On the Idea of Natural Science as a Resistance to Psychoanalysis

I argue here that the long-standing question “Is psychoanalysis a science?” should be viewed from the perspective of a different question, that is, “Why do we feel that it matters whether psychoanalysis is a science or not?” The emphasis that has been given to the first question in recent decades I trace to the continuing influence of Kant on the philosophy of science and in particular to his wish to keep morality immune from scientific investigation. Three recent examples of this influence are considered: Popper, Grünbaum, and Ricoeur. Finally, I suggest how Nietzsche's psychology can be

used to get a deeper insight into the emotional significance of science and the scientific evaluation of psychoanalysis.