{'fraction_non_alphanumeric': 0.015197568389057751, 'fraction_numerical': 0.0, 'mean_word_length': 5.543046357615894, 'pattern_counts': {'":': 0, '<': 0, '<?xml version=': 0, '>': 0, 'https://': 0, 'lorem ipsum': 0, 'www.': 0, 'xml': 0}, 'pii_count': 0, 'substrings_counts': 0, 'word_list_counts': {'cursed_substrings.json': 0, 'profanity_word_list.json': 0, 'sexual_word_list.json': 0, 'zh_pornsignals.json': 0}}
Incommensurability between paradigms, revolutions and common ground in the development of psychoanalysis*

ABSTRACT The purpose of this article is to offer a critical analysis of different uses of the Kuhnian concept of paradigm to study psychoanalysis by showing how this notion may be used to establish a more profitable dialogue between different theoretical systems of psychoanalysis. In order to do so, we will examine how various authors, psychoanalysts and philosophers use this tool to understand psychoanalysis and its history. It will be argued that the understanding of theoretical systems of psychoanalysis as paradigms emphasises both their similarities (in the comprehension of a Freudian common ground) and their incommensurabilities. Additionally, it will be shown that the theories are not subject to communication, but rather the phenomena that such theories enable us to understand; they are, therefore, redescribed in each one of the systems allowing them to develop.