'Yes, we have bananas!'.

Area of Science:

• Psychoanalysis
• Cultural Studies
• Scientific Publishing

Background:

• The concept of 'identifying markers of Latin American psychoanalysis' is examined.
• This theme is viewed as a compromise between divergent academic and publication-driven approaches.
• The authors argue that focusing on minor differences (secondary identifications) overlooks core psychoanalytic invariances (identities).

Purpose of the Study:

• To critique the search for specific 'markers' of Latin American psychoanalysis.
• To analyze how colonial-colonized dynamics influence the perception and publication of psychoanalytic thought.
• To explore the impact of editorial power and cultural conformity on scientific knowledge dissemination.

Main Methods:

• Critical analysis of the concept of 'identifying markers'.
• Examination of editorial criteria and publication biases as a 'clinical case'.
• Illustration using historical Brazilian context to explore power dynamics and conformity.

Main Results:

• The search for unique markers is identified as a prejudiced approach stemming from colonial legacies.
• Editorial power and conformity to cultural patterns distort the focus from fundamental psychoanalytic principles.
• Publication practices create a cycle favoring established ideas, marginalizing novel contributions.

Conclusions:

• The concept of 'identifying markers' in Latin American psychoanalysis is a construct of colonial bias.
• Psychoanalysis must address uncertainty, pluralism, and complexity, rather than seeking superficial distinctions.
• Reforming publication and editorial practices is crucial to foster a more inclusive and scientifically robust dissemination of psychoanalytic knowledge.