Howdy mailbear!
Let's take your questions one at a time.
- Is psychoanalysis a science?
The American Psychoanalytic Association thinks so.
http://www.apsa-co.org/ctf/pubinfo/ask/askarchiveJ.html
"Is psychoanalysis a science? Philosopher Karl [P]opper says
it isn't and others have said it is."
"Look here [ http://www.apsa.org/pubinfo/efficacystudies.htm ]
for empirical studies in psychoanalysis. For example, the
presence of unconscious mental activity is the fundamental
hypothesis of psychoanalysis. Its presence has been confirmed
empirically many many times. This empirical confirmation is
the essence of a science."
Norman Holland's "Psychoanalysis as Science" agrees, but takes
a different approach.
http://www.clas.ufl.edu/users/nnh/psas&sci.htm
"I think it is perfectly legitimate to claim that psychoanalysis is
'scientific.'"
...
"Free associations (or a literary text) provide the data. One looks
for themes. One tries to make those themes into a coherent theme
of themes or a narrative explanation. One uses one's own involvement
to qualify or to gain insight into the holistic understanding.
One generalizes from case to case (perhaps) by learning from each
what to ask of the next one. This constitutes a very pure example
of holistic method, and holistic method is one of the standard modes
of the social and natural sciences."
- If it is a science is it a failed science?
A Human Nature editorial mentions one of the better known critics of
psychoanalysis, Adolf Grunbaum.
http://human-nature.com/ksej/smith.htm
"The inclusion of Grunbaum’s critique of psychoanalysis as a failed
science, a unique move for an introductory survey, broadens the
intellectual scope of the book. Smith’s balanced approach invokes a
healthy skepticism in the reader, while it also makes clear the
indispensable value and intellectual richness of psychoanalytic theory."
This Department of Psychology at Northwestern University, Weinberg
College of Arts and Sciences web page has a summary of Adolf Grunbaum's
"Foundations of Psychoanalysis."
http://www.psych.nwu.edu/~coriat/grunbaum.htm
"In an attempt to further examine the level of scientific integrity in
Freud's theories, Grunbaum sites Popper's assertion's concerning Freud's
theories and their testability. Popper stated that Freud's theory is
"simply non-testable, irrefutable." According to Popper, for a theory
to hold, it must be testable, and contradictable."
...
"According to Grunbaum, "There is empirical evidence against the view
that psychoanalytic treatment is a valid means of gaining access to
memories."
More at the above site at a different page titled "Criticism of Grunbaum
and his response"
http://www.psych.nwu.edu/~coriat/criticism2.html
"Of the thirty-eight authors that responded to Grunbaum's précis, some
of the more lengthy and comprehensive arguments have been chosen for
summary."
...
"Grunbaum states that the difference between himself and Popper is
whether Freudian theories can be considered science or not. Popper
believes the theories are not, Grunbaum argues that it is bad science."
Karl Popper, mentioned above, said that psychoanalysis is not a
science at all, as this Personality Research page states.
http://www.personalityresearch.org/psychoanalysis.html
"Among those who believe that psychoanalysis is not science is the
philosopher Karl Popper. Popper holds that the demarcation criterion
that separates science from logic, myth, religion, metaphysics, etc.
is that all scientific theories can be falsified by empirical tests
--that is, a scientific theory rules out some class of events, and if
one of those events occurs, then the theory is declared false."
- How do the "hermeneutic" psychoanalysts handle psychoanalysis'
claim to be a science?
The University of Valencia "Mural" web site, has a paper on psychoanalysis,
including the view of the Hermeneutics.
http://mural.uv.es/majuan2/narrat1.htm
"It is interesting to point some criticisms that psychoanalysis has
received. For example, the Hermeneutics thought that psychoanalysis is
not a science, they say that psychoanalysis is not based on facts because
the analyst does not observe the date. Instead, the analyst interprets
them to fit his own ideas. Psychoanalysis cannot also be justified using
physical laws of science. Therefore psychoanalysis, despite Freud’s claims,
is not a science."
Search Strategy: Searched Google with the keywords:
psychoanalysis "failed science"
://www.google.com/search?q=psychoanalysis+%22failed+science%22
psychoanalysis Grunbaum
://www.google.com/search?q=psychoanalysis+Grunbaum
hermeneutic psychoanalysis science
://www.google.com/search?q=hermeneutic+psychoanalysis+science
If you need any clarification, feel free to ask!
Looking Forward, denco-ga |
