There are times, remarkably enough, when problems do not call for
surgery, nor medicine, nor statistical verification. A place remains,
and I dare say will always remain, for poetry, literature, art, and
compassion. When I feel troubled, I would rather seek these than the
assistance of the empiricist. And at my work, I would rather offer them,
as best as I can, than pretend that multivariate analysis can explain
the dilemmas of human existence and relationship.

Paul Hamburg

Howard Eisman wrote:


>  > Were I to require surgery, I would hope that the operation would be based on the
>  > findings of that old nasty reductionistic empiricism. I'll bet that Dr. Hamburg
>  > feels the same way. Were I to require a form of psychotherapy, should the
>  > psychotherapy be based on looser standards that the surgery? Many Psychotherapists
>  > would say, yes! it should. How would we feel if surgeons said the same thing.
>  >
>  > Howard D. Eisman, Ph.D.
>  >
>  > Paul Hamburg wrote:
>  >
>
>>  >> It is interesting to stop for a moment and speculate: would empirical
>>  >> science offer us an explanation for the nastiness in its defenders that
>>  >> has so obviously wounded many list members? Or would any exploration of
>>  >> this interpersonal experience require recourse to precisely those
>>  >> non-empirical insights that a discipline like psychoanalysis (or
>>  >> literary critical theory, or philosophy) offer to any of us with some
>>  >> remnant of openmindedness to receive them? It amazes me that the social
>>  >> pseudo-science arguments still find advocates in the 21st century----the
>>  >> cult of reductionist empiricism is as powerful as any other close-minded
>>  >> belief system. Alas.
>>  >>
>>  >> Paul Hamburg MD
>>  >> Harvard Medical School
>>  >>
>>  >> L Miller wrote:
>>  >>
>>
>>>  >>> Dr Eisman,
>>>  >>>
>>>  >>> There's no trick involved...  nor is an ad hominem attack on you intended.
>>>  >>>
>>>  >>> What I am trying to communicate, as tactfully as possible, is my take on
>>>  >>> your comments--that your comments about women social workers who have
>>>  >>> undergone psychoanalytic training, who are supported by husbands, etc etc
>>>  >>> etc are gross generalizations, and smack of misogyny, and other
>>>  >>> negativeness to me.  I sure don't know if there was some incident or
>>>  >>> experience that stimulated these comments, maybe you could help us out with
>>>  >>> that?  I am curious as to the vehemence of your comments.  I have not had
>>>  >>> the experience that you describe and it is a mystery to me why/how you
>>>  >>> would come to say the things that you have.  Louise
>>