(1991). Psychoanalytic Dialogues, 1:525-533 I would like to respond to Hoffman's (1991) commentary on the papers by Modell, Greenberg, and Aron. The papers and the commentary are extremely rich, and I will address only a few key issues raised by Hoffman. In particular, I want to examine Hoffman's formulation of the new paradigm that defines contemporary psychoanalysis. His premise is that the great changes occurring in our field can be articulated in terms of one epistemiological principle, in this case from positivist to social-constructivist. To begin with, this premise raises a question as to the adequacy of any one epistemiological or metapsychological principle to grasp these changes. It seems to me that this kind of conceptualization misses the structure of many great changes in intellectual history. Such changes do not necessarily fit Kuhn's model of the structure of scientific revolutions, which involve the creation of a new paradigm. For example, the emergence of postmodernism embraces many intellectual and [This is a summary or excerpt from the full text of the book or article. The full text of the document is available to subscribers.] |
