Suppr超能文献

迈向临床精神分析的认识论。

Toward an epistemology of clinical psychoanalysis.

作者信息

Ahumada J L

机构信息

Buenos Aires Psychoanalytic Association.

出版信息

J Am Psychoanal Assoc. 1997;45(2):507-30. doi: 10.1177/00030651970450020201.

Abstract

Epistemology emerges from the study of the ways knowledge is gained in the different fields of scientific endeavor. Current polemics on the nature of psychoanalytic knowledge involve counterposed misconceptions of the nature of mind. On one side clinical psychoanalysis is under siege from philosophical "hard science" stalwarts who, upholding as the unitary model of scientific knowledge of Galilean model of science built around the "well-behaved" variables of mechanics and cosmology, argue clinical psychoanalysis does not meet empirical criteria for the validation of its claims. On the other side, its empirical character is renounced by hermeneuticists who, agreeing with "hard science" advocates on what science is, dismiss the animal nature of human beings and hold that clinical psychoanalysis is not an empirical science but a "human" interpretive one. Taking Adolf Grünbaum's critique as its referent, this paper examines how, by ignoring the differences between "exact" and observational science, the "hard science" demand for well-behaved variables misconstrues the nature of events in the realm of mind. Criteria for an epistemology fit for the facts of clinical psychoanalysis as an empirical, observational science of mind are then proposed.

摘要

认识论源自对不同科学研究领域中获取知识方式的研究。当前关于精神分析知识本质的论战涉及对心智本质的相互对立的误解。一方面,临床精神分析受到哲学“硬科学”坚定支持者的围攻,他们秉持以力学和宇宙学中“表现良好”的变量构建的伽利略科学模型作为科学知识的统一模型,认为临床精神分析不符合其主张验证的实证标准。另一方面,诠释学家摒弃了其经验特征,诠释学家在科学是什么的问题上与“硬科学”倡导者观点一致,忽视人类的动物性,认为临床精神分析不是一门经验科学,而是一门“人文”解释性科学。以阿道夫·格林鲍姆的批判为参照,本文考察了“硬科学”对表现良好变量的要求如何通过忽视“精确”科学与观测科学之间的差异而误解了心智领域中事件的本质。随后提出了一种适用于临床精神分析这一作为心智经验性观测科学事实的认识论标准。

文献AI研究员

20分钟写一篇综述,助力文献阅读效率提升50倍。

立即体验

用中文搜PubMed

大模型驱动的PubMed中文搜索引擎

马上搜索

文档翻译

学术文献翻译模型,支持多种主流文档格式。

立即体验