In this paper, I criticize the claim made by Donald Davidson, among others, that Freud’s psychoanalytic theory provides “a conceptual framework within which to describe and understand irrationality.” Further, I defend my epistemological strictures on the explanatory and therapeutic foundations of the psychoanalytic enterprise against the efforts of Davidson, Marcia Cavell, Thomas Nagel, et al., to undermine them.

This paper consists of two related parts:I. A detailed critique of Donald Davidson's thesis—in his “The Paradoxes of Irrationality”—that “…any satisfactory [explanatory] view [of irrationality] must embrace some of Freud's most important theses” (p. 290). I argue that this conclusion is doubly flawed: (i) Davidson's case for it is logically ill‐founded, and (ii) its Freudian plaidoyer is also factually false.II. Relatedly, in the second part, I confute the recent arguments given by Marcia Cavell, Thomas Nagel, et al. to establish that (...) psychoanalytic causal explanations of irrationality are epistemically justified, because they are extensions of the desire‐cumbelief pattern of accounting for intentional actions. As a corollary, it becomes clear that these authors have failed to undermine my epistemological strictures on the foundations of psychoanalysis. (shrink)

What does a confrontation between philosophy and psychoanalysis look like? My task is a philosophical investigation of a psychoanalytic concept. Thus, I offer a conceptual analysis of a concept that is used both clinically and as a part of a metapsychology. The concept that I investigate in this article is regression. I work with the following two problems: What does a conceptual analysis of the phenomenon called regression look like? Regression can be regarded as an instrument that can give us (...) knowledge about ourselves. What does this mean? I compare two ways of analyzing regression, an atomistic as well as an holistic approach. This comparison is made by way of a discussion of the conceptual analysis of the infant. Can we construct the inner life of the infant? How should we conceptualize the primitive? Using concepts like ‘conceptual holism’ and ‘holism of attributes’, I draw parallell conclusions about the construction of the infant's inner life and the analysis of the concept of regression. (shrink)