Psychoanaliza bez impulsu totalizacji. Adorno wobec przesady, losu i podmiotowości kompulsywnej

This text was born out of the need to rethink the claims of psychoanalysis to describe and explain socio-political phenomena in their totality. Actually, it was born out of the need to test the applicability of psychoanalytic schemas in order to better understand political life in dimensions such as commodity fetishism and money, community and society, but also those concerning the sources of power, and thus in questions of authoritarianism, populism or fascism, and finally in questions concerning the broader issue of sexuality linked to the so-called repression hypothesis. I acknowledge that the resistance to psychoanalysis is well documented. Sigmund Freud was already aware of this resistance, and Jacques Derrida has also thought it through. Today, however, I ask, not so much to contradict these diagnoses, but in order to complement them, whether psychoanalysis itself is safe against the temptation of totalization, i.e. against its tendency to become the first science? Is psychoanalysis aware that it is in danger of being transformed from a local and critical knowledge into a general science – a geometry of human affects, a topology of drives? In this text, I will defend the claim that psychoanalysis is most successful when it neutralises generalisations and refuses to totalise its cognitive claims, remaining faithful to the detail, the fragment, the historical moment or the case study.