Lear sets out four principal arguments in Love and Its Place in Nature, a title that seems to owe something of its inspiration to the title of Broad's 1925 work, The Mind and Its Place in Nature.1 First, it is argued that Freud's understanding of affects was inadequate to his own discoveries, leaving behind theoretical problems posed by his discoveries that he could not solve. For example, Freud's theory of affects cannot account for the developmental advance that accompanies the resolution of neurosis. Second, since psychoanalysis assumes that the ego does not exist in a finished form at birth, but develops gradually (or fails to develop properly), and since this entails that the world is not experienced by an infant and child in the same way as it is by adults whose egos have matured, psychoanalysis is epistemologically committed to some form of nonobservational phenomenology that locates itself between subjectivity and objectivity. Third, Freud abandoned his understanding of human