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.
Although freud's legacy assumes that every psychoanalytic proposition blends science and humanism, the authors of the papers in this issue devote special attention to the dignity, values and ideals of human life in the development of their thesis. Chessick advocates authenticity of choice; Lichtenberg stresses the experimental and regulatory effect of human relations; Palombo describes the approximation of conflicting life forces; Barratt raises questions about the alienation of self-consciousness; and Meissner addresses the need for theory to be broad enough to encompass the human condition. In the realm of science, only psychoanalysis has the methodology and conceptual power to deal with the causality and meaning of these issues.
Theodore Shapiro, editor of the Journal of the American Psychoanalytic Association, wrote “Editorial: Psychoanalysis, Philosophy and the Public” (1985). The editorial is a response to several recent reviews in the lay and intellectual press on Adolph Grünbaum's, The Foundation of Psychoanalysis (1984). The reviews question the validity of psychoanalysis as a science and its usefulness as a therapy. Shapiro challenged psychoanalysts to develop a strategy to respond to the criticism, particularly whether psychoanalysis has a valid vital foundation within the scientific realm. We believe that Shapiro has articulated a crucial requirement to which psychoanalysts must respond. The success of our efforts will depend on how well psychoanalysts can further develop the unique scientific and humanistic capacities of psychoanalysis. We believe the accounting of Freud's legacy the papers in this issue provide are a fundamental foundation for the task ahead.