Abstract

The present text is a commentary of the paper about Lacanian conception of psychoses. The text examines three groups of criticism. On the reproach that the Lacanian conception implies a binary logic sustaining the idea of incurability of psychoses, the author considers that the Lacanian model proposes a structural point of view, which needs to be completed by the other Freudian points of view (topics, dynamic, genetic and economic). On the reproach that this conception leads to the exclusion of madness from society, he remarks that the study of counter-transference when working with psychotic patients is more able to explain the difficulties they face for community insertion and rehabilitation. On the reproach that this theory induces a practice that recommends to act in upon the reality of psychotic patients as the mere possibility of therapeutic action, he highlights that working with psychotics always needs a therapeutic acting in, and this statement means that psychiatry and psychoanalysis have to seek for a theory of acting in. In conclusion, the author considers that the Lacanian conception proposes an anthropological point of view that specifies the human psychic word; this point of view is maybe a radical one, but it does not lack arguments.

Full Text
Published version (Free)

Talk to us

Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have

Schedule a call