What do you think?
Rate this book
The Only Cure: Freud and the Neuroscience of Mental Healing
Not yet published
Expected 4 Aug 26'A scholarly masterpiece, written by the world's greatest living authority on Freud . . . There is so much to be learned in these pages'
KARL J. FRISTON, the world's most cited neuroscientist
Once dismissed as unscientific, psychoanalytic therapy is proving to be among our most effective medical treatments of any kind - outperforming psychiatric drugs and rivalling vaccines in its power to prevent and heal. Why does it work so well?
Perhaps because one of the most controversial figures in psychology was right all along. Neuroscience now confirms much of what Sigmund Freud conjectured over a century our deepest struggles stem, not from chemical imbalances, but from buried memories and unconscious conflicts that no pill can touch.
Using enthralling case studies and cutting-edge brain science, pioneering neuroscientist Mark Solms makes the case that psychoanalysis should resume its position as our master theory of the mind. Yet modern research also reveals where Freud got important things wrong. Could correcting these errors make therapy even more effective?
As psychiatric diagnoses soar and standard treatments continue to fail many patients, The Only Cure offers a revolutionary a real science of healing, rooted in the radical idea that our suffering arises from truths we haven't yet faced.
KARL J. FRISTON, the world's most cited neuroscientist
Once dismissed as unscientific, psychoanalytic therapy is proving to be among our most effective medical treatments of any kind - outperforming psychiatric drugs and rivalling vaccines in its power to prevent and heal. Why does it work so well?
Perhaps because one of the most controversial figures in psychology was right all along. Neuroscience now confirms much of what Sigmund Freud conjectured over a century our deepest struggles stem, not from chemical imbalances, but from buried memories and unconscious conflicts that no pill can touch.
Using enthralling case studies and cutting-edge brain science, pioneering neuroscientist Mark Solms makes the case that psychoanalysis should resume its position as our master theory of the mind. Yet modern research also reveals where Freud got important things wrong. Could correcting these errors make therapy even more effective?
As psychiatric diagnoses soar and standard treatments continue to fail many patients, The Only Cure offers a revolutionary a real science of healing, rooted in the radical idea that our suffering arises from truths we haven't yet faced.
336 pages, Hardcover
First published February 5, 2026
Ratings & Reviews
Friends & Following
Create a free account to discover what your friends think of this book!
Community Reviews
Displaying 1 - 8 of 8 reviews
February 21, 2026
Immersive, insightful, and perspective-shifting, this text offers a compelling reconsideration of Freud’s work, situating his ideas within a contemporary neuroscientific framework. I have long found Freud’s theorising intellectually engaging and, perhaps more than many of my psychology peers, have been receptive to concepts such as unconscious drives and the interpretative significance of dreams. I therefore approached this book with cautious optimism, hoping to encounter evidence that Freud’s central propositions retain both conceptual and therapeutic relevance. In this respect, the overarching argument of the text did not disappoint.
I have historically avoided Freud’s original writings due to their density and perceived inaccessibility. Solms effectively bridges this gap by rearticulating Freud’s ideas using contemporary neuropsychological terminology that will be familiar to modern psychology students and practitioners. This translational work represents one of the book’s principal strengths: it is both accessible and persuasive, while simultaneously stimulating a desire for deeper engagement with Freud’s original theories beyond the scope of this volume.
Another noteworthy aspect of the text is its measured reappraisal of Freud’s character and intellectual positioning. Although not central to the theoretical arguments, this reframing encourages readers to view Freud through the author’s interpretative lens, as a scientist and clinician whose ideas, in several respects, were progressive for his historical context. This perspective contributes to a more nuanced understanding of Freud’s legacy without lapsing into uncritical endorsement.
Despite these strengths, several limitations warrant consideration. Most notably, the discussion of empirical support for psychoanalytic therapies would have benefited from greater critical scrutiny. In particular, when referencing meta-analyses and systematic reviews, the text offers limited examination of methodological heterogeneity, potential confounding variables, and the extent to which therapeutic outcomes may be influenced by common factors such as the therapeutic alliance. While such omissions may reflect the intended scope of the work, readers with a more critical orientation may be left seeking a more detailed appraisal of the evidentiary base.
