In AnalysisPub Date : 2023-09-01DOI: 10.1016/j.inan.2023.100378
J.C. Wakefield
{"title":"Anti-Oedipus from philosophy of science and Foucauldian knowledge-power perspectives","authors":"J.C. Wakefield","doi":"10.1016/j.inan.2023.100378","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1016/j.inan.2023.100378","url":null,"abstract":"<div><h3>Background</h3><p>Freud identified his theory of the Oedipus complex<span><span> as his greatest scientific contribution, made it the centerpiece of his clinical theory of the etiology and cure of the psychoneuroses<span>, and adamantly defended it throughout his life. The theory dominated psychoanalysis for almost a century and determined how the problems of countless patients were interpreted. However, recent scholarship suggests that the arguments Freud used to support the theory are unsound and that, far from being harmless pseudoscience, the Oedipal theory constitutes an oppressive form of Foucauldian “knowledge-power” that rearranges </span></span>family relationships in sociosyntonic but emotionally harmful ways. Continued identification of psychoanalysis with Oedipal theory poses an obstacle to fresh psychoanalytic thinking and psychoanalytic credibility. To liberate psychoanalysis from its Oedipal shackles, a clear understanding of the theory's faulty origins and deleterious effects is essential.</span></p></div><div><h3>Objectives and methods</h3><p>This paper distills the conclusions of two recent books that consider how and why Freud staunchly defended the Oedipal theory and the deleterious effects on the modern family that resulted. After the failure of his seduction theory, Freud developed the Oedipal theory to defend his central theoretical claim, the sexual theory of the neuroses. However, the Oedipal theory remained an entirely ad hoc, scientifically unpersuasive defense without novel evidential support less dependent on psychoanalytic method, which had also been cast into doubt by the seduction theory's failure. Freud attempted to provide such “more direct” evidence in the case of Little Hans, on which my analysis focuses. Regarding the evaluation of Freud's evidence, the method is philosophy-of-science logical reconstruction, analysis, and evaluation of the arguments Freud offered. Regarding the theory's effects, the method is neo-Foucauldian analysis of how acceptance of the theory changed family power relations — that is, the theory's knowledge-power.</p></div><div><h3>Results</h3><p>I identify four pivotal arguments Freud presents in the Hans case to support Oedipal theory. Each argument is brilliant as a logical construction but unsound when compared to the evidence of the Hans case history. I then analyze the knowledge-power of the Oedipal theory as it appears in the Hans case as well as in modern family life. Acceptance or awareness of the theory serves to create a sense of danger in mother-son physical affection, leading to separation of children from parents — especially at bedtime — and thus protection of the marital bed in the new era of egalitarian sexual and emotional marriage that started at about the time that the Oedipal theory was proposed.</p></div><div><h3>Conclusions</h3><p><span>Freud's arguments defending Oedipal theory are brilliantly conceived, but Freud misreads the facts of the Hans case so tha","PeriodicalId":100661,"journal":{"name":"In Analysis","volume":"7 2","pages":"Article 100378"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2023-09-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"50199077","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
In AnalysisPub Date : 2023-09-01DOI: 10.1016/j.inan.2023.100367
Lili Fevre
{"title":"Œdipe ou le savoir qui condamne","authors":"Lili Fevre","doi":"10.1016/j.inan.2023.100367","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1016/j.inan.2023.100367","url":null,"abstract":"<div><h3>Context</h3><p>This article is a study at the temporal and thematic intersection of the treatment of the myth of Oedipus in theater. It is based on dramatic works from the Antiquity to the contemporary period. This article does not claim to make a relevant contribution to a purely psychological (or psychoanalytic) debate. However, as Jean-Pierre Vernant maintains, dramaturgical study provides a transdisciplinary perspective necessary for reflection.</p></div><div><h3>Goals</h3><p>Echoing the words of Hervé Castanet “Psychoanalysis does not give air to literature - on the contrary, when applied, it stops questions and problems” (himself inspired by Lacan's remarks in “Lituraterre”), this study seeks to highlight the plurality and richness of the questions asked by different playwrights. Based on the words of Christiane Page “we do not know what an author wanted to say, we are faced with what he has written, and the links that are woven between the work and its reception depend as much on its artistic approach as well as the reading which is made of it” we will thus seek to demonstrate the restrictive aspect of the Freudian interpretation of the myth of Oedipus.