The Psychoanalytic Quarterly 1989/3. [antikvár]

THE FUTURE OF PSYCHOANALYSIS BY RÓBERT S. WALLERSTEIN, M.D. AND EDWARD M. WEINSHEL, M.D. An invitation to write an article on the future of psychoanalysis evokes a response that is both personal and speculative. Our personal response is derived, for each of us, from almost four decades of the clinical work of psychoanalysis and alsó from years of intense involvement in the organizational life of the American Psychoanalytic Association and the International Psychoanalytical Association. Our speculations are inevitably colored by these experiences, both national and worldwide. Any discussion of the future of psychoanalysis can be approached from a variety of perspectives: the nature of psychoanalysis as a science; its nature as a discipline; psychoanalytic education and its relationship to the wider academic world for which Freud always yearned; the nature of psychoanalytic research; the nature-and scope-of professional practice; and the institutional expression of psychoanalysis in the International Psychoanalytical Association and its component organizations. Space constraints dictate that we deal with these issues selectively; we cannot devote equal space to each, and somé we may scant almost completely or defer altogether. PSYCHOANALYSIS AS A SCIENCE The nature of psychoanalysis as a science is perhaps the most fundamental of all these questions. It is alsó the issue that may be beset by the most intense theoretical controversy and the editor's note: This is the sixth in a series of invited papers on this topic. For previous papers, see the January, April, and July issues for 1988 and the January and April issues for 1989.