Customer Service | Help | FAQ | PEP-Easy | Report a Data Error | About
:
Login
Tip: To see who cited a particular article…

PEP-Web Tip of the Day

To see what papers cited a particular article, click on “[Who Cited This?] which can be found at the end of every article.

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

Shevrin, H. (1999). Commentary by Howard Shevrin. Neuropsychoanalysis, 1(1):55-60.

(1999). Neuropsychoanalysis, 1(1):55-60

Commentary by Howard Shevrin

Howard Shevrin

Bridge building between psychoanalysis and neuroscience, disciplines that on their face appear to be worlds apart, has been deemed by some foolhardy and by others premature, yet as the Solms and Nersessian summary of Freud's affect theory and Panksepp's position paper attest, the time may be ripe and the enterprise fruitful. Most gratifying from a psychoanalyst's standpoint is the call made by Panksepp for drawing, not only on psychoanalytic insights, but for integrating the psychoanalytic method with psychological and neuroscience research approaches. As someone who has been committed to this integration in my own research (Shevrin, Bond, Brakel, Hertel, and Williams, 1996), I welcome these exciting efforts to advance interchange between psychoanalysis and neuroscience.

In my commentary I will be limiting my observations to some of the issues raised concerning the relationship of affect to consciousness, motivation, and action.

[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.