Customer Service | Help | FAQ | Report a Data Error | About
:
Login
Tip: To zoom in or out on PEP-Web…

PEP-Web Tip of the Day

Are you having difficulty reading an article due its font size?  In order to make the content on PEP-Web larger (zoom in), press Ctrl (on Windows) or ⌘Command (on the Mac) and the plus sign (+).  Press Ctrl (on Windows) or ⌘Command (on the Mac) and the minus sign (-) to make the content smaller (zoom out).   To go back to 100% size (normal size), press Ctrl (⌘Command  on the Mac) + 0 (the number 0).

Another way on Windows: Hold the Ctrl key and scroll the mouse wheel up or down to zoom in and out (respectively) of the webpage. Laptop users may use two fingers and separate them or bring them together while pressing the mouse track pad.

Safari users: You can also improve the readability of you browser when using Safari, with the Reader Mode: Go to PEP-Web. Right-click the URL box and select Settings for This Website, or go to Safari > Settings for This Website. A large pop-up will appear underneath the URL box. Look for the header that reads, “When visiting this website.” If you want Reader mode to always work on this site, check the box for “Use Reader when available.”

For the complete list of tips, see PEP-Web Tips on the PEP-Web support page.

Tuckett, D. (2000). Commentary. J. Amer. Psychoanal. Assn., 48(2):403-411.
    

(2000). Journal of the American Psychoanalytic Association, 48(2):403-411

Commentary

David Tuckett

Robert Michels's skillful and incisive discussion of the history of the psychoanalytic case history exposes, in the manner in which we are accustomed to expect from him, the still chaotic state of our intentions when seeking to draw conclusions from what we tell each other we do.

- 403 -

Michels's review is exemplary and complements an earlier effort by Widlöcher (1994), alongside which I found it interesting to read—partly as an interesting comparison of French and American views of the issues. Widlöcher, interestingly, as he occupied Charcot's position at the Salpêtriére, focuses less on the issue of how far clinical reporting can “prove” anything and more on the issue of how clinicians can learn from experience. The difference in emphasis is relevant to Widlöcher's academic post. It has been argued that it was upon Freud's visit to Charcot at the Salpêtriére that he learned to value and interpret clinical data in a way rather at odds with the approach in the German-speaking, physiologically based medicine of the day (Schwartz 1999p. 38). As Freud (1893) reported, Charcot said, “La theorie c'est bon, mais ça n'empeche pas d'exister. [Theory is good, but it doesn't prevent the existence of other things]” (p. 13). The tension between the difficulty of using “mere” clinical experience to advance knowledge and the necessity of doing so seems to me to live on and to be beautifully

[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.]

Copyright © 2017, Psychoanalytic Electronic Publishing, ISSN 2472-6982 Customer Service | Help | FAQ | Download PEP Bibliography | Report a Data Error | About

WARNING! This text is printed for personal use. It is copyright to the journal in which it originally appeared. It is illegal to redistribute it in any form.