Customer Service | Help | FAQ | PEP-Easy | 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. (1995). The Conceptualisation And Communication Of Clinical Facts In Psychoanalysis. Int. J. Psycho-Anal., 76:653-662.

(1995). International Journal of Psycho-Analysis, 76:653-662

The Conceptualisation And Communication Of Clinical Facts In Psychoanalysis

David Tuckett

Behind the choice of theme for the Journal's 75th anniversary was a desire to address and to improve our basic methodology. By this I mean formal consideration of how we observe and draw inferences, communicate, publish and conduct debate among ourselves—believing, if we are to establish and share any common ground, that the way forward requires us to base ourselves firmly in the experience of the psychoanalytic session. Thus, each of the five topics discussed and the questions they raise relates in some way to a single central methodological concern—can we find a way of sharing what we do so that we advance our psychoanalytical practice and understanding in a rigorous manner? Do we, and can we, really learn from our collective experience so that psychoanalytic knowledge can accumulate on the basis of an informed consensus, or is our discipline rather a matter of rhetoric, intuition, opinion and faith? Assuming that we really want to learn from and talk to each other, how do we do it? What is required to explain to each other what we actually do and to develop clear arguments about what we can conclude about it, to the point where we can resolve debates?

Science

I do not believe we have ever got very far by arguing whether or not psychoanalysis is an art or a science. That debate has been mainly rhetorical and usually aimed either at imposing or at seeking release from various received and limited sets of opinions. In fact, as several contributors to our anniversary issue have made clear, conceptions of scientific methodology and its application to psychoanalysis vary considerably.

[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.