Grounding a Critical Psychoanalysis in Frameworks of Power

Abstract

This article outlines two frameworks of power to explore the relationship between consulting room practices of psychoanalysis and societal networks of power. First, focus falls on Habermas's view of Freudian psychoanalysis as an emancipatory practice. Despite Habermas's problematic rationalistic interpretation of classical analysis, he may have been correct in noting that it attempts to stand in external relation to the systems of power that it seeks to address. This is a problematic grounding for critique, which may lead to idealism and authoritarianism. The second framework is an internalist Foucauldian one, which proposes that the analyst cannot avoid participation in societal power dynamics even in the consulting room. This framework is preferred, but must take account of Habermas's charge that Foucault's position succumbs to relativism. Following some reworking, the internalist approach is used to generate three principles for critical activity in relation to which classical and other psychoanalytic practices are examined.

The Powers of Emptiness

“…The work of Michel Foucault has proved an important influence in the arena of the critical and theoretical psychology that Theory & Psychology has done so well to explore over the last 20 years. This has proved the case not only methodologically (Hook, 2001;Ibáñez, 1991;Yates & Hiles, 2010), but also in terms of plotting the relation between power and subjectivity (Amigot & Pujal, 2009;Guilfoyle, 2007;Hook, 2003;Joy, 1993). While the current paper wishes to make a contribution to this literature, it hopes to do so via means of an adjunct to Foucault's theorization of power provided by another French intellectual whose work has itself gained increasing prominence in Theory & Psychology over the last several years (Dunker, 2008;Malone, 2000Malone, , 2007Malone, , 2008Parker, 2005Parker, , 2008Shingu & Funaki, 2008;Vanheule & Verhaeghe, 2001;Webb & Sells, 1995): Jacques Lacan.…”