</p></div><div><h3>Method</h3><p>This article presents itself as a comparative dramaturgical analysis of the rewritings of the myth, enriched by theoretical contributions from plural disciplinary horizons: philosophical, aesthetic and anthropological.</p></div><div><h3>Results</h3><p>The study of dramatic works allows us to put the Oedipus complex and its myth into perspective. The dramaturgical analysis proposes to go beyond the Freudian understanding of the myth and the character but also acts as a witness to social and societal developments and the impact of the theorization of the complex.</p></div><div><h3>Interpretations</h3><p>The myth, a tragedy of heredity, goes beyond the complex, depicting an Oedipus victim of destiny and himself and questioning the notion of responsibility. The myth seeks to portray human duality through the representation of an Oedipus with an ambivalent image, going beyond his popular image.</p></div>","PeriodicalId":100661,"journal":{"name":"In Analysis","volume":"7 2","pages":"Article 100367"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2023-09-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"50199082","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
In AnalysisPub Date : 2023-09-01DOI: 10.1016/j.inan.2023.100372
J.C. Wakefield
{"title":"L’anti-Œdipe du point de vue de la philosophie des sciences et des perspectives foucaldiennes du savoir-pouvoir","authors":"J.C. Wakefield","doi":"10.1016/j.inan.2023.100372","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1016/j.inan.2023.100372","url":null,"abstract":"<div><h3>Background</h3><p>Freud identified his theory of the Oedipus complex as his greatest scientific contribution, made it the centerpiece of his clinical theory of the etiology and cure of the psychoneuroses, and adamantly defended it throughout his life. The theory dominated psychoanalysis for almost a century and determined how the problems of countless patients were interpreted. However, recent scholarship suggests that the arguments Freud used to support the theory are unsound and that, far from being harmless pseudoscience, the Oedipal theory constitutes an oppressive form of Foucauldian “knowledge-power” that rearranges family relationships in sociosyntonic but emotionally harmful ways. Continued identification of psychoanalysis with Oedipal theory poses an obstacle to fresh psychoanalytic thinking and psychoanalytic credibility. To liberate psychoanalysis from its Oedipal shackles, a clear understanding of the theory's faulty origins and deleterious effects is essential.</p></div><div><h3>Objectives and methods</h3><p>This paper distills the conclusions of two recent books that consider how and why Freud staunchly defended the Oedipal theory and the deleterious effects on the modern family that resulted. After the failure of his seduction theory, Freud developed the Oedipal theory to defend his central theoretical claim, the sexual theory of neuroses. However, the Oedipal theory remained an entirely ad hoc, scientifically unpersuasive defense without novel evidential support less dependent on psychoanalytic method, which had also been cast into doubt by the seduction theory's failure. Freud attempted to provide such “more direct” evidence in the case of Little Hans, on which my analysis focuses. Regarding the evaluation of Freud's evidence, the method is philosophy-of-science logical reconstruction, analysis, and evaluation of the arguments Freud offered. Regarding the theory's effects, the method is neo-Foucauldian analysis of how acceptance of the theory changed family power relations — that is, the theory's knowledge-power.</p></div><div><h3>Results</h3><p>I identify four pivotal arguments Freud presents in the Hans case to support Oedipal theory. Each argument is brilliant as a logical construction but unsound when compared to the evidence of the Hans case history. I then analyze the knowledge-power of the Oedipal theory as it appears in the Hans case as well as in modern family life. Acceptance or awareness of the theory serves to create a sense of danger in mother-son physical affection, leading to separation of children from parents — especially at bedtime — and thus protection of the marital bed in the new era of egalitarian sexual and emotional marriage that started at about the time that Oedipal theory was proposed.</p></div><div><h3>Conclusions</h3><p>Freud's arguments defending Oedipal theory are brilliantly conceived, but Freud misreads the facts of the Hans case so that his arguments are unsound. In failing to confirm no","PeriodicalId":100661,"journal":{"name":"In Analysis","volume":"7 2","pages":"Article 100372"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2023-09-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"50199074","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
