R I T I C I S M . O M ::
Home
Philosophy
wittgenstein-freud |

|
| Essay
Points of Contact and Criticism Between Wittgenstein and Freud By Steve Hoenisch Last updated on November 4, 2005 Copyright 1996-2006 www.Criticism.Com Table of Contents 1 Dreams 2 Science 3 Traits and Teachings 4 Related 1 Dreams
Dreams. Freud, Wittgenstein says, held that "all dreams are wish
fulfillments." Wittgenstein, on the other hand, holds that "it is
probable ... there is no single line of explanation for all of
them" ("Conversations on Freud," p. 47).
Interpretation as Meaning. For Freud, the meaning of a dream
could often be revealed through the interpretation of it. For
Wittgenstein, "any interpretation still hangs in the air along with
what it interprets, and cannot give it any support. Interpretations
by themselves do not determine meaning" (Philosophical Investigations, No.
198).
Reductionism. Freud was misguided, Wittgenstein says, in that he
"wanted to find some one explanation which would show what dreaming
is. He wanted to find the essence of dreaming" (L&C, p. 48).
2 Science
Science. Freud considered his approach to be scientific.
Wittgenstein considered both his and Freud's approach to be
philosophical, not scientific.
Weltanschauung. Freud's agenda, Bouveresse says, was "to
eliminate metaphysics in favor of the 'scientific' conception of
the world." Wittgenstein thought such agendas naive.
Theory. Freud attempted to construct a theory that explained the
range of psychological behavior. Wittgenstein thought misguided the
construction of a single philosophical theory, and he may have
thought that psychoanalysis lacked the power to explain the range
of psychic behavior.
3 Traits and Teachings
Courage. Wittgenstein saw courage, a trait he valued highly, in
Freud's originality and ingeniousness.
Cleverness. Wittgenstein often remarked that Freud was clever,
a view that contains, as Bouveresse points out, an element of
implicit criticism -- and also of self-criticism, for Wittgenstein
often feared that he, too, was only clever, rather than wise, the
trait for which he strived. Wittgenstein says: "Wisdom is something
I never would expect from Freud. Cleverness, certainly; but not
wisdom" (Lectures and Conversations, p. 41).
Danger to the Public. Bouveresse notes that Wittgenstein
compared the "incalculable harm" Freud had done to the harm he
himself had probably done to philosophy -- both of their
enterprises allowed anyone to claim they could treat philosophical
or psychological maladies. Wittgenstein once remarked that his and
Freud's "teachings, like wine, had made people drunk. They did not
know how to use the teaching soberly."
Creation of a School. Freud, Bouveresse says, thought it
indispensable to create a school to spread his ideas, whereas
Wittgenstein did not believe that philosophy had new truths to
communicate and did not want to create a school.
4 Related
My central thesis is that if, as Wittgenstein says, Freudian
psychoanalysis is based in myth, its application to actual
psychological problems does not, indeed cannot, resolve them.
Instead, all it can do is clarify them or present them in a
different light. Implicit in my argument is that this is how
Wittgenstein thought of the results of psychoanalysis, much like
he thought of the application of his philosophical technique to
philosophical problems, especially those of metaphysics, ethics,
and aesthetics. As such, Wittgenstein is also subverting a larger
myth: that the insights gained in psychoanalysis lead to the
scientific resolution of psychological problems.
This essay seeks to take Wittgenstein's influence on
discourse analysis a step further by using his writings as the theoretical foundation for an
approach to analyzing discourse that is distinct from speech act theory,
which
stems from the analytic tradition in philosophy, and to suggest that a
Wittgenstein-inspired approach may actually be closer in spirit and content to
that of an unlikely candidate whose views, in contrast to the analytic school,
harbor a distinctly Continental flavor which has come to influence critical
theory: Mikhail Bakhtin. |
|
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Copyright © 1996-2006
Steve Hoenisch and Criticism.Com. All rights reserved.
| Home
| Site Map
| Search
| Privacy Policy
| Top |