Paradigms and Crises in Psychoanalysis

References

• Arlow, J. A. (1975). The structural hypothesis—theoretical considerations. Psychoanal. Q., 44:509–525.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Astley, M. R. C. (1974). Psychoanalysis: the future. J. Amer. Psychoanal. Assn., 22:83–96.
   Google Scholar
• Burnham, J. C. (1967). Psychoanalysis and American Medicine: 1894–1918. Medicine, Science and Culture. Psychol. Issues, Monogr. 20. New York: Int. Univ. Press.
   Google Scholar
• Castel, R. (1973). Le psychanalysme. Paris: Maspero.
   Google Scholar
• Decker, H. S. (1977). Freud in Germany. Revolution and Reaction in Science, 1893–1907. Psychol. Issues, Monogr. 41. New York: Int. Univ. Press.
   Google Scholar
• Deleuze, G. & Guattari, F. (1972). Anti-Oedipus. Capitalism and Schizophrenia. Minneapolis: Univ. Minnesota Press, 1983.
   Google Scholar
• Eissler, K. R. (1969). Irreverent remarks about the present and future of psychoanalysis. Int. J. Psychoanal., 50:461–471.
   Google Scholar
• Eysenck, H. J. & Wilson, G. D., Editors (1973). The Experimental Study of Freudian Theories. London: Methuen.
   Google Scholar
• Gitelson, M. (1964). On the identity crisis in American psychoanalysis. J. Amer. Psychoanal. Assn., 12:451–476.
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Guntrip, H. (1978). Psychoanalysis and some scientific and philosophical critics. Brit. J. Med. Psychol., 51:207–224.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Holzman, P. S. (1976). The future of psychoanalysis and its institutes. Psychoanal. Q., 45:250–273.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Hook, S., Editor (1959). Psychoanalysis, Scientific Method, and Philosophy. A Symposium. New York: New York Univ. Press.
   Google Scholar
• Kelk, N. (1977). Is psychoanalysis a science? A reply to Slater. Brit. J. Psychiat., 130:105–111.
   Google Scholar
• Knobloch, F. & Knobloch, J. (1979). In search of a new paradigm of psychoanalysis. J. Amer. Acad. Psychoanal., 7:499–524.
   Google Scholar
• Kuhn, T. S. (1962). The Structure of Scientific Revolutions. Chicago: Univ. Chicago Press.
   Google Scholar
• ——— (1970a). The Structure of Scientific Revolutions. Second edition. Chicago: Univ. Chicago Press.
   Google Scholar
• ——— (1970b). The logic of discovery or psychology of research?. In Criticism and the Growth of Knowledg., ed. I. Lakatos & A. Musgrave. Cambridge: Cambridge Univ. Press, pp. 1–23.
   Google Scholar
• ——— (1977). Second thoughts on paradigms. In The Essential Tension: Selected Studies in Scientific Tradition and Change. Chicago: Univ. Chicago Press, pp. 293–319.
   Google Scholar
• Legrand, M. (1973). Psychanalyse et paradigme scientifique. Revue des Questions Scientifiques, 144:506–512.
   Google Scholar
• ——— (1974). l e statut scientifique de la psychanalyse. Topique, 11/12:237–258.
   Google Scholar
• ———. (1975). Hypothèses pour une histoire de la psychanalyse. Dialéctica, 29:189–207.
   Google Scholar
• Lifton, R. J. (1976). From analysis to formation: towards a shift in psychological paradigm. J. Amer. Acad. Psychoanal., 4:63–94.
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Lotto, D. J. (1982). Another point of view on Freud’s metapsychology. J. Amer. Acad. Psychoanal., 10:457–481.
   Google Scholar
• Medawar, P. B. (1973). The Hope of Progress: A Scientist Looks at Problems in Philosophy, Literature and Science. Garden City, N.Y.: Doubleday Anchor Books.
   Google Scholar
• Modell, A. H. (1975). The ego and the id: fifty years later. Int. J. Psychoanal., 56: 57–68.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Ornstein, P. H. (1981). The bipolar self in the psychoanalytic treatment process: clinical-theoretical considerations. J. Amer. Psychoanal. Assn., 29:353–375.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Panel (1975). National conference on psychoanalytic education and research. R. N. Emde, Reporter. J. Amer. Psychoanal. Assn., 23:569–586.
   Google Scholar
• Peterfreund, E. (1975). The need for a new general theoretical frame of reference for psychoanalysis. Psychoanal. Q., 44:534–549.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Popper, K. R. (1935). The Logic of Scientific Discovery. New York: Basic Books, 1959.
   Google Scholar
• ——— (1963). Conjectures and Refutations: The Growth of Scientific Knowledge. New York: Basic Books.
   Google Scholar
• ——— (1970). Normal science and its dangers. In Criticism and the Growth of Knowledg., ed. I. Lakatos & A. E. Musgrave. Cambridge: Cambridge Univ. Press, pp. 51–58.
   Google Scholar
• Ricoeur, P. (1977). The question of proof in Freud’s psychoanalytic writings. In Hermeneutics and the Human Science., ed. J. B. Thompson. Cambridge: Cambridge Univ. Press, 1981, pp. 247–273. Originally published in J. Amer. Psychoanal. Assn., 25:835–871.
   Google Scholar
• Rothstein, A. (1980). Psychoanalytic paradigms and their narcissistic investment. J. Amer. Psychoanal. Assn., 28:385–395.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Schafer, R. (1976). A New Language for Psychoanalysis. New Haven/London: Yale Univ. Press.
   Google Scholar
• Shakow, D. & Rapaport, D. (1964). The Influence of Freud on American Psychology. Psychol. Issues, Monogr. 13. New York: Int. Univ. Press.
   Google Scholar
• Spruiell, V. (1983). Kuhn’s “paradigm” and psychoanalysis. Psychoanal. Q., 52: 353–363.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Steele, T. E. (1978). Teaching behavioral sciences to medical students. Arch. Gen. Psychiat., 35:27–34.
   Google Scholar
• Sulloway, F. J. (1979). Freud, Biologist of the Mind. Beyond the Psychoanalytic Legend. New York: Basic Books.
   Google Scholar
• van DER Leeuw, P. J. (1977). L’impact de la correspondance Freud-Jung sur l’histoire des idées. Rev. Fr. Psychanal., 41:439–463.
   Google Scholar
• Wallerstein, R. S. (1976). Psychoanalysis as a science: its present status and its future tasks. In Psychology versus Metapsychology: Psychoanalytic Essays in Memory of George S. Klein. Psychol. Issue., Monogr. 36, ed. M. M. Gill & P. S. Holzman. New York: Int. Univ. Press, pp. 198–228.
   Google Scholar
• Will, D. (1980). Psychoanalysis as a human science. Brit. J. Med. Psychol., 53: 201–211.
   Google Scholar