In AnalysisPub Date : 2023-09-01DOI: 10.1016/j.inan.2023.100363
Brent Adkins
{"title":"Anti-Oedipus: Metaphysics and method","authors":"Brent Adkins","doi":"10.1016/j.inan.2023.100363","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1016/j.inan.2023.100363","url":null,"abstract":"<div><h3>Context</h3><p><span>This article is a philosophical reflection on Gilles Deleuze and Félix Guattari's critique of psychoanalysis and its relation to clinical practice. It draws on Guattari's clinical practice at La Borde as well as his philosophical collaboration with Deleuze, particularly their co-authored work </span><em>Anti-Oedipus</em>. First published in 1972, the book was written in the wake of the May, 1968 upheavels in France and focuses, in particular, on the interconnection between psychoanalysis and capitalism. The author is a philosopher working at the intersection of philosophical history and politics from within a Deleuzian framework. While <em>Anti-Oedipus</em> was seen as the liberatory, theoretical underpinning for some political movements in Europe and South America, it has also been deployed by Accelerationist theorists to intensify capitalist hegemony. Later works by Deleuze and Guattari, such as <em>A Thousand Plateaus</em>, counsel more prudence. This shift in tone has raised interpretive issues, as well as issues of praxis. Thus, while it remains clear that Deleuze and Guattari are arguing for liberation and the creation of the new throughout their work, the means of pursuing this remain underdetermined.</p></div><div><h3>Objectives</h3><p>This article has two primary objectives. This first objective is to show that Deleuze and Guattari's critique of Oedipus arises out of Guattari's clinical practice. This critique of Oedipus is in line with Deleuze's critique of the history of philosophy and necessitates the creation of a new metaphysics to ground not only clinical practice but thought in general. The second objective is to show what method Deleuze and Guattari propose for replacing psychoanalysis. A method they call “schizoanalysis.”</p></div><div><h3>Method</h3><p>Qualitative. A single case study is used as an illustration and framework to organize the explication of Deleuze and Guattari's argument in <em>Anti-Oedipus</em>.</p></div><div><h3>Results</h3><p>The critique of psychoanalysis creates space for a new, liberatory praxis. The fundamental principles of schizoanalysis are outlined.</p></div><div><h3>Interpretations</h3><p>The primary limitation of this study is that it is focused entirely on theoretical foundations. Future work would need to incorporate an analysis of empirical data, not only in relation to the history of La Borde Clinic and its outposts but also of current therapeutic regimes.</p></div>","PeriodicalId":100661,"journal":{"name":"In Analysis","volume":"7 2","pages":"Article 100363"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2023-09-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"50199532","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
In AnalysisPub Date : 2023-09-01DOI: 10.1016/j.inan.2023.100362
G. Bray, P. Molinier, O. Ouvry
{"title":"Arguments pour une psychanalyse située","authors":"G. Bray, P. Molinier, O. Ouvry","doi":"10.1016/j.inan.2023.100362","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1016/j.inan.2023.100362","url":null,"abstract":"<div><h3>Context</h3><p>In this theoretical article, the authors discuss the possibilities of a post-oedipal psychoanalysis and a beyond the notion of sexual difference.</p></div><div><h3>Objective</h3><p>The aim is to question a certain form of bipartite thinking present in psychoanalytical theory, in order to integrate current clinical problematics.</p></div><div><h3>Method</h3><p>Within the framework of a theoretical exploratory work based on a literature review, the notion of sexual difference is subjected to criticism by crossing studies on gender and sexualities with a reading of the Oedipus complex.</p></div><div><h3>Results</h3><p>A psychoanalysis situated in its theoretical-clinical elaboration could thus allow a queered psychoanalysis; being situated then means assuming the political dimension of concepts and their effects on praxis.</p></div><div><h3>Interpretation</h3><p>The thesis defended is that psychoanalysis can de-referentialize the notion of sexual difference from its theory without losing its identity. Not necessarily doing without, but making it more complex.</p></div>","PeriodicalId":100661,"journal":{"name":"In Analysis","volume":"7 2","pages":"Article 100362"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2023-09-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"50199533","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
In AnalysisPub Date : 2023-09-01DOI: 10.1016/j.inan.2023.100361
P.-J. Chantepie
