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.
Freud's theoretical formulations have been misunderstood, misrepresented, and sometimes discredited because of the reported influence on him of Helmholtz, Brücke, J. F. Herbart, and the Zeitgeist of nineteenth-century mechanophysics.6a, 4a, 3a Posthumously beleaguered with accusations of mechanical rigidity, it is ironical to note that Freud not only “mystifyingly” abandoned his “Project for a Scientific Psychology,” but wrote in a letter to Fleiss in October 1895:
The mechanical explanation is not coming off, and I am inclined to listen to the still, small voice which tells me my explanation will not do.3b
Today it appears that “scientific” progress necessarily rests heavily on the inviolate pillars of narrative description and stochastic manipulation as primary methods of communication used in the seeking, processing, and explaining of data. Not often recognized is the fact that linguistic and grammatical structure and stochastic processes are themselves profoundly “mechanical.” One might then contend that it may not be “mechanics” per se which is intrinsically discrepant and obsolete, but rather the intention and application of these conceptual perspectives.
Rather than stir the polemic kettle, I intend here to introduce a diagrammatic model and indirectly address the following two issues: