PRESSURE MOUNTS FOR ANALYSTS TO PROVE THEORY IS SCIENTIFIC
THE scientific credentials of psychoanalysis are being weighed anew in what some see as an effort to demolish its intellectual status, and what others see as a defense of its viability. More than 25 years ago in an influential statement on the nature of science Sir Karl Popper dismissed psychoanalysis, along with Marxism and astrology, as a self-confirming, nonscientific theory. Now, in a detailed refutation of Sir Karl, Adolf Gr"unbaum, a philosopher of science at the University of Pittsburgh, has proposed that psychoanalytic theory may be scientifically respectable, but he finds it poorly served by most attempts to support it. ''Its scientific foundations are impoverished,'' Dr. Gr"unbaum said in an interview. He grants that many, perhaps most of Freud's clinical observations and the theories that followed from them may be accurate. His point is that they have not been proved by Freud, or anyone else, in a way that meets the basic standards of the scientific method. Thus no one knows which aspects of the theory may be true, and which false.
