Freud, Biologist of the Mind

Last updated
Freud, Biologist of the Mind: Beyond the Psychoanalytic Legend
Freud, Biologist of the Mind (first edition).jpg
Cover of the first edition
Author Frank Sulloway
CountryUnited States
LanguageEnglish
Subject Sigmund Freud
PublisherBurnett Books
Publication date
1979
Media typePrint (Hardcover and Paperback)
Pages612
ISBN 978-0465025589

Freud, Biologist of the Mind: Beyond the Psychoanalytic Legend is a 1979 biography of Sigmund Freud, the founder of psychoanalysis, by the psychologist Frank Sulloway.

Contents

The work received much discussion, including both positive and mixed reviews. Sulloway criticizes Freud and has been credited with helping to place psychoanalysis in historical context by establishing the influence of 19th-century biological thinking on Freud and with improving upon previous biographies of Freud such as the psychoanalyst Ernest Jones's The Life and Work of Sigmund Freud (1953–1957). He was complimented for discussions of Freud's relationship to the naturalist Charles Darwin and the otolaryngologist Wilhelm Fliess.

Summary

Sulloway describes the work as "a comprehensive intellectual biography of Sigmund Freud" that "seeks to bring both Freud and the history of psychoanalysis within the professional boundaries of the history of science." He contrasts his approach to Freud to that of Ernest Jones, author of The Life and Work of Sigmund Freud. He discusses such works of Freud as The Interpretation of Dreams (1899), Three Essays on the Theory of Sexuality (1905), and Totem and Taboo (1913). His discussion of Freud draws on the psychiatrist Henri Ellenberger's The Discovery of the Unconscious (1970). Sulloway also discusses the naturalists Jean-Baptiste Lamarck and Charles Darwin, the psychiatrist Richard von Krafft-Ebing, the physician Josef Breuer, the otolaryngologist Wilhelm Fliess, the physician Havelock Ellis, the sexologist Friedrich Salomon Krauss, and the psychiatrists Albert Moll and Iwan Bloch. [1]

Publication history

Freud, Biologist of the Mind was first published in 1979 by Burnett Books. [2]

Reception

Reviews

Freud, Biologist of the Mind received positive reviews from Mark F. Schwartz in the Archives of Sexual Behavior and Erwin J. Haeberle in the Journal of Sex Research , [3] [4] mixed reviews from the philosopher Richard Wollheim in The New York Review of Books , [5] Robert N. Mollinger in Library Journal , [6] Richard L. Schoenwald in The American Historical Review , [7] Jerome L. Himmelstein in Theory & Society , [8] and a negative review from the psychologist Reuben Fine in the Journal of Psychohistory . [9] The book was also reviewed by Eli Zaretsky in The Psychohistory Review, [10] Perry Meisel in Partisan Review , [11] Paul Weindling in The British Journal for the History of Science , [12] J. O. Wisdom in Philosophy of the Social Sciences , [13] and British Medical Journal . [14]

Schwartz considered the book likely to be the most important work "written for modern sexologists unaware or uncertain of their intellectual heritage", and wrote that it discussed various topics of great importance to sexologists. He credited Sulloway with suggesting a way of integrating the various methods used in multidisciplinary approaches to the scientific study of sex and with carefully reviewing "pages of references, letters, and even margin notes from Freud's personal library to write one of the most valuable studies of the history of both sexology and science". He found Sulloway's view that Freud was a "scientific heir" of Darwin and other 19th-century evolutionary thinkers convincing. He believed that Sulloway made clear that "most of Freud's ideas remain remarkably contemporary", and concluded that while Sulloway showed that "many of the concepts attributed to Freud are not uniquely his", his biography "increases, in a realistic way, the appreciation of Freud's genius." [3] Haeberle wrote that the book had "gained considerable attention and justified praise", calling it a model of scholarship. He credited Sulloway with carefully retracing Freud's intellectual development and placing psychoanalysis in a wider historical context through the use of many original sources, such as Freud's library, showing how Freud's thinking was related to the biological theories of his time. He suggested that Sulloway's discussion of the influence of Moll and other sexologists on Freud gave his work special importance for sex researchers. [4]

