Reiche R
Psyche (Stuttg). 1995 Mar;49(3):227-58.
The attempt first instituted by Freud to use the instruments of psychoanalysis to improve understanding not only of the individual but also of society as a whole has a long tradition, particularly in Germany. Reviewing the last thirty years of discourse on the range of the applicability of psychoanalysis in this context, the author comes to the conclusion that the fruits of this discussion are negligible. Reiche distinguishes five major lines of discourse to illustrate this failure to establish the relevance of a psychoanalytic approach to illuminating the "out-side" world: the first is one of assimilation and desiccation, reference here being to psychoanalytic culture critique; the second a pathological reaction of collective grieving bound up with the Critical Theory; the third the aggressive rebuffs levelled at psychoanalytic insights by systems theory; the fourth a line of devaluation and usurpation as represented by post-structuralism and deconstructionism. In the fifth and final strand of psychoanalytic application discourse discernible in the theory of communicative action, the author discerns a tentative new rapprochement between sociology and psychoanalysis. The author's final conclusion is that psychoanalysis is suitable for the perspective on the inside world, while the outside world is beyond the scope of psychoanalytic theory.
弗洛伊德率先尝试运用精神分析工具,不仅用以增进对个体的理解,还试图提升对整个社会的认识,这有着悠久的传统,在德国尤为如此。回顾过去三十年在这一背景下有关精神分析适用性范围的论述,作者得出结论,这场讨论的成果微不足道。赖歇区分出五条主要论述脉络,以说明未能确立精神分析方法对于阐释“外部”世界的相关性:第一条是同化与干涸脉络,这里指的是精神分析文化批判;第二条是与批判理论相关的集体哀悼的病理反应;第三条是系统理论对精神分析见解的激烈驳斥;第四条是以后结构主义和解构主义为代表的贬低与篡夺脉络。在第五条也是最后一条可在交往行动理论中辨识出的精神分析应用论述脉络中,作者察觉到社会学与精神分析之间一种试探性的新和解。作者的最终结论是,精神分析适用于对内心世界的洞察,而外部世界超出了精神分析理论的范畴。