At times, the text appears to imply scientific legitimacy through reference to the institutional authority of certain reviews (for example, Cochrane publications). This does not invalidate the claims presented; however, a more explicit discussion of the methodological strengths and limitations of the cited evidence would have strengthened the overall argument. The absence of such discussion may be interpreted as an invitation for readers to pursue further inquiry, though this remains an interpretative judgement.
Overall, notwithstanding moments where a more explicitly critical empirical lens would have been welcome, the text advances a persuasive argument for the continued relevance of Freud’s ideas within contemporary psychology. It highlights the possibility that psychoanalytic approaches may offer meaningful long-term therapeutic value for complex psychological difficulties. This integrative perspective is likely to remain influential in my own ongoing training and clinical practice. The book represents a significant and thought-provoking contribution for readers engaged in psychological theory and practice. Those without prior exposure to psychological or medical frameworks may find aspects of the text less accessible.
Five stars 🌟
I have historically avoided Freud’s original writings due to their density and perceived inaccessibility. Solms effectively bridges this gap by rearticulating Freud’s ideas using contemporary neuropsychological terminology that will be familiar to modern psychology students and practitioners. This translational work represents one of the book’s principal strengths: it is both accessible and persuasive, while simultaneously stimulating a desire for deeper engagement with Freud’s original theories beyond the scope of this volume.
Another noteworthy aspect of the text is its measured reappraisal of Freud’s character and intellectual positioning. Although not central to the theoretical arguments, this reframing encourages readers to view Freud through the author’s interpretative lens, as a scientist and clinician whose ideas, in several respects, were progressive for his historical context. This perspective contributes to a more nuanced understanding of Freud’s legacy without lapsing into uncritical endorsement.
Despite these strengths, several limitations warrant consideration. Most notably, the discussion of empirical support for psychoanalytic therapies would have benefited from greater critical scrutiny. In particular, when referencing meta-analyses and systematic reviews, the text offers limited examination of methodological heterogeneity, potential confounding variables, and the extent to which therapeutic outcomes may be influenced by common factors such as the therapeutic alliance. While such omissions may reflect the intended scope of the work, readers with a more critical orientation may be left seeking a more detailed appraisal of the evidentiary base.
At times, the text appears to imply scientific legitimacy through reference to the institutional authority of certain reviews (for example, Cochrane publications). This does not invalidate the claims presented; however, a more explicit discussion of the methodological strengths and limitations of the cited evidence would have strengthened the overall argument. The absence of such discussion may be interpreted as an invitation for readers to pursue further inquiry, though this remains an interpretative judgement.
Overall, notwithstanding moments where a more explicitly critical empirical lens would have been welcome, the text advances a persuasive argument for the continued relevance of Freud’s ideas within contemporary psychology. It highlights the possibility that psychoanalytic approaches may offer meaningful long-term therapeutic value for complex psychological difficulties. This integrative perspective is likely to remain influential in my own ongoing training and clinical practice. The book represents a significant and thought-provoking contribution for readers engaged in psychological theory and practice. Those without prior exposure to psychological or medical frameworks may find aspects of the text less accessible.
Five stars 🌟
March 26, 2026
In Solms' book one particular branch of psychoanalysis, meets one particular branch of neuroscience. The two meet in the discipline of neuropsychoanalysis. This all works well. It's a good book on Freud and his contribution to the study of human minds, and a good case for the relevance of psychoanalysis in the 21st century. Here and there Solms makes brief critical remarks about other models (in neuroscience) and approaches (to psychotherapy). These sometimes boil down to quick jabs, rather than serious discussions, which left me skeptically wondering about the big picture.
March 10, 2026
a refreshing perspective on Freud's contributions
April 29, 2026
Great review of Freud’s legacy offering a much-needed perspective on his contributions to science beyond the popular stereotypes, but a few objections:
1) Toward the end, the book turns into a kind of late-career autobiographical reflection, dwelling too much on his family tree rather than sticking to the topic of the book.
