Jana Milić

DOI Number
First page
Last page


This paper is actually a review of the status of psychoanalysis versus science. The lack of articles in contemporary discussions, and the absence of the topic of psychoanalysis suggests that there is less interest in the given topic. The impression is that the therapist who has the function of a patient does not have the time for other means of research and work. This supports the contemporary views that a therapist is, figuratively speaking, married to therapy and, therefore, cannot do anything for its sake. Strong criticism persisting even today is that addressed to Freud (in reference to relational psychoanalysis), arguing that he could not even bear to be seen as a warm and gentle figure by his patients. He is even known to have sat in a chair behind the headrest of the sofa used by the patient, in order to avoid looking the patients in the eyes, claiming it to be bothersome. The third century of the existence of psychoanalysis seems to be the time of questioning of whether the interest in this topic is disappearing. The corpus of psychoanalysis has been implemented throughout the 20th century. The general attitudes are that the analytical method has to change. Contemporary society wants quick results because the contemporary individual has little time. Psychoanalysis has always preferred the quiet, which now is a bad strategy, because very little has been done about its visibility and promotion.


unconsciousness, the scientific status of psychoanalysis, contemporary‚ approaches, the visibility of psychoanalysis.

Full Text:



Aron, L. (1989). Dreams, Narrative and the Psychoanalytic Method. Contemporary Psychoanalysis, 25(1), 108-127.

Aron, L. (1990). One Person and Two Person Psychologies and the Method of Psychoanalysis. Psychoanalytic Psychology, 7(4), 440-475.

Bornstein, R. F. (2001). The Impending Death of Psychoanalysis. Psychoanalytic Psychology, 18(1), 3-20. doi: 10.1037//0736-9735.I8.1.3

Bornstein, R. F. (2005). Reconnecting Psychoanalysis to Mainstream Psychology. Challenges and Opportunities. Psychoanalytic Psychology, 22(3), 323-340. doi: 10.1037/0736-9735.22.3.323.

Bornstein, R. F. (2007). Nomothetic Psychoanalysis. Psychoanalytic Psychology, 24(4), 570-590. doi: 10.1037/0736-9735.24.4.590.

Cozolino, L. (2014). The Neuroscience of Human Relationships: Attachment and the Developing Social Brain. WW Norton & Company. Infant Mental Health Journal, 36(5), 533–535. doi: 10.1002/imhj.21532

Damjanović, A. (2015). Filozofska kritika kao nadogradnja psihoanalize (ili kako, kad i koliko filozofija priznaje frojdovo nesvesno) [Philosophical Critique as an Addition to Psychoanalysis (or How, When and How Much Philosophy Acknowledges Freud’s Unconscious]. Engrami, 37(2), 41–53.

Dimitrijević, A. (2011). P E. Stepansky: Psychoanalysis at the Margins.Clinical Social Work Journal, 39(3), 321-322. doi: 10.1007/s10615-011-0323-8.

Dimitrijević, A. (2015). Being Mad in Early Modern England. Frontiers in Psychology, 6, 1-4. doi: 10.3389/fpsyg.2015.01740.

Fonagy, P. (2003). Psychoanalysis today. World Psychiatry, 2(2), 73. doi:10.1017/s0954579497001399

Fonagy, P., & Target, M. (1997). Attachment and reflective function: Their role in self-organization. Development and psychopathology, 9(4), 679-700., (Pristupljeno decembra 2019), (Pristupljeno decembra 2019)

Jalom, I. (2011). Gledanje u Sunce [Watching the Sun]. Novi Sad: Psihopolis.

Jandrić, A. (2017). Vitgenštajnova kritika Frojda [Wittgenstein’s Critique of Freud]. Theoria 3, 60: 75–91. doi: 10.2298/THEO1703075C (Retrieved from 13 June 2019)

Jevremović, P. M. (2005). Ishodišta i putevi savremene psihoanalize [The starting points and pathways of contemporary psychoanalysis]. (Retrieved from 13 June 2019)

Jevremović, P. M. (2010) Budućnost psihoterapije i pitanje vrednosti [Future of Psychotherapy and the Question of Value]. u: B. Ćorić (Prir.) Ljudi govore... [Peaple Talk...]. (str. 149–154). Beograd. FASPER.

Paris, J. (2017). Is Psychoanalysis Still Relevant to Psychiatry? The Canadian Journal of Psychiatry, 62(5), 308-312. doi: 10.1177/0706743717692306.

Roudinesco, E. (2005). Psihoanaliza i njezini putovi. [Psychoanalysis a and its pathways]. Zagreb: Naklada Slap.

Sandler, Dž., Dar, K., Holder, A. (1998). Pacijent i analitičar [The patient and analyst]. Beograd: Paideia.

Wallerstein, R. S. (2009). What Kind of Research in Psychoanalytic Science? International Journal of Psycho-Analysis, 90(1), 109-133. doi: 10.1111/j.1745-8315.2008.00107.x.

Zlopaša, S. (2015). Preduslovi kritike psihoanalize. [The Conditions of Critique of Psychoanalysis]. Engrami, 37(2), 55–62.

Zlopaša, S., Vuković, O., Dunjić Kostić, B. & Damjanović, A. (2011). Psihoanaliza i Film [Psychoanalysis and Movie]. Engrami, 33(4), 61–69.



  • There are currently no refbacks.

© University of Niš, Serbia
Creative Commons licence CC BY-NC-ND
Print ISSN: 0353-7919
Online ISSN: 1820-7804