Format

Send to

Choose Destination
See comment in PubMed Commons below
Int J Psychoanal. 2015 Dec;96(6):1515-53. doi: 10.1111/1745-8315.12332. Epub 2015 Jul 30.

The case for neuropsychoanalysis: Why a dialogue with neuroscience is necessary but not sufficient for psychoanalysis.

Author information

  • 1Institute for the Study of Affective Neuroscience, University of Haifa, Israel. yovell@research.haifa.ac.il.
  • 2Department of Psychology, University of Cape Town, South Africa. Mark.Solms@uct.ac.za.
  • 3Psychoanalysis Unit, Clinical, Educational and Healthy Psychology, Division of Psychology and Language Sciences, University College London, UK. a.fotopoulou@ucl.ac.uk.

Abstract

Recent advances in the cognitive, affective and social neurosciences have enabled these fields to study aspects of the mind that are central to psychoanalysis. These developments raise a number of possibilities for psychoanalysis. Can it engage the neurosciences in a productive and mutually enriching dialogue without compromising its own integrity and unique perspective? While many analysts welcome interdisciplinary exchanges with the neurosciences, termed neuropsychoanalysis, some have voiced concerns about their potentially deleterious effects on psychoanalytic theory and practice. In this paper we outline the development and aims of neuropsychoanalysis, and consider its reception in psychoanalysis and in the neurosciences. We then discuss some of the concerns raised within psychoanalysis, with particular emphasis on the epistemological foundations of neuropsychoanalysis. While this paper does not attempt to fully address the clinical applications of neuropsychoanalysis, we offer and discuss a brief case illustration in order to demonstrate that neuroscientific research findings can be used to enrich our models of the mind in ways that, in turn, may influence how analysts work with their patients. We will conclude that neuropsychoanalysis is grounded in the history of psychoanalysis, that it is part of the psychoanalytic worldview, and that it is necessary, albeit not sufficient, for the future viability of psychoanalysis.

KEYWORDS:

Freud; cognitive neuroscience; dual-aspect monism; interdisciplinary dialogue; meaning; mind-body problem; neuropsychoanalysis; subjectivity

PMID:
26227821
DOI:
10.1111/1745-8315.12332
[PubMed - indexed for MEDLINE]
PubMed Commons home

PubMed Commons

0 comments
How to join PubMed Commons

    Supplemental Content

    Full text links

    Icon for Wiley
    Loading ...
    Support Center