Hostname: page-component-745bb68f8f-grxwn Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2025-01-26T03:01:32.312Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

A. Grünbaum's The Foundations of Psychoanalysis: A Philosophical Critique

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  01 April 2022

Morris N. Eagle
Morris N. Eagle*
Affiliation:
Department of Psychology, York University
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Extract

This book consists thematically of three broad sections: (1) a lengthy introduction (approximately one third of the book) in which Grünbaum critically assesses the hermeneutic construal of psychoanalysis, as represented in the work of Habermas, G. S. Klein, and Ricoeur; (2) a critical examination of Popper's assessment of both psychoanalysis and inductivism; and (3) a logical analysis of core psychoanalytic ideas that constitute the foundation for much of psychoanalytic theory. This last section is, in my view, the heart of the book and therefore, it is that section on which I will focus in this review.

Type
Critical Notice
Information
Philosophy of Science , Volume 53 , Issue 1 , March 1986 , pp. 65 - 88
Copyright
Copyright © The Philosophy of Science Association 1986

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

Barglow, , (1980), Letter to the Editor. Commentary 74: 6, 10.Google Scholar
Bowlby, J. (1981), “Psychoanalysis as a Natural Science”, International Review of Psychoanalysis 8: 243–56.Google Scholar
Cioffi, F. (1970), “Freud and the Idea of a Pseudo-Science”, in Explanation in the Behavioural Sciences, Borger, R. and Cioffi, F. (eds.). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, pp. 471–99.Google Scholar
Cooper, A. (1984), “Psychoanalysis at One Hundred: Beginning of Maturity”, Journal of the American Psychoanalytic Association 32: 245–67.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Crews, F. (1985), “Beyond Sulloway's Freud: Psychoanalysis Minus the Myth of the Hero”, Paper presented to the Conference on Psychoanalysis and Philosophy of Mind, St. Andrews University, Fife, Scotland, March 17–21, 1985.Google Scholar
Curtis, H. (1983), “Toward a Metapsychology of Transference”, paper presented to the American Psychoanalytic Association, New York.Google Scholar
Dahl, H. (1974), “The Measurement of Meaning in Psychoanalysis by Computer Analysis of Verbal Contexts”, Journal of the American Psychoanalytic Association 22: 37–57.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Dilthey, W. (1961), Meaning in History. Edited by Rickman, H. P. London: Allen and Unwin.Google Scholar
Dixon, N. P. (1958), “Apparent Changes in the Visual Threshold as a Function of Subliminal Stimulation”, Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology 10: 211–15.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Eagle, M. N. (1981), “Interests as Object Relations”, Psychoanalysis and Contemporary Thought 4: 527–65 (Reprinted in Empirical Studies of Psychoanalytical Theories, Vol. 2, J. Masling (ed.). Hillsdale, New Jersey: Erlbaum, 1983, pp. 159–87.)Google Scholar
Eagle, M. N. (1983), “The Epistemological Status of Recent Developments in Psychoanalytic Theory”, in Physics, Philosophy, and Psychoanalysis: Essays in Honor of Adolf Grünbaum, Cohen, R. S. and Laudan, L. (eds.). Dordrecht: D. Reidel.Google Scholar
Eagle, M. N. (1984), Recent Developments in Psychoanalysis: A Critical Evaluation. New York: McGraw-Hill.Google Scholar
Erdelyi, M. H., and Goldberg, B. (1979), “Let's Not Sweep Repression under the Rug. Toward a Cognitive Psychology of Repression”, in Functional Disorders of Memory, Kihlstrom, J. F. and Evans, F. J. (eds.). Hillsdale, New Jersey: Erlbaum.Google Scholar
Erwin, E. (1985), “Experimental Studies of Freudian Theory”, Paper presented at annual meetings of Society of Philosophy and Psychology, May 15–19, Toronto, Canada.Google Scholar
Eysenck, H. J. (1985), Review of A. Grünbaum's The Foundations of Psychoanalysis: A Philosophical Critique. Behavior Research and Therapy 23: 89–90.Google Scholar
Fantz, R. L. (1958), “Pattern Vision in Young Infants”, Psychological Records 8: 43–47.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Fantz, R. L. (1965), “Visual Perception from Birth as Shown by Pattern Selectivity”, Annals of the New York Academy of Science 118: 793–814.Google ScholarPubMed
Fantz, R. L., and Fagan, J. F. (1975), “Visual Attention to Size and Number of Pattern Details by Term and Pre-Term Infants during the First Six Months”, Child Development 46: 3–18.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Farrell, B. A. (1981), The Standing of Psychoanalysis. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Fisher, S., and Greenberg, R. P. (1978), The Scientific Evaluation of Freud's Theories and Therapy. New York: Basic Books.Google Scholar
Freud, S. [1900] (1953), The Interpretation of Dreams. Standard edition. Vols. 4 and 5. London: Hogarth Press.Google Scholar
Freud, S. [1901] (1960), The Psychopathology of Everyday Life. Standard edition. Vol. 6. London: Hogarth Press.Google Scholar
Freud, S. [1915] (1957), Instincts and Their Vicissitudes. Standard edition. Vol. 14. London: Hogarth Press, pp. 117–40.Google Scholar
