Psychoanalysis and Dogmatism

As its title implies, Patrick Casement's Further Learning From the Patient (1990)* is the sequel to his earlier On Learning From the Patient (1985). Like its predecessor, Further Learning deals mainly with issues surrounding analytic technique. Further Learning is a slim volume which is clearly and engagingly written. Like On Learning From the Patient, Further Learning represents the progressive edge of the standard Freudian-Kleinian-Object Relational paradigm. It will be of interest to those already committed to mainstream psychoanalysis and will be accessible to those who are looking for an accessible introduction to liberal mainstream analytic technique and who have some background knowledge of psychoanalytic theory.

The central preoccupation of Further Learning is the issue of psychoanalytic dogmatism. Throughout the book, Casement expresses concern about the prevalence of dogmatic thinking in psychoanalysis and strives to develop a non-dogmatic approach to theory and technique. I do not think that Casement's concern is misplaced for the question of psychoanalytic dogmatism is, in essence, the question of whether or not we have rational grounds for believing psychoanalytic propositions about the human mind. This, in turn, has profound implications for clinical psycho-analysis. If our belief in psychoanalytic theory is primarily dogmatic rather than rational, what right have we to treat patients using a method derived from this theory? Why should patients entrust themselves to our care?

Laudable as Casement's anti-dogmatic stance is, I will argue that it does not provide an adequate answer to the problem of psychoanalytic dogmatism. It is only by pushing the analysis further that we can determine the true locus of dogmatism within psychoanalysis and devise strategies to eliminate - or at least minimise - it. However, as I will show, the remedy required must call into question the validity of a large number of widely accepted psychoanalytic doctrines and undercuts t