Technique and Understanding: Paul Ricoeur on Freud and the Analytic Experience

Eoin Carney

Abstract


For Ricœur any study of Freud, or of psychoanalysis more generally, needs to take into account the crucial dimension of the analytic experience itself. Psychoanalysis, as a “mixed discourse,” aims to anticipate questions of meaning and explication alongside technical questions of energies, repression, displacement, and so on. The analytic experience is one which is practical and intersubjective, but which is also guided by various techniques or methods. These techniques, I will argue, should be understood as a type of techne, one which is less concerned with hermeneutic questions of meaning than with quasi-scientific questions of force, feedback, struggle, and process. The practice of psychoanalysis, on the other hand, deals with the ways in which these forces or drives become meaningful for a particular subject, and within a singular context or history. This article will aim to draw out both the interrelationship between techniques and practical understanding, and also the productive incommensurability between the two.

Keywords


Psychoanalysis; Technique; Practice; Recursivity; Hermeneutics

Full Text:

PDF


DOI: https://doi.org/10.5195/errs.2016.339



Copyright (c) 2016 Eoin Carney

License URL: http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/3.0/us/


This journal is published by the University Library System, University of Pittsburgh as part of its D-Scribe Digital Publishing Program and is cosponsored by the University of Pittsburgh Press.

ISSN 2156-7808 (online)