The analyst's knowledge and authority: a critique of the "new view" in psychoanalysis

A critical assessment is presented of positions recently taken by Mitchell and Renik, who are taken as representatives of a "new view" in psychoanalysis. One article by Mitchell and two by Renik are examined as paradigmatic of certain ways of construing the nature of mind, the analyst's knowledge and authority, and the analytic process that are unduly influenced by the postmodern turn in psychoanalysis. Although "new view" theorists have made valid criticisms of traditional psychoanalytic theory and practice, they wind up taking untenable positions. Specifically called into question are their views on the relation between language and interpretation, on the one hand, and the mental contents of the patient on the other. A disjunction is noted between their discussion of clinical material and their conceptual stance, and their idiosyncratic redefinitions of truth and objectivity are criticized. Finally, a "humble realism" is suggested as the most appropriate philosophical position for psychoanalysts to adopt.     

Dumb August. Freud's "dream interpretation" as a critique of traditional common sense]

Freud's profound scepticism about philosophy and its fondness for philosophical "systems" is well-known. From an early stage, the author of the "Interpretation of Dreams" was convinced that philosophy--like animism--was nothing other than a narcissistic attempt to explain the world systematically from one single point. That point is the ego, synthesising everything manifold, alien and threatening into an intelligible mould and subjecting it to the intellectual censorship of the cogito. Gekle shows that Freud's "Interpretation of Dreams" undercuts and decentralizes the imperialist claims of the ego, thus opening up vistas on the areas where the ego is not sole and undisputed master. At the same time, however, it becomes apparent that the decentralizing work of dream interpretation is itself confronted by a paradox. The insights gained in the process cannot be presented in any other than a theoretical, systematic and hence ego-oriented form.     

The psychiatric patient as a person

The dehumanization which is so much a part of a technological society is keenly felt by psychiatric patients. Pastors must treat them with care if they are to recover their personhood. The author suggests certain pastoral approaches intended to reflect the values of the inherent worth of persons and their moral responsibility and right to self-fulfillment. Included in the approach is the need to gather the facts, establish rapport, empathize, listen with love, interpret, and have a plan of action.Professor Barnette is Professor of Christian Ethics Emeritus at the Southern Baptist Theological Seminary. He presently serves as Clinical Professor, Department of Psychiatry, University of Louisville School of Medicine, Louisville, Kentucky 40201.     

Psychology and "ordinary language"—a critique of Smedslund

This article takes up methodological issues of the kind raised by Jan Smedslund in earlier issues of this journal, concerning the status of psychological enquiry as a discipline. Arguments are presented which aim to show that Smedslund has failed to establish the thesis that all generally valid theoretical statements in psychology are explications of conceptual relationships embedded in ordinary language, i.e., analytic statements. Some specific examples of what Smedslund takes to be "ordinary language theorems" are examined. Doubts are expressed concerning the validity of the proof procedure Smedslund employs in the "demonstration" of a number of his alleged theorems. Finally, it is argued that the results produced by the situation-bound and culture-bound empirical research of the psychologist need not be viewed as "arbitrary" in Smedslund's sense of that term.     

The assessment of type a behaviour: A critique

Abstract

The validity of type A behaviour (TAB) as a precursor to heart disease is now increasingly subject to debate. This review examines some issues in the assessment of TAB that may have confused rather than clarified such debate. The status and interrelations between four widely used measures of TAB (Jenkins Activity Survey, Framingham Type A Scale, Bortner Rating Scale, and Structured Interview) are described, and a number of problems in their use discussed, including: differing conceptualisations of TAB, drifting criteria of assessment, failure to obtain accurate self-report of TAB, and difficulties associated with the measurement of TAB in populations other than male non-manual workers. Future research should attempt to obviate such difficulties, while elucidating pathogenic behaviours and attitudes, and how these interact with other variables to increase the risk of heart disease. Finally, the value of a state measure of TAB is discussed.