Freud’s Rejection of Hypnosis, Part II: The Perpetuation of a Rift

Abstract

Freud’s rejection of hypnosis gave rise to a rift between clinical hypnosis and psychoanalysis that has endured for over a century. A review of Freud’s rationales (Kluft, 2018a/this issue) demonstrates that while some stemmed from what he considered advances, others appear strongly influenced by his promoting the superiority of his “psycho-analysis” at the expense of hypnosis. Mainstream psychoanalysis continues to endorse the perpetuation of rationales Freud asserted nearly a century ago, and an oral lore of related supportive statements. This oral lore proves difficult to sustain upon closer scrutiny. It bypasses concerns that, if studied in depth, would demonstrate significant shortcomings. Problems encountered in this oral lore include: (1) the importance of information unavailable to Freud; (2) the ongoing impact of certain errors of Freud’s thinking; (3) the distorting force of Freud’s compelling drive to be a “conquistador” of the mind and create a heroic theory; (4) the implausibility, upon inspection, of certain long-accepted assertions about Freud’s motivations; and (5) Freud’s discomfort with his own dissociative symptomatology. It is argued that the “oral lore” promulgated in connection with Freud’s rejection of hypnosis, like Freud’s decision to reject hypnosis itself, is not firmly grounded and deserves careful reassessment.