{"title":"Le complexe d’œdipe : un organisateur temporel toujours actuel","authors":"P.-J. Chantepie","doi":"10.1016/j.inan.2023.100361","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1016/j.inan.2023.100361","url":null,"abstract":"<div><h3>Context</h3><p>This article prolongs questions raised in the author's doctoral thesis. It engages with contemporary psychoanalytical research that questions the psychic modalities that organize the relationship to time and the subjective inscription of temporality, within the framework of the processes that begin at the time of puberty. These processes operate, in fact, as fertile moments of reorganization and psychic organization of the relationship to time of individuals.</p></div><div><h3>Objective</h3><p>Based on the psychoanalytical works carried out since Freud as well as his own elaborations, the author underlines the importance of considering the Oedipus complex in its double valence, as a psychic organizer of the difference between the sexes and between the generations - this second valence having been very often left in the background compared to the first one. This psychoanalytic reading of the Oedipus complex, in its dual register, is set against other perspectives (gender studies and the historical study of myths).</p></div><div><h3>Method</h3><p>Starting from the fundamental texts in the Freudian corpus and completing them with contributions from contemporary psychoanalysis, and illustrating this with a clinical vignette, the author underlines the heuristic value of recourse to the Oedipal myth as a representation of subjective and inter-subjective temporal organization.</p></div><div><h3>Results</h3><p>In the wake of contemporary psychoanalytical research, the author's work demonstrates the interest of thinking about the place of the Oedipus complex as a psychic organizer of the relationship to time – the psychic modalities of investment in time appearing, in themselves, as organizers of psychic life. This is done from a complementarian perspective, which does not exclude other approaches to the problem.</p></div><div><h3>Conclusions</h3><p>This reflection invites us to think about the complexity of the Oedipal myth in order not to reduce it to its gendered dimension. If social and societal evolutions, as well as the anthropological context, must lead us to reexamine the value of our conceptual tools and their limits, the Oedipus complex as a nodal organizer must be grasped here in all its dimensions – sexual and temporal. As the author's reflections draw on clinical work with juvenile psychopathology, they deserve to be completed and discussed in the light of other complementary fields.</p></div>","PeriodicalId":100661,"journal":{"name":"In Analysis","volume":"7 2","pages":"Article 100361"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2023-09-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"50199535","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
In AnalysisPub Date : 2023-09-01DOI: 10.1016/j.inan.2023.100383
J. Benjamin
{"title":"Un autre regard sur l’énigme du sexe : l’excès et l’affect à la lumière de la complémentarité des sexes","authors":"J. Benjamin","doi":"10.1016/j.inan.2023.100383","DOIUrl":"10.1016/j.inan.2023.100383","url":null,"abstract":"<div><h3>Context</h3><p>This article traces the history of my efforts to understand how binary gender signifiers organise the otherness of sexuality; to analyse the tension of bearing the tension of sexuality with regard to the regulation of affect and the theory of recognition.</p></div><div><h3>Objectives</h3><p>The core of this work has been an effort to establish a place in intersubjective and relational thought for sexuality.</p></div><div><h3>Method</h3><p>To do this, I locate the origins of our stance toward sexual arousal in experiences of the early mother-child dyad and following the traces of this model into gender complementarity.</p></div><div><h3>Results</h3><p>The clinical sequelae of early dysregulation should be noted: the effects of unacknowledged distress, abandonment and overstimulation on adult sexuality. We have explored how the inability to tolerate sexual arousal and the affect of arousal, the “overflow”, reflects the failures of the mother-baby relationship. The marks of these failures are apparent when they emerge in the clinical staging of transference-countertransference.</p></div><div><h3>Interpretations</h3><p>The constant tension between intrapsychic fantasy and intersubjective procedural work in the transferential matrix should be emphasised. The interweaving of these two layers is visible in the fantasies that – at once – mask and reveal the intersubjective failures of regulation and recognition. These fantasies are shaped by the gender metaphors used to deal with the enigmatic message.</p></div>","PeriodicalId":100661,"journal":{"name":"In Analysis","volume":"7 2","pages":"Article 100383"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2023-09-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"135736677","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
求助内容：
应助结果提醒方式：
京公网安备 11010802042870号
