Here is a comparative table that contrasts the neurobiological and psychoanalytic views of perversion, showing how each paradigm conceptualizes its nature, mechanisms, and functions:
Neurobiological vs. Psychoanalytic Views of Perversion
|
Dimension |
Neurobiological View |
Psychoanalytic View |
|
Core Concept |
Maladaptive neurocognitive patterns involving reward, impulse control, and social cognition |
A structural position in relation to the Law, jouissance, and desire; a mode of organizing subjectivity |
|
Etiology |
Dysregulation in dopamine and serotonin systems; early attachment trauma; neurodevelopmental anomalies |
Unconscious defense against castration anxiety; denial of the lack in the Other; fixation at pre-Oedipal/Oedipal stages |
|
Behavioral Focus |
Compulsive or maladaptive sexual behaviors (e.g., paraphilias) rooted in reward-seeking and loss of control |
Use of the Other as object/tool to sustain a fantasy; staging of a scene that sustains the subject’s relation to the Law and jouissance |
|
Mechanism |
Hyperactivation of mesolimbic reward circuits; hypoactivity in prefrontal control and empathy-related regions |
Disavowal (“I know very well, but nonetheless … “); enactment of fantasy to stabilize symbolic position |
|
Role of the Other |
Often diminished empathy, failure of intersubjective attunement, objectification of the other |
The Other is staged and manipulated in a fixed fantasy scene to support the subject’s denial of castration |
|
Attachment and Development |
Insecure attachment; early trauma affecting limbic and oxytocinergic systems |
Failure of symbolic castration; the child assumes the role of enforcer/supplement of the Law to bypass anxiety |
|
Symbolic Function |
Minimal focus on symbolic meaning; emphasis on observable, measurable behavior and circuits |
Perversion “sustains the Law by transgressing it”, it reaffirms the Symbolic by occupying its blind spot |
|
Treatment Orientation |
Behavioral modification, medication (SSRIs, antiandrogens), impulse control training |
Interpretive listening, revealing the unconscious structure and fantasy; transference analysis without moral judgment |
|
View of the Subject |
The subject is a biological organism affected by neurochemical imbalances and behavior patterns |
The subject is constituted in language and desire, structured by the unconscious and the symbolic order |
|
Ethical Stance |
Emphasis on harm reduction, social norm adherence, and risk management |
Emphasis on subjective truth, unconscious ethics, and the singularity of desire |
|
Terminology |
Paraphilic disorders, hypersexuality, compulsive sexual behavior |
Perverse structure, foreclosure, disavowal, jouissance, fantasy scene |
Key Insights:
- The neurobiological model is descriptive, empirical, and emphasizes dysfunctions in circuits related to reward, impulse, and social cognition.
- The psychoanalytic model (especially Lacanian) views perversion as a structural position—not just behavior, but a way to stabilize the symbolic coordinates of the subject’s world.
- While neurobiology targets symptoms, psychoanalysis interrogates the structure of desire.
- Where neurobiology emphasizes risk and control, psychoanalysis emphasizes truth and fantasy.
Would you like a third column added for a philosophical/ethical perspective (e.g., Foucault or Bataille) on perversion?
