SEM: Freud Between the Two Cultures
Fall 2013
Class 10:00 - 11:50 TR Stephen E. Epler Hall 107
“The important thing is for your mother to repress what happened, push it deep
down inside her so she'll never annoy us again.”
Homer Simpson
Instructor: Kathleen Merrow merrowk@pdx.edu; phone 725-5365; office UHB 106
Office Hours: 3:00-5:00 MW or by appointment
Course Description:
We shall continue the investigation into the nature of, and relationships between, the sciences
and the humanities that was begun in earlier coursework by taking as a case study Freud’s
development of psychoanalysis as a disciplinary practice. Freud attempted to position
psychoanalysis as neither psychiatry nor biology, neither philosophy nor religion, but as
something new with the authoritative power to comment upon and interpret these competing
discourses. This is not an investigation of whether psychoanalysis is “really” either one of the
sciences or the humanities. Rather, we will use our study of Freud to think through the
ideological and disciplinary investments at work in such divisions. Our study of Freud’s texts
from this perspective will:
1. Use Freud’s work to establish psychoanalysis as an autonomous science as a critical
framework for thinking about the nature and relative status of the sciences and the humanities,
2. Use Freud’s work as a way of thinking about the kinds of boundary-marking and exclusionary
practices that have gone into establishing the “divide” that separates the culture of the sciences
from that of the humanities,
3. Use the responses to Freud’s work that you will investigate in your individual research to
study how these “divisions” are still highly contested.
Along the way, we shall learn something of value about one of the most important theoretical
frameworks of the twentieth century.
Required Texts:
Sigmund Freud, The Interpretation of Dreams (Avon)
Dora: An Analysis of a Case of Hysteria (Simon and Schuster)
On the History of the Psychoanalytic Movement
------------------
“One of the Difficulties in Psychoanalysis” (Handout)
Available through D2L course page:
“Wild’ Psycho-Analysis,” “The Question of Lay Analysis,” “The Question of a
Weltanschauung”
General Learning Outcomes:
1. Review and rehearse the skill of “summary of argument.” This is continued practice for thesis
writing and the ability to evaluate and appropriately situate sources.
2. Work on appropriate framing of an argument and the use of textual evidence to support it.
3. Improve presentation and teamwork skills by taking over responsibility for a 50-minute class
period.
4. Further develop the second year curriculum work on methods in the intellectual domains of
the humanities, human, and natural sciences by studying how different disciplines appropriate
and frame (in all senses of this word) Freud’s theories of psychoanalysis.
5. Develop skills in the explication and reading of complex texts—in this case really complex
texts.
Course expectations and grading policy:
This course is a seminar and thus depends upon lively and informed class discussion. I expect
you to come to class with the readings done and reflected upon. We have a tight reading
schedule with little room for repetition, so near flawless attendance is also expected. If you
cannot come to class it is your responsibility to get notes from a classmate.
Given that 2 classes comprise an entire week of work, 2 unexcused absences will result in a
reduction of the attendance grade by one full grade. Additional absences will further lower this
grade accordingly. Excused absences for an illness or emergency will not count against your
grade. (Please note that this will not include scheduling appointments in conflict with the
course meeting time.) Habitual lateness will also affect your grade. If you experience any kind
of extended illness or emergency that interferes with your regular attendance then you need to
document this and make arrangements to make up work and/or keep up with the pace of the
class.
Please keep me informed of any ongoing problems that result in missing classes or an inability to
keep up with the work. Timely intervention here is crucial and we are willing to make
accommodations where appropriate.
Given these expectations, attendance and class participation make up a significant portion of
your grade:
Attendance and participation: 20%
Partial draft:
10%
First draft:
15%
Final draft:
30%
Presentation:
25%
Late papers will not be accepted.
Optional: Anyone who wants to hand in a second draft after receiving comments to the first
draft is welcome to do so.
Discussion Schedule:
Tuesday
Week of:
Oct. 1
Oct. 8
Introduction/Overview
Writing assignment; assignment of
disciplines to groups; assignment of
individual articles/chapters within
groups. Review folder materials
posted on D2L page.
“One of the Difficulties in Psychoanalysis” Dreams, prefaces and chap. 1
Oct. 15
Dreams, chaps. 2,3,4,5
Oct. 22
Dreams, chap 7
Oct. 29
Dora
Nov. 5
Thursday
Dreams, chaps. 6
Partial draft due: work on author/sources
Dreams, conclusion
Dora
“Lay Analysis”
“The Question of a Weltanschauung”
“Wild Psychoanalysis”
Discussion 10-10:50
Presentation prep: PSYCH/O 1111:50
Full draft due
Nov. 12
Nov. 19
On the History of the Psychoanalytic Mvt.
Presentation prep:
Meet only with ENG 10-10:50
SOC 11-11:50,
Presentation prep:
Meet only with HIST 10-10:50
Meet only with PHIL 11-11:50
Presentations (PSYCH/HIST)
Groups not meeting during class time should use available time to work on presentations. This is
one time you all have free without conflicts to meet together.