Wollheim described the book as ambitious and erudite, and credited Sulloway with making careful use of sources such as "the scientific literature that provides the background to Freud's thought" and "the polemical literature that surrounded the publication of Freud's own work", as well as "Freud's personal library" and marginalia. He wrote that Sulloway placed Freud in historical context and avoided reliance on Freud's own account of "the progress of his influence and reputation", and found his work sometimes more coherent and detailed than that of Jones. However, he believed Sulloway failed to provide a detailed treatment of Freud's revised theory of anxiety or to provide a useful discussion of Freud's relationship with Breuer, and was guilty of some inaccuracies in reporting Freud's views. He questioned Sulloway's interpretation of Freud as "essentially a biologist of the mind". He also faulted Sulloway's criticism of the "legend" surrounding Freud, writing that it offers a single explanation to material "from very different periods and variegated sources". [5]

Mollinger called the book "scholarly" and "well-researched". He considered its strength to be Sulloway's "thorough and detailed exploration of Freud's relations to and with Breuer, Fliess, Darwin, and late 19th-Century sexologists", but criticized it for Sulloway's "lack of awareness of the psychoanalytic process and thus of the essentials of psychoanalysis." [6] Schoenwald credited Sulloway with being the first to demonstrate "the pervasive biological content of essential Freudian notions" and with offering the best interpretations he had encountered of some issues, such as why Freud posited the existence of the death instinct. However, he also wrote that by "Skimping on theoretical structure in a very long book", Sulloway "heightens the impression that Freud mostly borrowed or took a good deal from others" while failing to clarify why Freud borrowed ideas or how he reshaped them, and maintained that Sulloway's interest in criticizing psychoanalysis sometimes lead him into "unnecessary all-or-nothing formulations", for example concerning the role of Freud's self-analysis. Schoenwald also argued that while Sulloway showed Freud's borrowings from other writers, he failed to explain how Freud created psychoanalysis. [15]

Himmelstein described the book as "well-researched, enlightening, but ultimately paradoxical", writing that it had received much discussion. He credited Sulloway with revealing a Freud "about whom one can only muse as a historical curiosity and then quickly rebury" and with discrediting the received picture of Freud's development by showing that Freud "never labored in total isolation" and always had "intellectual intimates", such as Fliess, as well as with demonstrating that Fliess's ideas were considered respectable when he put them forward and anticipated Freud, and showing that the negative reception of Freud's work had been exaggerated, that psychoanalytic theory was "strongly rooted in contemporary biology and sexology", that Freudian theory is based in biogenetic and Lamarckian ideas, and that the idea of infantile sexuality was already familiar before Freud. He considered Sulloway's explanation of why "official biographers" of psychoanalysis would have obscured the origins of Freudian theory plausible, but was less convinced by his suggestion that psychoanalysis is a form of "psychobiology". He wrote that Sulloway failed to explain why the biological content of Freudian theory had been ignored. He found Sulloway's "psychobiological" interpretation of Freud overstated despite its "kernel of truth", and criticized Sulloway for ignoring the most interesting non-orthodox approaches to understanding Freud's work. He concluded that "Sulloway's psychobiological reading of Freud seems to lead nowhere; its intellectual implications are nil." [8]

Fine considered Freud, Biologist of the Mind, like several other recent books about Freud and psychoanalysis, part of an "anti-Freudian crusade" that persisted because social scientists who write about Freud "do not understand psychoanalysts' dual role as therapists and theoreticians" and had led to "careless scholarship and inaccurate quotations". [9]

Other evaluations

Freud, Biologist of the Mind was discussed in Time . [16] Later discussions include those by the critic Harold Bloom in The New York Times and Zaretsky in Tikkun . [17] [18] Bloom credited Sulloway with providing an important statement of the "sociobiological interpretation of Freud", but noted that his own interpretation of Freud was very different. In Bloom's view, what Sulloway considers a reliance upon biology is instead "Freud's overcoming of his own anxieties of influence, or the fear of having been flooded out by precursors, and psychoanalysis is thus revealed as a triumphantly strong and deliberate misreading of 19th-century biology." He suggested Freud's work provided some basis to both views. [17]

