精神分析學の根本特徴の二三 -並に丸井清泰教授等の學説の批判-
スポンサーリンク
概要
- 論文の詳細を見る
In the original article on the psychoanalytic theories of Prof . Marni and his school (of Sendai University; the only followers of Freud in Japanese universities) the fundamental features of Psychoanalysis in general are first discussed. As general characters are noted (1) its practical truth (2) its popular rationalism, (3) its constancy hypothesis (in a broad sense) and (4) its concrete conception of man. (1) In spite of its scientific disguise psychoanalysis has its life and vitality in its practice , its cure of neurotics, rather than in its theoretical truth. Neurotic persons find security in it and their confidence cannot be altered , unless more efficient practical theories are offered. (2) The psychoanalyst feels satisfied when he has explained mental conditions in some way or other often piling up many hypothesis, and does not ask if it is the best among many possible explanations. Many of them have not sufficient knowledge of general psychology . (3) By the "constancy hypothesis" is meant the assumption of developed mental states behind the undeveloped, which is a general principle of the atomistic view of mind. The idea of latent thoughts behind the manifest content of dreams and the sexual interpretation of infantile behavior are examples of this. (4) But the contribution of psychoanalysis to psychological knowledge must not be forgotten. It is seen in the developmental and social view of mind, the estimation of experiences in early childhood, the distinguishing of three factors in the ego and so on.<BR>The characteristics of Prof. Marui and his school are as follows: (1) They are followers of Freud, but there is some incompleteness in their analysis and interpretations. (2) They also share the psychoanalytical popular rationalism. (3) They lack reflection on their scientific standpoint. (4) But they have a great deal of analytic experience with neurotic persons, which many of their critics have not. (1) An example of their incompleteness is the inadequacy of their analysis of the cEdipus complex and the castration complex. But the writer finds in this rather evidence of their lack of bias and a hopeful prospect of their escaping from their errors. As an example, he takes a case analysis of Dr. Hayasaka, a pupil of Prof. Marni, Dr. Hayasaka found a special type of the Edipus complex, namely, a passionate love for the mother and an indifference to the father (in spite of the usual hate for the father found in psychoanalytical literature). But the normal Edipus complex can be found when his case is analysed thoroughly. Dr. Hayasaka shrinks from such a forced interpretation (which makes him an imperfect psychoanalyst and an conscientious psychologist). One ought to consider the attitudes of children relation with those of their parents. The Edipus complex is only one type of children's attitudes and is opposed to a type of parents' attitudes (which, especially the father's, the writer proposes to name the "Rains" complex). And there can be many other relations between them one of which is found in Dr. Hayasaka's case. (2) The psychoanalytical and the general psychological interpretations are to be compared best in the field of analysis of dreams and especially of erroneous acts. But these psychoanalysts have not yet offered any such analysis of erroneous acts. Therefore the writer takes Prof. Marui's case of hysterical amaurosis and tries to interpret it in the psychologist's way. (3) When one refuses to accept their interpretations, psychoanalysts think it is due to one's "resistance" or one's lack of analytical experience. But if they consider, for example, the writer's opposition a result of an Edipus complex in him, he can analyse Prof. Marui's assertion as well and perhaps attribute it to his "Rains" complex. If . they cannot admit that, they must recede from their interpretation of his critique.
- 公益社団法人 日本心理学会の論文