Nov. 26
Presentations (PHIL/ENG)
Dec. 3
Presentations (SOC)/overview
Dec. 10
NO CLASS
Summary /Evaluations
Final Exams Week
Final drafts due by 5:00 Thursday Dec. 12 in my mailbox at University Honors
Assignment Descriptions:
Paper;
In working on this it is best to keep in mind your purpose in summarizing the argument of the
text you are assigned. We are thinking about how disciplinary training and methods shape the
way the particular author you are reading approaches the work of Freud, with a special emphasis
(built into the selection of texts available) on how they locate Freud within the three main
domains that structure contemporary academic knowledge production. For example, the authors
trained in the study of languages and literatures—no surprise—focus on the textuality and the
“written” nature of Freud’s texts: formal structures, use of metaphor, etc. Their “Freud” is a
literary Freud. Philosophers worry about the epistemic foundations of Freud’s theories, while
historians find the historical dimension of these same theories more compelling. Etc. In
summarizing your author’s argument then, you need to focus on this aspect. What kind of
“Freud” is your author shaping? Why? How? Or, how do they position psychoanalysis as a
theory and method? For example, if your author insists that psychoanalysis should not be
understood as a science, then what is it? What is at stake in this? You will also need to consider
which of Freud’s texts they privilege, and make an argument of your own about why this would
be the case. Here the reading of Freud’s texts that we develop in class should inform your own
argument. What aspect of Freud’s work gets foregrounded in order to support your author’s
thesis? What is occluded? What conclusions can you draw from this? Can you extend this
outward to the tensions that exist between the three major intellectual domains?
This is not a research paper per se, but in order to get at this you may well need to go beyond the
specific text you are working with. You will certainly need to research your author. You will
need to do some research into the author’s discipline: what kinds of questions are considered
valid within the disciplinary context, how are they answered, what constitutes legitimate
knowledge and evidence within it, how are disciplinary boundaries maintained? You may in
some instances need to familiarize yourself (not reading exhaustively but selectively) with other
texts of Freud and/or other authors who play a dominant role in your particular article or chapter.
Wikipedia can be surprisingly helpful here to give you a vocabulary to work with, but is not to
be ultimately relied upon. Your article or chapter is your universe for this assignment and you
need to figure out what you need to know and then set about knowing it. You will of course cite
any sources you use.
In order to do to this, your paper will need the following logical structure (which should be
understood as the necessary steps one would take to engage in summary of argument, repeatable
in other contexts, say a thesis that lays out the relevant literature on a topic) and should be 25003000 words long:
Title
Directive introduction
Here you provide a concise map for your reader: what are you doing, why are you
doing it, how are you doing it (i.e. lay out the main parts of your main body (see below),
and what results have you obtained? Include your own thesis statement. Do not use the
“inverted pyramid” form of introduction.
Main Body (the 4 steps of your own argument):
-Summary of author’s argument
What is his or her thesis? What are the main steps taken to support it? Or,
what is the logic that structures the argument made in support of the thesis? What
larger questions are driving the specific argument your author makes about how to
understand Freud?
-Catalogue of author’s evidentiary archive:
What primary sources are relied upon? What secondary sources? Look each of
these up and find a way to chart them (bar graph, diagram, spread sheet) by
labeling them and counting the elements assigned to each label. This
documentation is your evidence in support of any claims you make in the
evaluative section in the main body of your paper. It will be attached to your
paper as an addendum and cited appropriately in support of your claims. The
relevant information here would be the discipline to which a particular scholarly
text belongs (authors may or may not provide a guide for you here) and/or the
subject matter. You are to be strictly descriptive here, as the evaluative part comes
in the next section of your paper. Essentially this is a design problem: how are
you going to document your author’s evidentiary archive in order to describe it
synthetically in this section of your paper and to establish the basis for an
argument about the nature of this archive and what it reveals about the author’s
positioning of Freud? You cannot simply list or repeat the author’s bibliography
nor can you be selective. So, count and catalogue and then discuss the categories.
-Evaluation of the relationship between the argument and the kinds and types of
evidence used, bringing your own knowledge of Freud’s texts to bear upon this
problem and your assessment of the kinds and types of evidence relied upon by
your author. What principles of selection apply? Why? How does this work? What
“Freud” is produced?
-Discussion of the author’s disciplinary identity (training, institutional affiliations,
association with a particular school of thought, theory, method) and how this can
be seen in the shape and nature of the argument? This then sets up your
Reflective conclusion
This would be the place to briefly review the work you (not your author) have done in
your paper and then carry it forward to thinking about the larger methodological
considerations raised.
The first step to take is to work on parts 2 and 4 of the main body in a partial draft (see due
dates on reading schedule). You will hand in your charts/graphs along with your description of
them in prose, together with your discussion of your author’s disciplinary identity and a tentative
argument about how this shapes his or her approach to Freud.
The second step is to fold this in to the other parts of your main body and produce a first full
draft. This draft will receive extensive commentary that must be attended to in the third step,
your final paper.
Presentation:
The class will be divided up into five groups (English and Comp
Lit, Philosophy, Sociology, Psychology, and History) that are the main disciplines with any kind
of investment in psychoanalysis. Each of you is working on an individual paper within one of
these groups (4 articles/chapters per group =one article per person). In the presentation you will
pool your work, and figure out how to teach it to the class. You will have a total of 50 minutes
to present your findings along with the relevant evidence and to lead a class discussion (say
30/35 mins for presentation and 20/15 mins for discussion). You will want to chose some pages
or significant passages from the works your group studied to hand out in advance for the class
can read as a prompt for questions and discussion (material should be ready to be posted one
week prior to presentation).
You will be graded on clarity and professionalism, usefulness of supporting
documentation/visual aids, and ability to present a range of material concisely yet accurately
such that issues about disciplinary boundaries and contestations over method emerge clearly
from the material you present.
This too is a design problem: how are you going to walk your audience through material they
will not have read and yet convey the crucial information necessary for them to grasp the key
questions and issues at stake?
Keep in mind that 30 minutes passes much faster than you think it will. Rehearse your
presentation with a timer so that you do not go over.
________________________________________________________________________
Please note: If you are a student with a documented disability and registered with the DRC,
please contact us immediately to facilitate arranging academic accommodations.