The philosopher Adolf Grünbaum credited Sulloway with showing that "Freud's successive modifications of many of his hypotheses throughout most of his life were hardly empirically unmotivated" and thereby disproving the philosopher Karl Popper's argument that psychoanalytic ideas cannot be falsified. [19] The historian Peter Gay described Freud, Biologist of the Mind as an "overargued" and "irritatingly self-indulgent" work that suggests "some revisions of the accepted view of the Freud-Fliess relationship". [20] Gay wrote that while Sulloway presented the book as "a great unmasking document", his conclusion that Freud's theory had a biological background was not novel. However, he complimented its analysis of Freud's dependence on Fliess and "nineteenth-century psychophysics". [21] The psychiatrist Allan Hobson called the book "pioneering", and credited Sulloway with showing that "Freud was the careful custodian of his own image and was willing to suppress the truth to protect himself." [22] Hobson has also credited Sulloway with demonstrating that Freud carefully concealed the fact that his psychology was derived from neurobiology. [23] The psychologist Hans Eysenck praised Sulloway, crediting him with exposing many myths which have accumulated around Freud. [24] The historian Roy Porter described Freud, Biologist of the Mind as tendentious, but necessary as a supplement to the "hagiographical" The Life and Work of Sigmund Freud. [25] The psychoanalyst Joel Kovel credited Sulloway with helping to establish the immense impact of biological thinking on Freud. [26] The historian Paul Robinson described Freud, Biologist of the Mind as being "among the most important anti-Freudian writings". [27]

The critic Alexander Welsh identified Freud, Biologist of the Mind as the key work that discredited psychoanalysis as science. He credited Sulloway with using careful research to "historicize Freud's thinking more thoroughly than has ever been done in a single volume." He denied that Sulloway wanted to damage Freud's reputation, suggesting that he would have been incapable of writing the book had he not been sympathetic to Freud. [28] The critic Frederick Crews argued that Sulloway "revolutionized our idea of Freud's scientific affinities and habits", helping to make possible subsequent works such as Grünbaum's The Foundations of Psychoanalysis (1984) and the psychologist Malcolm Macmillan's Freud Evaluated (1991). [29] Crews wrote that Freud, Biologist of the Mind was rightly considered a classic work on Freud. He credited Sulloway with helping scholars understand Freud's relationship with Fliess and demonstrating Fliess's enduring influence on Freud. However, he added that the book was limited by Sulloway's lack of access to the complete correspondence between Freud and Fliess, arguing that this made Sulloway more "indulgent" in his assessment of Freud and Fliess than he should have been. [30]

The historian of science Roger Smith credited Sulloway with detailing the "lasting biological dimension of Freud's work". [31] The psychologist Louis Breger credited Sulloway with "exposing the myths that have surrounded Freud and the history of psychoanalysis", and expanding on the earlier work of Ellenberger. However, he criticized Sulloway's interpretation of Freud as a "crypto-biologist". [32] The philosopher Mikkel Borch-Jacobsen and the psychologist Sonu Shamdasani credited Sulloway with demonstrating that Freud's "principal 'discoveries' were actually deeply rooted in the biological hypotheses and speculations of his Darwinian era". [33]

See also

Related Research Articles

Psychoanalysis is a set of theories and therapeutic techniques that deal in part with the unconscious mind, and which together form a method of treatment for mental disorders. The discipline was established in the early 1890s by Sigmund Freud, whose work stemmed partly from the clinical work of Josef Breuer and others. Freud developed and refined the theory and practice of psychoanalysis until his death in 1939. In an encyclopedia article, he identified the cornerstones of psychoanalysis as "the assumption that there are unconscious mental processes, the recognition of the theory of repression and resistance, the appreciation of the importance of sexuality and of the Oedipus complex." Freud's colleagues Alfred Adler and Carl Gustav Jung developed offshoots of psychoanalysis which they called individual psychology (Adler) and Analytical Psychology (Jung), although Freud himself wrote a number of criticisms of them and emphatically denied that they were forms of psychoanalysis. Psychoanalysis was later developed in different directions by neo-Freudian thinkers, such as Erich Fromm, Karen Horney, and Harry Stack Sullivan.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Sigmund Freud</span> Austrian neurologist and founder of psychoanalysis (1856–1939)

