A time to experience and a time to narrate

Based on our experience of time as a dimension of our life, it appears a strong opposition between the time of the session and that of the narration of the cure. Indeed, the session may be conceived as relevant of an experimental methodology, reproducible during the time of the session, so that activation of some brain areas may be revealed by brain imaging methods. Given the recent findings on empathy, brain imaging should be applied to the patient but also to the therapist. Inversely, brain imaging might be not adapted to deal with the course of the cure, along the sessions, to disclose possible neuro-physiological reorganizations matching psychic improvement. The patient builds his/her personal history in order to be heard by the therapist. Transference and countertransference have here a heavy impact. It seems more adequate to use historical methods to deal with these data: time does not duplicate. However, Kandel proposes to make psychoanalysis more scientific by using brain imaging to show that some functional reorganization of brain areas could be the result of psychoanalysis. Unfortunately, the map cannot be confused with the territory. The question of the scientific dimension of Human Sciences and of History remains widely opened. Great authors, such as Balzac and Proust thought that their work contributed to scientific psychology. Their legacy in this field appears important to take into account.

► The session as a time unit is a good object for neuro-imaging. ► Feelings and cognitive processes are correlates of psychic states. ► The time of the cure process constitutes itself in a narrative. ► So its method of analysis has to do with historical approach. ► Neuronal reorganisation could be the goal of a new science: “neuro-psychoanalysis”.