[Skip to Content]
Access to paid content on this site is currently suspended due to excessive activity being detected from your IP address Please contact the publisher to request reinstatement.
[Skip to Content Landing]
April 15, 1933


JAMA. 1933;100(15):1196. doi:10.1001/jama.1933.02740150054026

This article is only available in the PDF format. Download the PDF to view the article, as well as its associated figures and tables.


To the Editor:  —It is surprising that after nearly forty years it should still be so difficult to have a calm, critical attitude toward psychoanalysis. Neither the proponents nor the critics seem to have difficulty in recognizing the emotional bias of those who disagree with them, but they become indignant at any suggestion of such prejudices in themselves.Psychoanalysts have again been accused of rejecting rational criticism as a manifestation of unconscious emotional "resistances." So far as this has been done it should indeed be condemned, for behind every argument there is an emotional factor; but it is the truth and falsehood of the argument that must be established, independent of the emotional state of the critic.It must be admitted, however, that it is extremely difficult to answer scientifically an article in which the emotions are so intense as to obscure the rational thinking. An extreme of this type

First Page Preview View Large
First page PDF preview
First page PDF preview