You do not currently have permission to view the full text for this document. Please sign in to an account with an active subscription or contact support.
Psychoanalysts are growing increasingly dissatisfied with Freud's theoretical framework. A particularly interesting new wave of criticisms is appearing in journals of classical psychoanalysis, for example, the International Journal of Psycho-Analysis (Schafer, 1975), Psychoanalytic Quarterly (Peterfreund, 1975; Holt, 1975), and Psychoanalytic Study of the Child (Schafer, 1972). These authors, who reject Freudian metapsychology, tend to follow in the footsteps of those progressive psychoanalysts of previous decades who discarded the libido theory and related concepts (Schultz-Hencke, 1931; Horney, 1939; Fromm, 1941; Masserman, 1946; Bieber, 1958, to name only a few) but who, in the concern for conceptual clarity, bring new elements to the scene. Since Peterfreund and other participants in the Symposium on the Ego and Id (Peterfreund, 1975; Arlow, 1975; R. Holt, 1975) refer to Kuhn's methodological work when defending or attacking Freud's structural paradigm, we shall first make a few comments on methodology. Their purpose is to alert us to the typical difficulties in seeking and establishing a new paradigm.