2) To say that psychoanalysis is “the only cure” unfortunately suggests that Solms might not have fully reckoned with the colonial past of his ancestors. There are numerous non-Western healing traditions that remain outside our healthcare system.
2.1) Following up on the previous point, this seems curiously narrow in epistemological terms for someone who might have grown up surrounded by more Indigenous communities than an average European.
3) The chapter titles do not seem to deliver what they promise: “Slips of the Tongue” seems to focus on pleasure without going into the actual slips and how they occur; “A Cure by Love” seems to conclude that psychoanalysis is the best without attempting to define what kind of love is meant here. Surely, it doesn't boil down to the robotic-homeostatic taking care of one's biological and emotional needs? What is Freudian love?
Overall, interesting and worth a read, even when unexpectedly slipping into a pattern where the author-analyst himself turns into a patient.
1) Toward the end, the book turns into a kind of late-career autobiographical reflection, dwelling too much on his family tree rather than sticking to the topic of the book.
2) To say that psychoanalysis is “the only cure” unfortunately suggests that Solms might not have fully reckoned with the colonial past of his ancestors. There are numerous non-Western healing traditions that remain outside our healthcare system.
2.1) Following up on the previous point, this seems curiously narrow in epistemological terms for someone who might have grown up surrounded by more Indigenous communities than an average European.
3) The chapter titles do not seem to deliver what they promise: “Slips of the Tongue” seems to focus on pleasure without going into the actual slips and how they occur; “A Cure by Love” seems to conclude that psychoanalysis is the best without attempting to define what kind of love is meant here. Surely, it doesn't boil down to the robotic-homeostatic taking care of one's biological and emotional needs? What is Freudian love?
Overall, interesting and worth a read, even when unexpectedly slipping into a pattern where the author-analyst himself turns into a patient.
May 3, 2026
The only way to get rid of weeds on a farm is by using toxins to eliminate them; there is no other way around it. This is what Freud failed to understand. He believed that nearly every condition could be treated through therapy alone.
He gave the example of a surgeon who was suffering from severe stress and bone-related problems, which eventually forced him to leave his career. Medication only treated the symptoms temporarily and the problems kept returning. Freud then provided therapy, during which it emerged that the death of the surgeon’s father and his divorce were major causes of his condition. According to Freud, these emotional issues needed to be addressed through therapy. Freud considered this a successful treatment, even though he himself admitted that the man was unable to return to surgery and instead became a medicine teacher.
As I said earlier, if you want to remove weeds from a farm, you need toxins; there is no alternative. In my view, Freud was a completely ignorant person who assumed that therapy could replace medicine in every case. He also seemed to encourage a cult of people who viewed therapy as intellectually or socially superior to medical treatment and the ones who opt for therapy are elitists.
He gave the example of a surgeon who was suffering from severe stress and bone-related problems, which eventually forced him to leave his career. Medication only treated the symptoms temporarily and the problems kept returning. Freud then provided therapy, during which it emerged that the death of the surgeon’s father and his divorce were major causes of his condition. According to Freud, these emotional issues needed to be addressed through therapy. Freud considered this a successful treatment, even though he himself admitted that the man was unable to return to surgery and instead became a medicine teacher.
As I said earlier, if you want to remove weeds from a farm, you need toxins; there is no alternative. In my view, Freud was a completely ignorant person who assumed that therapy could replace medicine in every case. He also seemed to encourage a cult of people who viewed therapy as intellectually or socially superior to medical treatment and the ones who opt for therapy are elitists.
This entire review has been hidden because of spoilers.
March 13, 2026
For many years I have tried to convince others about psychoanalysis. Reactions:" it is a brainproblem, talking wont help" ór "that takes so long". This book will convince both doubters. And, happily, it reads like a detective! Not as "boring science"!
April 1, 2026
picked this up at the local library. does a great job at connecting Freud with modern neuroscience and making a case for psychotherapy and why it is so effective.
Displaying 1 - 8 of 8 reviews