A common contemporary view is that psychoanalysis and psychiatric diagnosis represent fundamentally incompatible enterprises, one concerned with subjective meaning and unconscious life and the other with symptom classification, etiopathology, and interrater reliability. This paper challenges that dichotomy, arguing instead for an integrative model in which psychoanalysis is both diagnostically informed and scientifically grounded. Tracing the historical alliance between psychoanalysis and psychiatry, this paper critiques the postmodern rejection of diagnosis as a retreat from clinical and empirical reality. Drawing on the work of psychoanalysts such as Otto Kernberg and John Gunderson, it demonstrates how diagnostic clarity enhances, rather than diminishes, psychodynamic theory. Diagnosis identifies what syndrome a patient suffers from; psychoanalytic formulation explains why it has taken a particular form. Together, they offer a comprehensive account of mental disorder. Reclaiming this dual framework is essential not only for psychoanalytic therapy’s scientific legitimacy, but for its continued relevance as a method of treatment for psychopathology.
Mark L. Ruffalo (Thu,) studied this question.