Freud, S. [1917] (1963), Introductory Lectures on Psychoanalysis. Standard edition. Vol. 16. London: Hogarth Press.Google Scholar
Friedman, S.; Bruno, L. A.; and Vietze, T. (1974), “Newborn Habituation to Visual Stimuli: A Sex Difference in Novelty Detection”, Journal of Experimental Child Psychology 18: 242–51.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Gedo, J. (1984), Letter to the Editor, Review of Psychoanalytic Books 3: 511–15.Google Scholar
Geha, R. (1984), “On Psychoanalytic History and the Real Story of Fictitious Lives”, International Forum for Psychoanalysis 1: 221–91.Google Scholar
Gill, M. M., and Hoffman, I. Z. (1982), “A Method of Studying the Analysis of Aspects of the Patient's Experience of the Relationship in Psychoanalysis and Psychotherapy”, Journal of the American Psychoanalytic Association 30: 137–67.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Greenson, R. R. (1967), The Technique and Practice of Psychoanalysis. Vol. 1. New York: International Universities Press.Google Scholar
Grünbaum, A. (1980), “Epistemological Liabilities of the Clinical Appraisal of Psychoanalytic Theory”, Noûs 14: 307–85.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Grünbaum, A. (1982), “Can Psychoanalytic Theory Be Cogently Tested ‘on the Couch‘?”, Psychoanalysis and Contemporary Thought 5: 155–255, 311–436.Google Scholar
Habermas, J. (1971), Knowledge and Human Interests. Transi. by J. J. Shapiro. Boston: Beacon Press.Google Scholar
Harlow, H. F. (1958), “The Nature of Love”, American Psychologist 13: 673–85.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Holt, R. R. (forthcoming), “Some Reflections on Testing Psychoanalytic Hypotheses: A fragmentary review of Adolf Grünbaum's The Foundations of Psychoanalysis: A Philosophical Critique”, The Behavioral and Brain Sciences.Google Scholar
Holt, R. R. (1976), “Drive or Wish? A Reconsideration of the Psychoanalytic Theory of Motivation”, in Psychology Versus Metapsychology: Psychoanalytic Essays in Memory of George S. Klein, Gill, M. M. and Holzman, P. S. (eds.). New York: International Universities Press.Google Scholar
Holzman, P. S. (1976), “The Future of Psychoanalysis and Its Institutes”, Psychoanalytic Quarterly 55: 250–73.Google Scholar
Hull, C. L. (1943), Principles of Behavior. New York: Appleton-Century-Crofts.Google Scholar
Kline, P. (1981), Fact and Fantasy in Freudian Theory. Second Edition. London: Methuen.Google Scholar
Kohut, H. (1971), Analysis of the Self. New York: International Universities Press.Google Scholar
Kohut, H. (1977), The Restoration of the Self. New York: International Universities Press.Google Scholar
Lieberson, J. (1985), “Putting Freud to the Test”, New York Review of Books 32: 24–28.Google Scholar
Luborsky, L.; Mellon, J.; van Ravenswaay, P.; Childress, A. R.; Levine, F. J.; Alexander, K.; Cohen, K. D.; Hole, A.; and Ming, S. (forthcoming), “A Verification of Freud's Grandest Clinical Hypothesis: The Transference”, Clinical Psychology Review.Google Scholar
Masling, J., and Cohen, J. S. (forthcoming), “Psychotherapy, Clinical Evidence, and the Self-Fulfilling Prophecy”, Psychoanalytic Psychology.Google Scholar
Motley, M. T. (1980), “Verification of ‘Freudian slips’ and Semantic Prearticulatory Editing via Laboratory Induced Spoonerisms”, in Editing in Linquistic Performance: Slips of the Tongue, Ear, Pen, and Hand, Fromkin, V. A. (ed.). New York: Academic Press, pp. 133–47.Google Scholar
Murray, E. J. (1956), “A Content-Analysis Method for Studying Psychotherapy”, Psychological Monographs 70: whole no. 420.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Peterfreund, E. (1971), Information Systems, and Psychoanalysis. New York: International Universities Press. (Psychological Issues, Vol. 7, Monograph 25/26.)Google Scholar
Popper, K. R. (1972), Objective Knowledge: An Evolutionary Approach. London: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Ricoeur, P. (1974). The Conflict of Interpretations. Edited by Ihde, D. Evanston, Illinois: Northwestern University Press.Google Scholar
Robinson, N. D. (1979), Systems of Modern Psychology: A Critical Sketch. New York: Columbia University Press. New Haven: Yale University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Spence, D. P. (1982), Historical Truth and Narrative Truth. New York: W. W. Norton.Google Scholar
Spence, D. P. (1984), “Narrative persuasion”, Psychoanalysis and Contemporary Thought 17: 457–81.Google Scholar
Traux, C. (1966), “Reinforcement and Nonreinforcement in Rogerian Psychotherapy”, Journal of Abnormal Psychology 71: 1–9.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Weiss, J.; Sampson, H.; Caston, J.; and Silberschatz, G. (1977), “Research on the Psychoanalytic Process I: A Comparison of Two Themes about Analytic Neutrality”, the Psychotherapy Research Group, Department of Psychiatry, Mount Zion Hospital and Medical Center, Bulletin No. 3.Google Scholar
Wittgenstein, L.von (1967), Lectures and Conversations in Aesthetics, Psychology, and Religious Belief. Berkeley and Los Angeles: University of California Press.Google Scholar
Zamansky, H. S. (1958), “An Investigation of the Psychoanalytic Theory of Paranoid Delusions”, Journal of Personality 26: 410–25.CrossRefGoogle Scholar