For several years, the theories of Psychoanalysis, in their original and current versions, have regularly been criticized for their lack of science. Logic would say that the profession and its critics would want a science, but that is not clearly the case. This group will collect data, explore causes and seek solutions.
The Stimulus for the Group
As explained in other areas of this website, I am an ex-member and executive participant in analytic Societies, and a scientist who entered the profession with the expectation that its theories had been scientifically developed. When doubts arose, I created scientific clinical-research designs to test Freud’s Metapsychological principles and collect what was valid. With success, I became able to: (1) identify incorrectly explained; phenomena in analysands and analyst; (2) spot and define others that had no theory; (3) create multiple logical hypotheses and tests for predictive capability in each case; (4) subject those that survived to repeated tests; (5) establish the foundations of real scientific basic and applied theories of the symptoms of the clinical situation. (6) and provide later generations of researchers with directions for their continued development. The work took thirty-some years, during which, I also used the theories for a self analysis that dismantled symptom roots untouched by my training analysis, and it became a complementary research resource.
As all was taking place, I presented papers and workshops in Canada, the US and the UK. I also submitted material for publication. But as someone trained in General and Internal Medicine, and familiar with the responses to scientific discoveries there, the reactions were most peculiar. They ranged from total disinterest, to subjectively-determined dismissal, to (anonymous) astoundingly-subjectively, impassioned critique in utterly-inappropriate language. And when my colleagues proved to be just as unreceptive, I resigned from my Society. I tried other organizations and critics of analysis but there was nothing there either. So the scientist in me has become a psychosociologist who has ollected considerable data and invites others to join in a search for the causes and treatment of this aberration of logic.
The Group Will
- invite all professionals from analytic, psychotherapeutic and related fields, academics, critics, informed lay people and organizations who/that are interested
- Invite input into any aspect of the problem, including objections to change and the reasoning for such
- examine all submitted data that in any way bears on the situation and its solution
- permit me and subsequent hosts to organize that data in ways that allow its parts to coalesce and lead to a greater grasp of the whole (the dictionary definition of “analysis”) (subject to member critiques)
- proceed as far as possible towards understanding and change as the members of my generation (I am 79) and those of the merging next one can go
- define what has become known and what is as-yet unexplained as far as possible, before any organizer’s time has ended