Psychoanalysis as a human science: critique and reformulation

This paper continues the debate opened by Will (1980), concerning the scientific status of psychoanalysis. A critique is made of Will's paper, on the grounds that it misrepresents the scientific method, and fails to consider appropriate criteria for evaluating psychoanalysis. A defence of Popper, and the importance of prediction as a tool in structuring understanding, is sketched out, and an alternative view of the scientific process which can more adequately encompass the enterprise of psychoanalysis is suggested.