MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2955057491

Review of Matthew C. Altman and Cynthia D. Coe, The Fractured Self in Freud and German Philosophy . London: Palgrave MacMillan, 2013. 247 pages

2019· article· en· W2955057491 on OpenAlexaff
James Scott Johnston

Bibliographic record

VenueThe Journal of Macrodynamic Analysis (Memorial University of Newfoundland) · 2019
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPsychology
TopicPsychotherapy Techniques and Applications
Canadian institutionsMemorial University of Newfoundland
Fundersnot available
KeywordsGermanEnlightenmentHegelianismPhilosophyPsychoanalysisGerman philosophyEpistemologySubject (documents)Psychology
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Freud's metapsychology is a product of post-Enlightenment thinking.This is the upshot of Altman and Coe's well-researched The Fractured Self in Freud and German Philosophy.To get to this conclusion, Altman and Coe examine Freud's relationship with major German thinkers of the 19 th century.Despite Freud's own claim that metapsychology is a science, not a philosophy (3), Altman and Coe's examination reveals the philosophical underpinnings of an otherwise positivistic and methodologically individualistic program of psychoanalysis.This underpinning turns out to be both empirical (determinist) and autonomous (anti-determinist).Of course, Altman and Coe do not see this (as Freud might have) as a deficiency of intellectual rigour: rather as an acknowledgement of the intellectual history Freud subsumes as part of his metatheory generation.This puts Freud clearly in line with 19 th century post-Enlightenment thinking.And it places Freud in a line of scholars keen to test the boundaries of subjectivity as set by Enlightenment parameters.Freud's subject is "a fractured self-embodied, historically situated, and bound by language" (5).It is "an unfinished project" (5) that continues but does not imitate conclusions of post-Enlightenment German thought.In the interest of space, I will examine five of the nine thinkers through whom Altman and Coe read Freud; these are Kant, Schelling, Schopenhauer, Hegel, and Nietzsche.I will then discuss Altman and Coe's conclusions on having canvassed the tradition of 19 th century German philosophy.Kant's theory of freedom operates as the point of departure for Freudian analysis.Kant's freedom is notoriously dualistic; knowledge limits itself to make room for faith (10).Furthermore, self-knowledge is ultimately inscrutable: we don't have access to the (hidden) motivations of our hearts, and we don't have a mechanism to uncover these.We have the capacity to formulate moral maxims, but only to superimpose these onto our baser motivations, which remain inaccessible.Our empirical self is impenetrable, and our noumenal self is opaque (14).In contrast to this, Freud's self is empirical all the way down, and is motivated by (materialistic) drives ( 14).Through

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

How this classification was reachedexpand

Full frame machine prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.008
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: Not applicable
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.016
Threshold uncertainty score0.055

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.008
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0020.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0030.001
Bibliometrics0.0080.010
Science and technology studies0.0010.002
Scholarly communication0.0040.006
Open science0.0020.002
Research integrity0.0040.005
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0160.012

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.008
GPT teacher head0.267
Teacher spread0.258 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreReview

How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".

Quick stats

Citations0
Published2019
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueThe Journal of Macrodynamic Analysis (Memorial University of Newfoundland)Same topicPsychotherapy Techniques and ApplicationsFrench-language works237,207