THE GROWTH OF PSYCHO-ANALYSIS
[To the Editor of THE SPECTATOR]
Snt,—I note that a correspondent in the issue of your journal for March 24th strongly advocated the necessity of some action being taken " against " psycho-analysis. May I be allowed to suggest the form which such " action " might usefully take? But although I may admit that there is some truth in what he says, his statements seem somewhat sweeping. Does he know, for instance, what would have been the condition of the people, who were driven to " chronic melancholia " or " suicide " by psycho-analysis, had they never been treated by an analyist? They were obviously not in a normal state of mind to begin with, otherwise they would not have con- sulted a mental specialist!
But, whatever our ideas about psycho-analysis, we must never forget that, in comparison with all other branches of medicine, it is a science in its infancy—it is hardly forty years since Freud made his epoch-making discoveries—and we do not want to emulate the mistakes our ancestors made in crushing out all initiative towards new experiments by dubbing them sinful ; how many centuries of disease and torment had to pass before Lister, Koch and Pasteur were free to give their knowledge to suffering man? Let us not baulk the new mental science, but rather help it to better and truer understanding with our criticism.
Admittedly the human mind is the most puzzling pheno- menon that confronts mankind. Eddington sums up the problem in one sentence : " The physiologist can trace the nerve mechanism up to the brain ; but ultimately there is a hiatus which no one professes to fill up." That hiatus Freud and Adler, William Brown and Jung give their life's work in attempting to fill, each in his own way, whilst admitting that no solution is final—as yet.
But apart from these great ones, there are thousands of lesser people working ceaselessly to help the human mind to meet the strain of modern life, and if among these there are a few who, on the strength of having read some of Freud's or Jung's or Brown's books, and being able to talk glibly about the " libido," the " anima " or " repressions," set up a practice in mental healing, for which their only real equip- ment is a nice estimate of human folly, why should the whole profession be tarred with the same brush? Rather should we blame the laws which make five years training (at least)
compulsory for a physician but leave the training of a psycho- analyist to his own conscience. At this stage of our ignorance we should be thankful there are some few who, having been cured of their own neuroses, have learnt by their experience how to help otheis, instead of jeering at them!
Speaking of the training of an analyist, Jung says: " The fourth stage of analytical psychology, then, demands not only the transformation of the patient, but also the counter- application to himself by the doctor of the system which he prescribes in any given case. And in dealing with himself the doctor must display as much relentlessness, consistency and perseverance as in dealing with his patients. The medical diploma is no longer the crucial thing . . . the latest advance in analytical psychology makes an unavoidable problem of the doctor's ethical attitude."
The " action " therefore which we must ask of the doctors is clear ; but, at the same time, the general public should be taught the dangers of undergoing psycho-analytical treatment at the hands of irresponsible persons.—I am, yours faithfully,
105 Hallam Street, London, W. i. L. FROST.
Previous page
