The need for true controversies in psychoanalysis: the debates on Melanie Klein and Jacques Lacan in the Rio de la Plata.
Controversies are part of the process of scientific knowing. In psychoanalysis, the diversity of theoretical, technical and epistemological positions makes the debate particularly necessary and by the same token difficult. In this paper, the author examines the function of controversies and the obstacles to their development, taking as examples the debates held in the Río de la Plata (Buenos Aires and Montevideo) during the nineteen seventies, when the dominant Kleinian ideas came into contact with Lacanian thought. The author examines different examples of argumentative discourses, using concepts taken from the theory of argumentation. The major difficulties encountered did not hinge on characteristics pertaining to psychoanalytic theories (i.e. the lack of commensurability between them), but on the defensive strategies aimed at keeping each theory's premises safe from the opposing party's arguments. A true debate implies the construction of a shared argumentative field that makes it possible to lay out the different positions and see some interaction between them and is guided by the search for the best argument. When this occurs, controversies promote the discipline's development, even when they fail to reach any consensus.
Bernardi
Ricardo
R
Santiago Vázquez 1142, Montevideo 11300, Uruguay.
D005602:France; D006301:Health Services Needs and Demand; D049673:History, 20th Century; D011572:Psychoanalysis / Q000266:history; D011574:Psychoanalytic Theory; D011575:Psychoanalytic Therapy / Q000379:methods*