinniAspectos_117.pdf
FREUD S. O Mal estar na civilização. Tradução Paulo Souza. São Paulo: Companhia das Letras; 2010.
FREUD S. O Inconsciente. Tradução Paulo Souza. São Paulo: Companhia das Letras; 2010.
Ricoeur P. Finitud y culpabilidad. Tradução José L. Aranguren. Madri: Taurus; 1982.
BUTLER J. Relatar a si mesmo: crítica da violência ética. São Paulo: Autêntica; 2015.
FREUD S. Psicologia das Massas e Análise do Ego. Tradução Paulo Souza. São Paulo: Companhia das Letras; 2010.
SOLMS M. The Hidden Spring: A Journey to the Source of Consciousness. London: Porfile Book LTD; 2021. https://doi.org/10.53765/20512201.28.11.153
BEZERRA BC. Neurociências e psicanálise: definindo discordâncias para construir o diálogo. Revista da Associação Psicanalítica de Porto Alegre. 2010;38:145-159.
Downloads
Published
How to Cite
Issue
Section
License
Copyright (c) 2022 Érico Andrade Marques de Oliveira
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial 4.0 International License.
Debates em Psiquiatria allows the author (s) to keep their copyrights unrestricted. Allows the author (s) to retain their publication rights without restriction. Authors should ensure that the article is an original work without fabrication, fraud or plagiarism; does not infringe any copyright or right of ownership of any third party. Authors should also ensure that each one complies with the authorship requirements as recommended by the ICMJE and understand that if the article or part of it is flawed or fraudulent, each author shares responsibility.
Attribution-NonCommercial 4.0 International (CC BY-NC 4.0) - Debates em Psiquiatria is governed by the licencse CC-By-NC
You are free to:
- Share — copy and redistribute the material in any medium or format
- Adapt — remix, transform, and build upon the material
The licensor cannot revoke these freedoms as long as you follow the license terms. Under the following terms:
- Attribution — You must give appropriate credit, provide a link to the license, and indicate if changes were made. You may do so in any reasonable manner, but not in any way that suggests the licensor endorses you or your use.
- NonCommercial — You may not use the material for commercial purposes.
No additional restrictions — You may not apply legal terms or technological measures that legally restrict others from doing anything the license permits.
