Author:
Krause Monika,Guggenheim Michael
Abstract
AbstractThe debate about knowledge-production in sociology has pitted “internalist” accounts, which pay close attention to the places, practices, and tools of knowledge, against “externalist” accounts of institutions and fields. Using psychoanalysis as a case, this paper develops an approach that integrates these traditions by comparing the differentiation of places, tools and practices of knowledge production. The paper shows that, in a context in which other areas of practice increasingly differentiate research, diagnosis and treatment in spaces, tools, and professional roles, psychoanalysis invokes that differentiation rhetorically but refuses to differentiate its practice. Psychoanalysts insist on a specific setting – the couch and the psychoanalytic relationship – as central to all aspects of their knowledge-production but they do not adapt this space to pursue any of these purposes in their own right. This analysis explains some of the problems psychoanalysis has with its environment and the specific form divisions take within psychoanalysis. As an unusual case of non-differentiation, psychoanalysis highlights the role differentiation plays in other areas of knowledge-production.
Publisher
Cambridge University Press (CUP)
Subject
Sociology and Political Science
Reference77 articles.
1. Profession und empirische Forschung in der Psychoanalyse - ihre Souveränität und Integration;Buchholz;Psyche – Zeitschrift für Psychoanalyse,2006
2. Gesellschaft als Labor. Die Erzeugung sozialer Risiken durch experimentelle Forschung;Krohn;Soziale Welt,1989
Cited by
11 articles.
订阅此论文施引文献
订阅此论文施引文献,注册后可以免费订阅5篇论文的施引文献,订阅后可以查看论文全部施引文献