Sigmund Freud was an Austrian neurologist and the founder of psychoanalysis, a clinical method for evaluating and treating pathologies seen as originating from conflicts in the psyche, through dialogue between patient and psychoanalyst, and the distinctive theory of mind and human agency derived from it.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Emma Eckstein</span> Austrian author

Emma Eckstein (1865–1924) was an Austrian author. She was "one of Sigmund Freud's most important patients and, for a short period of time around 1897, became a psychoanalyst herself". She has been described as "the first woman analyst", who became "both colleague and patient" for Freud. As analyst, while "working mainly in the area of sexual and social hygiene, she also explored how 'daydreams, those "parasitic plants", invaded the life of young girls'."

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Wilhelm Fliess</span>

Wilhelm Fliess was a German otolaryngologist who practised in Berlin. He developed the pseudoscientific theory of human biorhythms and a possible nasogenital connection that have not been accepted by modern scientists. He is today best remembered for his close friendship and theoretical collaboration with Sigmund Freud, a controversial chapter in the history of psychoanalysis.

<i>Life Against Death</i> 1959 book by Norman O. Brown

Life Against Death: The Psychoanalytical Meaning of History is a book by the American classicist Norman O. Brown, in which the author offers a radical analysis and critique of the work of Sigmund Freud, tries to provide a theoretical rationale for a nonrepressive civilization, explores parallels between psychoanalysis and Martin Luther's theology, and draws on revolutionary themes in western religious thought, especially the body mysticism of Jakob Böhme and William Blake. It was the result of an interest in psychoanalysis that began when the philosopher Herbert Marcuse suggested to Brown that he should read Freud.

<i>Eros and Civilization</i> 1955 book by Herbert Marcuse

Eros and Civilization: A Philosophical Inquiry into Freud is a book by the German philosopher and social critic Herbert Marcuse, in which the author proposes a non-repressive society, attempts a synthesis of the theories of Karl Marx and Sigmund Freud, and explores the potential of collective memory to be a source of disobedience and revolt and point the way to an alternative future. Its title alludes to Freud's Civilization and Its Discontents (1930). The 1966 edition has an added "political preface".

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Frederick Crews</span> American essayist and literary critic

Frederick Campbell Crews is an American essayist and literary critic. Professor emeritus of English at the University of California, Berkeley, Crews is the author of numerous books, including The Tragedy of Manners: Moral Drama in the Later Novels of Henry James (1957), E. M. Forster: The Perils of Humanism (1962), and The Sins of the Fathers: Hawthorne's Psychological Themes (1966), a discussion of the work of Nathaniel Hawthorne. He received popular attention for The Pooh Perplex (1963), a book of satirical essays parodying contemporary casebooks. Initially a proponent of psychoanalytic literary criticism, Crews later rejected psychoanalysis, becoming a critic of Sigmund Freud and his scientific and ethical standards. Crews was a prominent participant in the "Freud wars" of the 1980s and 1990s, a debate over the reputation, scholarship, and impact on the 20th century of Freud, who founded psychoanalysis.

<i>The Discovery of the Unconscious</i> 1970 book by Henri Ellenberger

The Discovery of the Unconscious: The History and Evolution of Dynamic Psychiatry is a 1970 book about the history of dynamic psychiatry by the Swiss medical historian Henri F. Ellenberger, in which the author discusses such figures as Franz Anton Mesmer, Sigmund Freud, Pierre Janet, Alfred Adler, and Carl Jung. The book was first published in the United States by Basic Books. The work has become a classic, and has been credited with correcting older estimates of Freud's level of originality and encouraging scholars to question the scientific validity of psychoanalysis.

