Skip to content

A cat is not a battleship: thoughts on the meaning of "neuropsychoanalysis".

Brett H Clarke

The International Journal of Psychoanalysis April 2018 DOI: 10.1080/00207578.2017.1399064 (opens in new tab)

Study at a glance

AI-extracted from the abstract
Characteristics Theoretical or philosophical paper Peer reviewed
Topics Philosophy of mind
Keywords Hermeneutic Epistemology Neuropsychoanalysis Scientism Subjectivity
Key points Argues that neuropsychoanalytic writers acknowledge but then disregard the irreducible nature of lived experience and the fundamental differences between the psychoanalytic mind and the brain. Contends that misrecognizing neuroscience's differences and employing it as a psychoanalytic partner to answer questions proper to psychoanalysis poses potential dangers for psychoanalysis.

Abstract

As a conspicuously hybrid entity, neuropsychoanalysis enjoins one to look critically at its assumptions about knowledge and subjectivity as one tries to understand how its un-hyphenated halves relate to one another. The author looks at the differences between mind (which is grounded in subjective experience) and brain (which is an objectively described neurobiological entity), and suggests that neuropsychoanalytic writers are inclined to acknowledge but then disregard the unique, irreducible nature of lived experience, and the fundamental differences between the psychoanalytic mind (which requires an experiencing subject) and the brain (which is a neuronal aggregate). The author offers a philosophical basis for contending that there are potential dangers for psychoanalysis when neuroscience is misrecognized in its fundamental differences and injudiciously employed as a psychoanalytic partner in order to answer questions that properly belong to the language and conceptual architecture of psychoanalysis.

Comparable studies

Other theoretical and historical papers on philosophy of mind, most cited first.

Citations in the library

Explore topics