Customer Service | Help | FAQ | PEP-Easy | Report a Data Error | About
PEP-Easy Tip: To save PEP-Easy to the home screen

PEP-Web Tip of the Day

To start PEP-Easy without first opening your browser–just as you would start a mobile app, you can save a shortcut to your home screen.

First, in Chrome or Safari, depending on your platform, open PEP-Easy from You want to be on the default start screen, so you have a clean workspace.

Then, depending on your mobile device…follow the instructions below:


  1. Tap on the share icon Action navigation bar and tab bar icon
  2. In the bottom list, tap on ‘Add to home screen’
  3. In the “Add to Home” confirmation “bubble”, tap “Add”

On Android:

  1. Tap on the Chrome menu (Vertical Ellipses)
  2. Select “Add to Home Screen” from the menu


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

Stengel, E. (1959). The Unconscious: A Conceptual Analysis. By A. C. MacIntyre, Ph.D. (London: Routledge and Kegan Paul, 1958. Pp. 100. 11s. 6d.). Int. J. Psycho-Anal., 40:348.

(1959). International Journal of Psycho-Analysis, 40:348

The Unconscious: A Conceptual Analysis. By A. C. MacIntyre, Ph.D. (London: Routledge and Kegan Paul, 1958. Pp. 100. 11s. 6d.)

Review by:
E. Stengel

The author, who is Lecturer in Philosophy at Leeds University, has in this essay attempted a logical analysis of the concept of the unconscious. He finds Freud 'not over-careful about terminology'. He refers to Freud's spurious attempt to present a psychology based on neurophysiology. Like others before him, he notes that Freud borrowed from neurology a number of terms by which he described psychological mechanisms.

The concept of the unconscious, according to the author, stands and falls with that of repression, which he regards as unproven. Freud used the term 'the unconscious' in a new meaning which in the author's view derived from neurophysiology. It is, in his opinion, no more than an explanatory concept, like the notions of the ether or the electron. In treating unconscious motives both as purposes and causes, Freud was guilty of confusion. His great achievement lay not in the explanation of abnormal behaviour but in its redescription. It is not quite easy to follow the author in these arguments. He is at a disadvantage in not being a biologist, for whom cause and purpose of behaviour are more intimately related than they are to the logician. His use of the term 'description' is different from that of the scientist. It appears that he is referring to what Jaspers called the difference between 'verstehen', i.e. to discern understandable relationships between phenomena, and 'erklären', i.e. to answer the question why a certain event happened. If this distinction was as clear and clean as it seems to the philosopher, Freud's achievement would be largely in the area of 'verstehen'.

[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 © 2019, 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.