Psychoanalytic Theory: Clues from the Brain Commentary by Joseph LeDoux

Psychoanalytic theory has influenced contemporary Western culture in innumerable ways. Although I have never actually tested aspects of psychoanalytic theory in my research on emotions and the brain, “psychoanalytic-like” concepts (such as the unconscious, affect, and emotional memory) have been key to the way I have interpreted my research findings over the years (LeDoux, 1996). I refer to these as “psychoanalytic-like” because I don't have a deep understanding of psychoanalytic theory and have borrowed the concepts more from popular culture (films, novels, and just plain common knowledge) than from Freud's writings. From time to time, I've looked through books by Freud for research inspiration, but I never found my experimental muse there. Lacking the training and context in which to really understand Freud, I don't think I ever got beyond the surface notions that most college educated people are familiar with. Consequently, the article by Solms and Nersessian has done me, and perhaps other neuroscientists, a great service. Although I have still not found experimental inspiration in psychoanalytic theory, I feel that I now understand the theory of affect a little and am grateful for their translation of the theory in terms that are intelligible to those of us who are not trained in the area. Below, I am going to comment on several points made by Solms and Nersessian in order to do my own translation of some of their notions in terms related to modern work on the brain mechanisms of emotion and cognition. I'll also comment briefly on Panksepp's discussion of their paper.