<i>Knowledge and Human Interests</i> 1968 book by Jürgen Habermas

Knowledge and Human Interests is a 1968 book by the German philosopher Jürgen Habermas, in which the author discusses the development of the modern natural and human sciences. He criticizes Sigmund Freud, arguing that psychoanalysis is a branch of the humanities rather than a science, and provides a critique of the philosopher Friedrich Nietzsche.

<i>Why Freud Was Wrong</i> 1995 book by Richard Webster

Why Freud Was Wrong: Sin, Science and Psychoanalysis is a book by Richard Webster, in which the author provides a critique of Sigmund Freud and psychoanalysis, and attempts to develop his own theory of human nature. Webster argues that Freud became a kind of Messiah and that psychoanalysis is a pseudoscience and a disguised continuation of the Judaeo-Christian tradition. Webster endorses Gilbert Ryle's arguments against mentalist philosophies in The Concept of Mind (1949), and criticizes many other authors for their treatment of Freud and psychoanalysis.

<i>The Assault on Truth</i> 1984 book by Jeffrey Moussaieff Masson

The Assault on Truth: Freud's Suppression of the Seduction Theory is a book by the former psychoanalyst Jeffrey Moussaieff Masson, in which the author argues that Sigmund Freud, the founder of psychoanalysis, deliberately suppressed his early hypothesis, known as the seduction theory, that hysteria is caused by sexual abuse during infancy, because he refused to believe that children are the victims of sexual violence and abuse within their own families. Masson reached this conclusion while he had access to several of Freud's unpublished letters as projects director of the Sigmund Freud Archives. The Assault on Truth was first published in 1984 by Farrar, Straus and Giroux; several revised editions have since been published.

<i>The Foundations of Psychoanalysis</i> 1984 book by Adolf Grünbaum

The Foundations of Psychoanalysis: A Philosophical Critique is a 1984 book by the philosopher Adolf Grünbaum, in which the author offers a philosophical critique of the work of Sigmund Freud, the founder of psychoanalysis. The book was first published in the United States by the University of California Press. Grünbaum evaluates the status of psychoanalysis as a natural science, criticizes the method of free association and Freud's theory of dreams, and discusses the psychoanalytic theory of paranoia. He argues that Freud, in his efforts to defend psychoanalysis as a method of clinical investigation, employed an argument that Grünbaum refers to as the "Tally Argument"; according to Grünbaum, it rests on the premises that only psychoanalysis can provide patients with correct insight into the unconscious pathogens of their psychoneuroses and that such insight is necessary for successful treatment of neurotic patients. Grünbaum argues that the argument suffers from major problems. Grünbaum also criticizes the views of psychoanalysis put forward by other philosophers, including the hermeneutic interpretations propounded by Jürgen Habermas and Paul Ricœur, as well as Karl Popper's position that psychoanalytic propositions cannot be disconfirmed and that psychoanalysis is therefore a pseudoscience.

<i>Freud and Philosophy</i> 1965 book by Paul Ricœur

Freud and Philosophy: An Essay on Interpretation is a 1965 book about Sigmund Freud, the founder of psychoanalysis, written by the French philosopher Paul Ricœur. In Freud and Philosophy, Ricœur interprets Freudian work in terms of hermeneutics, a theory that governs the interpretation of a particular text, and phenomenology, a school of philosophy founded by Edmund Husserl. Ricœur addresses questions such as the nature of interpretation in psychoanalysis, the understanding of human nature and the relationship between Freud's interpretation of culture amongst other interpretations. The book was first published in France by Éditions du Seuil, and in the United States by Yale University Press.

