Fielding R G, Llewelyn S P
Br J Med Psychol. 1982 Mar;55(Pt 1):13-7. doi: 10.1111/j.2044-8341.1982.tb01476.x.
This paper continues the debate opened by Will (1980), concerning the scientific status of psychoanalysis. A critique is made of Will's paper, on the grounds that it misrepresents the scientific method, and fails to consider appropriate criteria for evaluating psychoanalysis. A defence of Popper, and the importance of prediction as a tool in structuring understanding, is sketched out, and an alternative view of the scientific process which can more adequately encompass the enterprise of psychoanalysis is suggested.
本文延续了威尔（1980年）开启的关于精神分析科学地位的辩论。文中对威尔的论文进行了批判，理由是它歪曲了科学方法，且未能考虑评估精神分析的适当标准。概述了对波普尔的辩护以及预测作为构建理解的工具的重要性，并提出了一种能更充分涵盖精神分析事业的科学过程的替代观点。
