So who does own psychoanalysis? Equally pertinent, what is psychoanalysis? Even before the death of Sigmund Freud, psychoanalysis was splintering into different groups, each convinced of their superiority to the other. There was little co-operation between them plus a great deal of resentment, recrimination and suspicion. The status quo has been evolving slowly in recent years, with increased tolerance and communication between the different factions, leading to the birth of this book.The result is an international and inter-group collaboration of eminent psychoanalysts and scholars of psychoanalysis discussing and reflecting on the meaning psychoanalysis holds for them. Their contributions have been grouped into four sections: academic, historical, political and scientific. Each paper is varied in its subject matter, looking at such issues as psychoanalytic ownership, the genealogy of the word "psychotherapy", historical perspectives on the situation, whether there can be a monopoly on psychoanalysis, and the role of the brain in relation to the mind, and has been grouped according to its main theme.
Table of Contents
Introduction -- Academic -- Pathways for psychoanalysis -- What is psychoanalysis? -- Reflections on psychic ownership and psychoanalytic studies -- From insight to self-begetting -- History -- Notes towards the genealogy of a word: “psychotherapy” -- The British Medical Association: Report of the Psycho-Analysis Committee, 1929 -- What has happened to psychoanalysis in the British Society? -- An historical view -- Political -- The New York State psychoanalytic licence -- The geography of psychoanalysis: sovereignty, ownership, and dispossession -- Knowledge in failure -- Who decides who decides? -- Can there be a monopoly on psychoanalysis? -- Science -- Critique of psychoanalysis -- What can developmental psychopathology tell psychoanalysts about the mind? -- Is the brain more real than the mind? -- How NOT to escape from the Grünbaum Syndrome: a critique of the "new view" of psychoanalysis -- The evasiveness of Freudian apologetic