<i>The Memory Wars</i> 1995 book by Frederick Crews

The Memory Wars: Freud's Legacy in Dispute is a 1995 book that reprints articles by the critic Frederick Crews critical of Sigmund Freud, the founder of psychoanalysis, and recovered-memory therapy. It also reprints letters from Harold P. Blum, Marcia Cavell, Morris Eagle, Matthew Erdelyi, Allen Esterson, Robert R. Holt, James Hopkins, Lester Luborsky, David D. Olds, Mortimer Ostow, Bernard L. Pacella, Herbert S. Peyser, Charlotte Krause Prozan, Theresa Reid, James L. Rice, Jean Schimek, and Marian Tolpin.

<i>Decline and Fall of the Freudian Empire</i> 1985 book by Hans Eysenck

Decline and Fall of the Freudian Empire is a book by the psychologist Hans Eysenck, in which the author criticizes Sigmund Freud, the founder of psychoanalysis. Eysenck argues that psychoanalysis is unscientific. The book received both positive and negative reviews. Eysenck has been criticized for his discussion of the physician Josef Breuer's treatment of his patient Anna O., whom Eysenck argues suffered from tuberculous meningitis.

<i>Freud: The Mind of the Moralist</i> 1959 book by Philip Rieff

Freud: The Mind of the Moralist is a book about Sigmund Freud, the founder of psychoanalysis, by the sociologist Philip Rieff, in which the author places Freud and psychoanalysis in historical context. Rieff described his goal as being to "show the mind of Freud ... as it derives lessons on the right conduct of life from the misery of living it."

<i>A History of the Mind</i> 1992 book by Nicholas Humphrey

A History of the Mind: Evolution and the Birth of Consciousness is a 1992 book about the mind–body problem by the psychologist Nicholas Humphrey. Humphrey advances a hypothesis about consciousness that has been criticised as speculative.

<i>The Freudian Fallacy</i> 1983 book by Elizabeth M. Thornton

The Freudian Fallacy, first published in the United Kingdom as Freud and Cocaine, is a 1983 book about Sigmund Freud, the founder of psychoanalysis, by the medical historian Elizabeth M. Thornton, in which the author argues that Freud became a cocaine addict and that his theories resulted from his use of cocaine. The book received several negative reviews, and some criticism from historians, but has been praised by authors critical of Freud and psychoanalysis. The work has been compared to Jeffrey Masson's The Assault on Truth (1984).

<i>Sexuality and Its Discontents</i> 1985 book by Jeffrey Weeks

Sexuality and Its Discontents: Meanings, Myths, and Modern Sexualities is a 1985 book about the politics and philosophy of sex by the sociologist Jeffrey Weeks. The book received positive reviews, crediting Weeks with explaining the theories of sexologists and usefully discussing controversial sexual issues. However, Weeks was criticised for his treatment of feminism and sado-masochism.

<i>Philosophical Essays on Freud</i> 1982 book edited by Richard Wollheim and James Hopkins

Philosophical Essays on Freud is a 1982 anthology of articles about Sigmund Freud and psychoanalysis edited by the philosophers Richard Wollheim and James Hopkins. Published by Cambridge University Press, it includes an introduction from Hopkins and an essay from Wollheim, as well as selections from philosophers such as Ludwig Wittgenstein, Clark Glymour, Adam Morton, Stuart Hampshire, Brian O'Shaughnessy, Jean-Paul Sartre, Thomas Nagel, and Donald Davidson. The essays deal with philosophical questions raised by the work of Freud, including topics such as materialism, intentionality, and theories of the self's structure. They represent a range of different viewpoints, most of them from within the tradition of analytic philosophy. The book received a mixture of positive, mixed, and negative reviews. Commentators found the contributions included in the book to be of uneven value.

