Mešovita priroda psihoanalitičkog diskursa
The Mixed Nature of Psychoanalytic Discourse

Summary/Abstract: Since his monography On aphasia, Freud distanced himself from the neurological reductionism of his contemporaries. Pointing out that the phenomenon of aphasia must be understood as independent of the localization of lesia, Freud contributed to the understanding of the phenomenon of hysteria. The hysterical symptom could not be reduced to degenerative changes in the central nervous system. In the case of hysteria, word-presentation is split from thing-presentation. Neurotic symptom – and this is the essence of Freud’s later doctrine – is cured when during the psychotherapeutic process, word presentation is linked with thing-presentation. The patient’s discourse, his free associations, is mainly determined by his unconscious. In an analytic situation, it (unconscious) is revealed to us as discourse. It cannot be disputed. However, if the talking cure is to be the cure, it is necessary to connect the symbolic and the energetic. Linguistic re/interpretation is not an alternative to economic explanation. Dynamic of meaning implies physical (energetic).

• Details
• Contents