Customer Service | Help | FAQ | PEP-Easy | Report a Data Error | About
:
Login
Tip: To use the Information icon…

PEP-Web Tip of the Day

The Information icon (an i in a circle) will give you valuable information about PEP Web data and features. You can find it besides a PEP Web feature and the author’s name in every journal article. Simply move the mouse pointer over the icon and click on it for the information to appear.

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

Mills, J. (2007). A Response to Grünbaum's Refutation of Psychoanalysis. Psychoanal. Psychol., 24(3):539-544.

(2007). Psychoanalytic Psychology, 24(3):539-544

A Response to Grünbaum's Refutation of Psychoanalysis Related Papers

Jon Mills, PsyD, ABPP, Ph.D.

Adolf Grünbaum has been a staunch critic of psychoanalysis for over three decades. The general thrust of his attacks are unwavering in content and focus and regurgitate the redundant point that psychoanalysis is not a true science. I wish to offer a modest defense of psychoanalysis as a human science and argue that Grünbaum commits a category mistake in comparing psychoanalysis with the physical sciences, thus he upholds a standard of scientific inquiry that cannot be applied to our field. As a philosopher, he furthermore lacks a proper epistemology of knowing how to appropriately evaluate the validity of clinical data and focuses on select aspects of Freudian theory he uses as a straw man to unjustly refute the whole discipline of psychoanalysis itself.

[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.