Escape from Reason

Dialogue 46 (4):781-796 (2007)
  Copy   BIBTEX

Abstract

McLaughlin’s case for the theoretical relevance of either "Escape" or of Freudian social theory generally proves counter-productive. He offers very weak criteria for theory acceptance and often takes mere labels to be explanatory theories. He does so particularly in his promotion of the con- cept of ambivalence. I will engage the proposed case study and explain why the use of “ambivalence” in psychoanalysis (especially by Bleuler or Freud) and sociology (by Smelser and his followers) is untenable. I point to a notable conflict between McLaughlin’s rationalist and other inten- tions, and will show how he shares the approach to social theories that makes for the state of affairs in the humanities which he deplores.

Links

PhilArchive



    Upload a copy of this work     Papers currently archived: 93,642

External links

Setup an account with your affiliations in order to access resources via your University's proxy server

Through your library

Analytics

Added to PP
2009-01-28

Downloads
49 (#103,641)

6 months
224 (#91,501)

Historical graph of downloads
How can I increase my downloads?

Author's Profile

Slava Sadovnikov
York University

Citations of this work

No citations found.

Add more citations

References found in this work

Realism and the aim of science.Karl R. Popper - 1983 - New York: Routledge. Edited by William Warren Bartley.
Escape from Freedom.Erich Fromm - 1941 - Science and Society 6 (2):187-190.
Realism and the Aim of Science.Karl R. Popper & W. W. Bartley - 1983 - Philosophy of Science 50 (4):669-671.

View all 16 references / Add more references