Comments on: The Argentinian love affair with psychoanalysis

By: Emil Kraepelin

Emil Kraepelin — Fri, 12 Nov 2010 02:34:33 +0000

me llama la atención la reflexión del psicoanalista lacaniano. Para empezar, debería de leer a Dylan Evans y a su “From Lacan to Darwin” en el que describe su percepción del psicoanálisis lacaniano aplicado en la clínica (y además en Claire House, parte del St George’s Hospital Medical School, mi alma mater). La ininteligibilidad y la arbitrariedad de Lacan quedan cifradas en la frase afortunada de Raymond Tallis, “¿Danza del significante?: El Lacán-can”. De esta manera se satiriza los excesos del Charla(t)an ¿O debería decir Charlacan?

By: Enterhase

Enterhase — Sat, 21 Nov 2009 15:22:55 +0000

To speak of a “pre-scientific hoo-ha” is to imply that there is a strict hierarchical and temporal relationship between science and other ways of analysis. If that were the case, we should regard philosophers with the utmost contempt since they are “still trying” to explain the fundamentals of reality while we “already know” that E=mc^2.

By: rita

rita — Thu, 19 Nov 2009 07:57:46 +0000

“really does work wonders”. Could we have some statistics on these “wonders”, please? Isn’t “pre-scientific hoo-ha” a pretty fair description of psychoanalysis?
As for digging into the public purse for psychoanalytic (non-)treatments of any stripe – it’s bad enough warding off homeopathy, astrology and all the other woo out there without the unfortunate public having to support more non- evidence-based gubbins!

By: ScottL

ScottL — Wed, 18 Nov 2009 05:57:04 +0000

I love these ‘other cultures are so crazy unlike ours’ articles. It’s not as though the US isn’t dominated by the most ridiculous sort of pop psychology, which one could explain in the same way as the WSJ article — which is to say superficially — as a result of a culture that hates even brief encounters with criticality.
On the few occasions it comes up, I’ve appreciated this site’s relatively measured take on psychoanalysis, relative, that is, to it being casually dismissed as pre-scientific hoo-ha. I thought the critique of Darian Leader’s CBT article ages ago was good for what it was. So not to seem too ungrateful, but it’s a bit unfair to sum up psychoanalysis as ‘fairly loopy’ in places. Not that it isn’t, but the Lacanian project was precisely intended to address the loopy-ness. I’m as frustrated as anyone at the hegemony of Lacanian psychoanalysis in humanities departments, but as a clinical practice, its focus on the particularity of each case and ignorance of what’s uncritically called science really does work wonders. It does aim to do a very different thing than traditional psychology, though.
The Argentinian example simply demonstrates that the problem of massification is not a necessary problem, merely a political one. And I share the sense that, in the English speaking world, the political concerns that dictate cost-efficient but superficial treatments like CBT and psychiatry are not likely to disappear. But maybe policy makers should have a good look at the Argentinian example and see if there isn’t any room in that big old public purse for us Lacanian cranks and our (in my case future) patients. I can only imagine it would be a far more interesting world to live in.

By: Enterhase

Enterhase — Tue, 17 Nov 2009 21:25:53 +0000

That’s an interesting take on psychoanalysis in Argentina.
I’m personally not too interested in studying Freud or Lacan, and that’s one of the reasons why I enrolled in med school instead of choosing a psychology program.

By: Avicenna

Avicenna — Tue, 17 Nov 2009 20:01:15 +0000

That explains Zizek’s obsession with Argentina. Still doesn’t explain how he was able to score such a hot wife.