Customer Service | Help | FAQ | PEP-Easy | Report a Data Error | About
Tip: To save articles in ePub format for your eBook reader…

PEP-Web Tip of the Day

To save an article in ePub format, look for the ePub reader icon above all articles for logged in users, and click it to quickly save the article, which is automatically downloaded to your computer or device. (There may be times when due to font sizes and other original formatting, the page may overflow onto a second page.).

You can also easily save to PDF format, a journal like printed format.

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

Fliess, R. (1956). Phylogenetic Vs. Ontogenetic Experience—Notes on a Passage of Dialogue Between 'Little Hans' and his Father. Int. J. Psycho-Anal., 37:46-60.

(1956). International Journal of Psycho-Analysis, 37:46-60

Phylogenetic Vs. Ontogenetic Experience—Notes on a Passage of Dialogue Between 'Little Hans' and his Father

Robert Fliess, M.D.


The assumption of phylogenetic inheritance of 'dispositions' (i.e. modes of reaction) and 'content' (i.e. memory traces of experiences of past generations) was to Freud 'an unavoidable boldness, without which we cannot advance a single step' (1). If the priority for this hypothesis belongs to Jung, if Freud was slow in adopting it, it was because he regarded it as 'a methodological error to seize upon a phylogenetic explanation before the ontogenetic possibilities have been exhausted', and because 'obstinately disputing the importance of infantile prehistory while at the same time freely acknowledging the importance of ancestral prehistory' (2), as did Jung, seemed to him arguing against reason.

Phylogenesis is with Freud, methodologically speaking, a remainder. 'It is only, ' he sums up, 'in the prehistory of the neuroses that we see the child lay hold of this phylogenetic experience where his experience fails him. He fills in the lacunae in individual truth with prehistoric truth; he puts the experience of his ancestors in the place of his own' (3). In other words, the hypothesis is necessitated by clinical observation. 'In studying reactions to early traumata we often find to our surprise that they do not keep strictly to what the individual himself has experienced, but deviate from this in a way that would accord much better with their being reactions to genetic events and in general can be explained only through the influence of such' (4).

[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 © 2020, 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.