Part II    Psychodynamic Theories58
fei75766_ch02_019-071.indd 58  02/19/20 08:59 AMdoing research ontheimportance ofnonconscious processing ofinformation and
memory, orwhat theycalled “implicit” cognition. John Bargh, oneoftheleaders in
thefieldofsocial-cognitive psychology, reviewed theliterature onthe“automaticity 
ofbeing” andconcluded thatroughly 95%ofourbehaviors areunconsciously deter -
mined (Bargh &Chartrand, 1999). Thisconclusion iscompletely consistent with
Freud’s metaphor thatconsciousness ismerely the“tipoftheiceberg.”
Bythelate1990s, thefindings from neuroscience andcognitive psychology 
began toconverge onmany cognitive andaffective processes thatwereveryconsis -
tentwithbasic Freudian theory. These commonalities havebecome thefoundation 
foramovement started bysome cognitive psychologists, neuroscientists, andpsychia -
trists whoareconvinced thatFreud’s theory isoneofthemore compelling integrative 
theories—one thatcould explain many ofthese findings. In1999, agroup ofscien -
tistsbegan asociety called Neuro-Psychoanalysis andascientific journal bythesame 
name. Forthefirsttime, some eminent cognitive andneuroscience psychologists such
asNobel laureate forphysiology, EricKandel, along withJoseph LeDoux, Antonio 
Damasio, Daniel Schacter, andVilayanur Ramachandran, werepublicly declaring the
value ofFreud’s theory andcontending that“psychoanalysis isstillthemost coher -
entandintellectually satisfying viewofthemind” (ascited inSolms, 2004, p.84).
Neuroscientist Antonio Damasio wrote: “Ibelieve wecansaythatFreud’s insights 
onthenature ofconsciousness areconsonant withthemost advanced contemporary 
neuroscience views” (ascited inSolms &Turnbull, 2002, p.93).Thirty years ago,
suchpronouncements from neuroscientists would havebeen nearly unthinkable.
Mark Solms isprobably themost active person involved inintegrating psycho -
analytic theory andneuroscientific research (Solms, 2000, 2004; Solms &Panksepp, 
2012; Solms &Turnbull, 2002; Smith &Solms, 2018). Heargued, forinstance, that
the following Freudian concepts havesupport from modern neuroscience: uncon -
scious motivation, repression, thepleasure principle, primitive drives, anddreams 
(Solms, 2004). Similarly, Kandel (1999) argued thatpsychoanalysis andneurosci -
encetogether could make useful contributions inthese eight domains: thenature of
unconscious mental processes; thenature ofpsychological causality; psychological 
causality andpsychopathology; early experience andthepredisposition tomental ill-
ness; thepreconscious, theunconscious, andtheprefrontal cortex; sexual orientation; 
psychotherapy andstructural changes inthebrain; andpsychopharmacology asan
adjunct topsychoanalysis.
Although there aresome gapsintheevidence (Hobson, 2004), andinfactsome 
psychoanalysts reject neuroscience asirrelevant andharmful topsychoanalysis (Blass &
Carmeli, 2007), theoverlap between Freud’s theory andneuroscience issufficient to
make atleastasuggestive, ifnotcompelling, casefortheirintegration (Johnson &
Mosri, 2016; Yovell, Solms, &Fotopoulou, 2015). Wehavereviewed some ofthe
empirical evidence forunconscious mental processing, theidandthepleasure principle 
andtheegoandthereality principle, repression anddefense mechanisms, anddreams.
Unconscious Mental Processing
Many scientists andphilosophers haverecognized twodifferent forms ofconscious -
ness.Firstisthestateofnotbeing aware orawake, andsecond isthestateofbeing 
aware. Theformer isreferred toas“core consciousness,” whereas thelatter isreferred Final PDF to printer