Refine
Psychoanalysis, religion, philosophy and the possibility for dialogue: Freud, Binswanger and Pfister
(2012)
This article considers the longstanding disciplinary tensions between psychoanalysis, religion, and philosophy. It argues for a cross-disciplinary understanding of human experience by examining the relationship of Sigmund Freud to his two Swiss colleagues, Ludwig Binswanger and Oskar Pfister. In contrast to Freud's avowed atheism and pronounced ambivalence on philosophy, Binswanger and Pfister both professed a strong religious sensibility and philosophical outlook. The article juxtaposes their theoretical divergences on religion and philosophy with personal interactions and correspondence. The relationship of Freud to Binswanger and Pfister is instructive for understanding the historical and contemporary interaction of psychoanalytic theory and practice with other disciplines and diverse viewpoints. The dialogical spirit that connects the three protagonists constitutes a critical engagement with learning and is essential to psychoanalysis today.
This essay explores the notion that we are all fundamentally shaped by history. I suggest that psychoanalysis needs to attend not just to the history of the patient, but also to the fact that the psychoanalyst and patient alike are affected by history and its traumas. Human experience cannot be separated from the historical and cultural contexts in which we live out our lives. The approach I am describing is not an endorsement of historical determinism, the notion that the past entirely makes us who we are today. It is, rather, a plea to know history so that we might respond to what it can teach us. In making this argument, I draw on the work of the historian and psychoanalyst by training, Thomas Kohut. His work helps us to avoid reductionist views of human experience, whether in the past or the present, and teaches us to use empathy to think and feel our way into the situation of the other person. This is particularly relevant in light of the ongoing prejudices and social injustices in contemporary society.
This essay addresses some of the challenges involved in accounting for history’s impact on psychological development. First, I consider how the personal beliefs and theoretical assumptions of psychoanalysts and historians can limit their understanding of other people, whether in the past or the present. Second, I examine the degree to which an individual’s perception and understanding is always a reflection of the collective cultural understanding in which that person lives. I apply these two observations to the discussion of how European Jewish psychoanalysts responded to the traumas of the Holocaust in the decades afterWorld War II. I suggest that individual responses were shaped by the absence of a collective discourse about the Holocaust during this time. When examining the past, I maintain that psychoanalysts and historians should be cautious, lest their current theories determine their understanding of the past.
Prólogo
(2011)
Psychoanalysis.
(2011)