.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
When we speak of madness from a perspective that rejects that which has no basis in reason, when we speak of abnormal behaviors, loss of view, we are establishing the extent of the subject in relation to that reality. The individual is often challenged by this deficit and held accountable for its inadequacy. The criterion by which psychiatric establishment of a "disease awareness" implies that the subject is claimed awareness and correction of his "disagreement" with the reality, that reality that the disease is constantly submitted to it too alien or too much concerned.
The subject, as a producer of meaning, has been ejected prevails with regard to a reality which is given an unambiguous meaning, so we have a consciousness that is not only a reflection of that reality that must be subordinated. Therefore, considering the madness in terms of deficit or excess has consequences for how to design treatment.
The three disciplines to which I referred above are: teaching, anthropology and psychiatry. Its mission was, according to the particularities of their subject, to make intelligible the conjunction between the irrational and what is posed as a real gap in the expected relationships between an individual and reality reduced to its exterior.
This approach actually makes the subject reference will allow us to develop some considerations about the madness and in particular on psychosis. If insanity is mismatch, will convene the corrective experience, and the alternative that is crazy poses to modify or marginalization. In the case of psychosis should take into account certain particular from the phenomena that characterize it. (...)
Madness is not synonymous with psychosis, but this distinction deserves some clarification. The madness is not exclusive to the psychoses: is the proper state of man linked to their status-speaking be a consequence of his alienation in the signifier.
When we put the psychosis as a concept in psychiatry, we are establishing the special relations of a subject with an objective reality translated into terms such as disturbance of thought, perception, will, affection, and so on. Concept is conceived in the last century the model of the neuroses, at the time that the scientific approach favored an exhaustive description of the object and psychiatry began to build, based on a persistent observation, the most important syndromes. Psychoanalysis had something to say, Freud opened the debate, in neurosis and psychosis and loss of reality in neurosis and psychosis concludes that alterations in reality are not crucial to establish an essential difference between neurosis and psychosis, as both were developed not only a loss of reality, but a substitute for it. It is then important factor differential process in which are inscribed the loss and replacement. (...)
recall that I spoke of pedagogy, anthropology, and of course, psychiatry ... through these three disciplines I will exemplify the usual modes adopted by the analyst's resistance outlined in three positions:
- Location the teacher transforms the analytic act in a corrective experience that develops in a dynamic teaching and learning.
- The position of the anthropologist justifying its action on abstinence is dedicated to the observation, recording and observation. May reduce the symptomatic to the level of cultural difference, and if you can not escape the fascination may fall in the praise of folly.
- The position of the psychiatrist instituted is characterized by the custodian of the "normal", normal consciousness towards which the rejection by coercive sometimes unconscious.
. Carlos Dellacasa
madness, knowledge and treatments ...
hallucination: the alleged wrong.
0 comments:
Post a Comment