References

  1. Sulloway 1979, pp. xiii, 4–6, 12, 16–17, 45, 81, 92, 135–237, 239.
  2. Sulloway 1979, p. iv.
  3. 1 2 Schwartz 1982, pp. 85–87.
  4. 1 2 Haeberle 1982, pp. 88–90.
  5. 1 2 Wollheim 1979, pp. 25–28.
  6. 1 2 Mollinger 1979, p. 2470.
  7. Schoenwald 1981, p. 112.
  8. 1 2 Himmelstein 1981, pp. 463–467.
  9. 1 2 Fine 1984, pp. 569–578.
  10. Zaretsky 1981, pp. 109–122.
  11. Meisel 1983, pp. 456–459.
  12. Weindling 1984, pp. 64–67.
  13. Wisdom 1985, p. 359.
  14. British Medical Journal 1979, p. 1286.
  15. Schoenwald 1981, pp. 112–113.
  16. Time 1979, p. 51.
  17. 1 2 Bloom 1986.
  18. Zaretsky 1994, p. 65.
  19. Grünbaum 1984, p. 117.
  20. Gay 1985, p. 464.
  21. Gay 1995, p. 750.
  22. Hobson 1985, p. 52.
  23. Hobson 1990, p. 64.
  24. Eysenck 1986, p. 213.
  25. Porter 1989, p. 250.
  26. Kovel 1991, p. 252.
  27. Robinson 1993, pp. 18–19.
  28. Welsh 1994, pp. 126–127.
  29. Crews 1997, p. vii.
  30. Crews 1999, pp. 54–56.
  31. Smith 1997, p. 990.
  32. Breger 2000, p. 385.
  33. Borch-Jacobsen & Shamdasani 2012, p. 21.

Bibliography

Books
Journals
  • Fine, Reuben (1984). "The Anti-Freudian Crusade". Journal of Psychohistory . 11 (4).  via  EBSCO's Academic Search Complete (subscription required)
  • Haeberle, Erwin J. (1982). "Freud, Biologist of the Mind: Beyond the Psychoanalytic Legend (Book review)". Journal of Sex Research . 18 (1).
  • Himmelstein, Jerome L. (1981). "Freud, Biologist of the Mind (Book)". Theory & Society . 10 (3).  via  EBSCO's Academic Search Complete (subscription required)
  • Hobson, J. Allan (1985). "Can Psychoanalysis be Saved? (Book Review)". The Sciences . 25 (6). doi:10.1002/j.2326-1951.1985.tb02814.x.  via  EBSCO's Academic Search Complete (subscription required)
  • Meisel, Perry (1983). "Freud, biologist of the mind (Book Review)". Partisan Review . 50 (3).  via  EBSCO's Academic Search Complete (subscription required)
  • Mollinger, Robert N. (1979). "Freud (Book Review)". Library Journal . 104 (20).  via  EBSCO's Academic Search Complete (subscription required)
  • Schoenwald, Richard L. (1981). "Freud, Biologist of the Mind (Book Review)". American Historical Review . 86 (1).  via  EBSCO's Academic Search Complete (subscription required)
  • Schwartz, Mark F. (1982). "Book review". Archives of Sexual Behavior . 11 (1): 85–87. doi:10.1007/BF01541368. S2CID   189876759.
  • Weindling, Paul (1984). "Freud, biologist of the mind (Book Review)". The British Journal for the History of Science . 17 (March 1984).  via  EBSCO's Academic Search Complete (subscription required)
  • Wisdom, J. O. (1985). "Is Freud Revised?---As Regards Substance or Accidents?". Philosophy of the Social Sciences . 15 (3): 359–364. doi:10.1177/004839318501500310. S2CID   144883679.  via  EBSCO's Academic Search Complete (subscription required)
  • Wollheim, Richard (1979). "Was Freud a Crypto-Biologist?". The New York Review of Books . 26 (17).
  • Zaretsky, Eli (1981). "Evolutionary biology and psychoanalysis: a review essay on Frank J. Sulloway's Freud: biologist of the mind". The Psychohistory Review. 10 (2).  via  EBSCO's Academic Search Complete (subscription required)
  • Zaretsky, Eli (1994). "The attack on Freud". Tikkun . 9 (3).  via  EBSCO's Academic Search Complete (subscription required)
  • "Some new titles". British Medical Journal . 2 (6200). 1979.  via  EBSCO's Academic Search Complete (subscription required)
  • "Did Freud Build His Own Legend? A new study analyzes the myth of the master". Time . Vol. 114, no. 5. 1979.  via  EBSCO's Academic Search Complete (subscription required)
Online articles