Psychoanalysis and Neuroscience: The Bridge Between Mind and Brain

Abstract

In 1895 in the Project for a Scientific Psychology, Freud tried to integrate psychology and neurology in order to develop a neuroscientific psychology. Since 1880, Freud made no distinction between psychology and physiology. His papers from the end of the 1880s to 1890 were very clear on this scientific overlap: as with many of his contemporaries, Freud thought about psychology essentially as the physiology of the brain. Years later he had to surrender, realizing a technological delay, not capable of pursuing its ambitious aim, and until that moment psychoanalysis would have to use its more suitable clinical method. Also, he seemed skeptical about phrenology drift, typical of that time, in which any psychological function needed to be located in its neuroanatomical area. He could not see the progresses of neuroscience and its fruitful dialogue with psychoanalysis, which occurred also thanks to the improvements in the field of neuroimaging, which has made possible a remarkable advance in the knowledge of the mind-brain system and a better observation of the psychoanalytical theories. After years of investigations, deriving from research and clinical work of the last century, the discovery of neural networks, together with the free energy principle, we are observing under a new light psychodynamic neuroscience in its exploration of the mind-brain system. In this manuscript, we summarize the important developments of psychodynamic neuroscience, with particular regard to the free energy principle, the resting state networks, especially the Default Mode Network in its link with the Self, emphasizing our view of a bridge between psychoanalysis and neuroscience. Finally, we suggest a discussion by approaching the concept of Alpha Function, proposed by the psychoanalyst Wilfred Ruprecht Bion, continuing the association with neuroscience.

Brain Entropy During Aging Through a Free Energy Principle Approach

“…The transition between these two phases seems to be associated with ordinary consciousness state of “neurocognitive efficiency”: the system has an internal (unconscious) model of the world and through the active inferences, create predictions about expectations. The difference between predicted sensory information (prior probability) and the real sensory information (posterior probability) gives rise to a prediction error ( Hohwy, 2013 ), where surprise, or free energy, can be decomposed into complexity minus accuracy ( Cieri and Esposito, 2019 ).…”

Entropy, Free Energy, and Symbolization: Free Association at the Intersection of Psychoanalysis and Neuroscience

“…The transition between these levels of consciousness and their modes of associativity could emerge through the DMN whose purpose is to integrate and organize internal and external information. As Cieri and Esposito (2019) suggest: "Freudian constructs of the primary and secondary processes seem to have neurobiological substrates, consistent with self-organized activity in hierarchical cortical systems, and Freudian descriptions of the ego are consistent with the functions described of the DMN with its reciprocal exchanges with subordinate limbic and paralimbic brain systems" (p. 12). The role of psychoanalytic therapy, therefore, appears to be the reestablishment of this integrative work.…”

“…Despite significant distinctions within these models, we focus on the connections between psychoanalytic and neuroscientific concepts to highlight the heterogeneity of psychic modes of symbolization (Roussillon, 2015), thus developing earlier observations in the fields (Mancia, 2006;De Masi et al, 2015). In this regard, we will underline, as proposed by Cieri and Esposito (2019), how "free association offers a clear and sharp path with cognitive science, free energy neuroscience, and computational psychiatry in order to create a consistent and solid connection between the psychological and neuroscientific views" (p. 5). Free association will thus emerge as a particularly fruitful concept to specify the understanding of therapeutic models through a dialogue between psychoanalysis and neuroscience (Magistretti and Ansermet, 2010;Panksepp and Solms, 2011;Yovell et al, 2015;Rabeyron, 2016).…”

Relationship between Mentalizing and Working Conditions in Health Care

“…Neuroimaging research has shown that compared to healthy controls, posttraumatic stress disorder patients have hyperactivation of default mode network (DMN) and mirror neuron system (MNS) to emotional stimuli [68]. Impairment of DMN connectivity has been shown to be associated with impairment of the self's experience in psychopathology [69].…”