This thesis represents the second part of the research: Reason and Psychoanalysis. The research aims to investigate, within the contemporary Anglo- Saxon debate, the epistemological foundations of psychoanalytical theory and whether it presents itself as an adequate tool for investigating madness and its manifestations. The first part of the thesis corresponds to a current summary of philosophical appraisals of psychoanalysis, in the traditional field of research development. It presents the following appraisals: Karl Popper s, Adolf Grünbaum s, Gregorio Klimovsky´s and Larry Laudan s criticism and alternative regarding Anglo-Saxon epistemology. The next appraisal is Marcia Cavell s one, already in the scope of the modern philosophy of language, initiating the second part of research. The next topic is: Wittgenstein and Psychoanalysis - his complex relation to the Freudian proposal, his enthusiasm and criticism. We show our own appraisal of Wittgenstein s contribution, linking it to a development of psychoanalysis: the object-relation theory. From the latter we took the Kleinian vision as referential and particularly W. R. Bion s contributions. The Case of Schreber (Freud,1911) is presented and investigated as a case study, with the aim of evaluating the validity of the philosophical and psychoanalytic notions previously exposed; particularly the notions of internal irrationalism (Cavell) and ways of living and certainty (Wittgenstein). The thesis suggests that delusion (taken as a paradigm of madness) may be seen as: a bizarre way of living, also suggesting some candidates as invariants for madness and its manifestations in varied contexts. We briefly discuss the relation between philosophical therapy and psychoanalysis. The background to the thesis is identified as what is known as the crisis of psychoanalysis, which we have placed within another, more comprehensive and durable one, the crisis of modernity. The thesis favours the clinical dimension of psychoanalytic project, suggesting new perspectives for it, through its dimension as a critique of culture. It calls attention to the two facets - clinical and cultural - of Freud´s work and the importance of establishing their differences and relations.