The important point to note here is that they all had the same brain injury. If the brain of the five patients had been examined with different tools there would not be a difference that showed that the patients were processing their injuries differently. It was only when subjectivity was involved that these differences were noticed and treated, which could suggest why psychoanalysis is better in treating some disorders than other treatments. This means that there are two perspectives when treating and understanding a person. One of them is a physical, which refers to neuroscience. As mentioned before, this field has an advantage over psychoanalysis over some criteria such as the treatment of schizophrenia or the ability to look at biological …show more content…
As mentioned before, this field has an advantage over neuroscience over some criteria such as the treatment of depression and the ability to look at subjective data. This is why a new paradigm is in order. One that advocates for neuropsychoanalysis. As it has been explained before, neuroscience has been conducting normal science. For example, in terms of addiction, neuroscience asserts that in the mesolimbic pathway there is a structure called the nucleus accumbens, which is associated with the seeking of pleasure. From the same starting point of that pathway, begins a different one called mesocortical pathway, which includes a structure known as the prefrontal cortex that is in charge of inhibition, planning, and regulating behavior. This is compatible with the Freudian model of the mind. In fact, the nucleus accumbens shares the same functions as the id and the superego shares similar functions with the prefrontal cortex. Moreover, these brain areas are activated while a person dreams much as it would be expected from the id and superego. In fact, damage to the ventromedial prefrontal cortex is the only damage that can cause cessation of dreaming. …show more content…
This is clearly seen in the early paradigms of hypnosis, where Mesmer, who was a key factor in the foundation of hypnosis, explained it in terms of animal magnetism. Even though, hypnosis worked, the theoretical background behind it is now rejected. Therefore, the possibility arises of what if psychoanalysis is clinically effective, but not theoretically right. Especially taking into the considerations of how scientists have arrived at the existing paradigm. Thus, it is important to justify psychoanalysis from an epistemological point of