essyoverlap in many respects and that one cannot entirely replace the other.”33 Nevertheless Sandler, et. al note that at the present there is no single all-embracing psychoanalytic theory.34 In regard to Freud using both models Bateman & Holmes point out that psychoanalytic concepts are elastic and allow for theoretical contortions to occur.35 Similarly they note that rather than new ideas superseding the old the new ideas are grafted onto the old.36
The topographical and structural models, amongst other things, were attempts, to account for the repressive and distorting process. Now as we shall see Freud’s attempt at a construction of the mental apparatus to account for this repression is a model that contain entities that violations of the laws of Aristotelian logic. We shall see that in the topographical model this entity is the coincidentia oppositorum of the censor and unconscious/conscious dichotomy of the mind. And in the structural model it is both this and the Ego which is a coincidentia oppositorum. In the jargon of analytic philosophy this coalescing of contradictories means that we get the result as G. Marshall states that Freud’s models “ demands a theory of mental functioning that makes it both intentional and involuntary. It is mediated by belief and desire as so is rational enough to be intentional but it often appears to be not under conscious control to be and so it seems
32 J. Arlow & C. Brenner, Psychoanalytic concepts and the Structural Theory, International University Press, NY,1964
33 J. Sandler, et.al., op. cit, p.187
34 ibid., p.167.
35 A. Bateman & J. Holmes, Introduction to Psychoanalysis, Routledge, NY, 1995, p.19
36 ibid., p. 19.
14
involuntary. Contradictions lurk.”37 It is in this regard that Freud’s entities of coincidentia oppositorum, which violate the laws of Aristotelian logic, which make Aristotelian logic then discover all the paradoxes and contradictions in Freud’s models and theories; thus making them meaningless...