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.
As psychoanalysis faces the many challenges of modern science and society, our relations with related disciplines invariably pose certain quandaries. Where incompatibilities exist between our theories and recent data from other scientific fields, our ingenuity and integrity are challenged to evaluate these data and question our assumptions. In turn, our colleagues who labor in related disciplines may be intrigued by potential integrations (as seen in the dialogue between Arnold Modell, 1993, and Gerald Edelman, 1992, or the cross-fertilization between attachment research and analysis, as exemplified in the work of Peter Fonagy and his colleagues, 1991, and Karlen Lyons-Ruth, 1991). Or they may reject psychoanalysis outright, as do many psychopharmacology-oriented psychiatrists; or they may exist in a parallel relationship, where, although potentially there may be common ground, the bubbles of the two disciplines remain distinct. It is the last situation that best captures the circumstances of our relations with the renowned academic psychologist Jerome Kagan. He could be an ally, a collaborator, a contributor. He is so close, yet so far.
Kagan's latest effort is Galen's Prophecy, so named for the second-century Greek physician who posited nine temperamental types derived from the four “humors.” Kagan is an excellent writer. He is scholarly, clear, entertaining, and informative. He is wonderful at metaphor and adage. He teaches, clarifies, and weaves a story. His grasp of history and capacity to draw from other fields is remarkable (making his assiduous avoidance of attachment research and psychoanalytic sources, except for a few well-placed digs, all the more striking). Not only do we get a compendium of wonderful tidbits, but we have a very good basic