чугунные тетради
[рубрика “выдуманные цитаты”] “Who knows! Right? I mean, these so-called depth psychologists… Are so far out of their depth on this one that the fish have lights on their noses.”
[снова рубрика “выдуманные цитаты”]
What do you think the word *sin* means? What do you hear when someone says it? If all you hear is “shame”, that’s because you’re an idiot and should be ashamed of yourself! Just kidding. Well, mostly. Let’s take shame and guilt seriously for a moment. Sure, psychologists might tell you there’s nothing to feel ashamed or guilty about—but what do they know? What if you actually do have good reasons to feel guilty or ashamed? What if you *are* doing something bad? What if you’ve hurt yourself or others due to your own stupidity? And we all do that sometimes, aren’t we? Maybe that’s what the word *sin* is for. It’s a warning: “this things are harmful for you and those close to you, please don’t do it, don’t be stupid”. *Sin* means doing bad things for stupid reasons and getting hurt despite the warning.
What do you think the word *sin* means? What do you hear when someone says it? If all you hear is “shame”, that’s because you’re an idiot and should be ashamed of yourself! Just kidding. Well, mostly. Let’s take shame and guilt seriously for a moment. Sure, psychologists might tell you there’s nothing to feel ashamed or guilty about—but what do they know? What if you actually do have good reasons to feel guilty or ashamed? What if you *are* doing something bad? What if you’ve hurt yourself or others due to your own stupidity? And we all do that sometimes, aren’t we? Maybe that’s what the word *sin* is for. It’s a warning: “this things are harmful for you and those close to you, please don’t do it, don’t be stupid”. *Sin* means doing bad things for stupid reasons and getting hurt despite the warning.
🔥4🕊2
«Nothing is like it seems, but everything is exactly like it is»
— Yogi Berra
— Yogi Berra
❤3🕊1
Forwarded from железноголовый
«Nothing can ever be reduced to anything»
— Joseph Needham
«Everything is what it is and not another thing»
— Ludwig Wittgenstein (probably from sermon by Joseph Butler)
— Joseph Needham
«Everything is what it is and not another thing»
— Ludwig Wittgenstein (probably from sermon by Joseph Butler)
👍1🕊1
чугунные тетради
evidence-based practice 🥱 practice-based evidence 🤩
«In theory there is no difference between theory and practice. In practice there is.»
— Yogi Berra
— Yogi Berra
🕊6👍1💯1
чугунные тетради
Senneke de Haan. Enactive Psychiatry Говоря коротко, но непонятно: де Хаан предлагает проект энактивистской психиатрии. Книжка очень хорошая и понятная! (насколько это возможно для такой литературы), и подход мне очень симпатичен, и сама она умница. Мечтаю…
Постепенно пишу конспект книги Sanneke de Haan “Enactive Psychiatry”. Это философия психиатрии, вопрос здесь о том, что такое психиатрические расстройства, каковы их аспекты и причины. Что такое психиатрические проблемы — вопрос гораздо более сложный и странный, чем может показаться сначала. Ответы на этот вопрос многочисленны, противоречивы и запутанны. Хороший, практически полезный ответ позволяет из проблемы (что не так?) сделать задачу (что делать?).
У нас есть множество разрозненных ответов на эти вопросы. И целый ворох идей и свидетельств: красочных картинок нейровизуализации, детальных феноменологических описаний, и в разной степени правдоподобных предположений о психологических взаимосвязях. В качестве предполагаемых “причин” мы рассматриваем психологическую травму, межличностный и “внутренний” конфликты, нарушение ранней привязанности, социокультурный контекст, экзистенциальные заботы человека, (нейро)физиологический или генетический сбой.
То есть дело не в том, что у нас нет полезных ответов, а в том, что их много, и они даются с совсем разных точек зрения. Хорошо бы учитывать все эти перспективы, понимать, как они соотносятся между собой, и с какого ракурса стоит смотреть на эти вопросы в каждом конкретном случае.
Говоря коротко, но непонятно: по этому поводу де Хаан предлагает проект энактивистской психиатрии. Энактивизм это более менее теория сознания (“воплощённое познание” и тд) с корнями в феноменологии, что мне симпатично.
https://ironhead.id/dehaan-enactive-psychiatry-1
#id_books
У нас есть множество разрозненных ответов на эти вопросы. И целый ворох идей и свидетельств: красочных картинок нейровизуализации, детальных феноменологических описаний, и в разной степени правдоподобных предположений о психологических взаимосвязях. В качестве предполагаемых “причин” мы рассматриваем психологическую травму, межличностный и “внутренний” конфликты, нарушение ранней привязанности, социокультурный контекст, экзистенциальные заботы человека, (нейро)физиологический или генетический сбой.
То есть дело не в том, что у нас нет полезных ответов, а в том, что их много, и они даются с совсем разных точек зрения. Хорошо бы учитывать все эти перспективы, понимать, как они соотносятся между собой, и с какого ракурса стоит смотреть на эти вопросы в каждом конкретном случае.
Говоря коротко, но непонятно: по этому поводу де Хаан предлагает проект энактивистской психиатрии. Энактивизм это более менее теория сознания (“воплощённое познание” и тд) с корнями в феноменологии, что мне симпатично.
https://ironhead.id/dehaan-enactive-psychiatry-1
#id_books
🔥5🕊1
Giovanni Stanghellini. Lost in dialogue: anthropology, psychopathology and care
—
«The need and the desire to be recognized as an individual person, and as part of a human society, to be accepted, respected, forgiven, and loved is a fundamental disposition in human existence — as well as eating and staying alive. My existence is conditioned and articulated by the value of social recognition alongside the organic values of my biological life. […]
the essence of human existence is the tragic awareness of the fragility of the reciprocal recognition. This thesis builds on and extends a distinctly Jaspersian statement: the essence of man is the tragic awareness of the inaccessibility of the Other. […]
To become (and remain) a ‘healthy’ person, I need to be recognized by the others. I need the others to recognize me in my being-so, that is, in my otherness with respect to them, and at the same time I need their acknowledgement of the value of the otherness that I am. Also, to establish ‘healthy’ relationships, within which I can feel recognized by the Other, I need to be able to recognize the otherness of the Other — and this, we have seen, is not an easy task. Thus, recognition is at the same time a necessary precondition for mental health, as well as for the ‘good life’, and an extremely difficult achievement. Non-recognition, in milder or more severe forms, is the norm and not the exception in human life.»
—
«The need and the desire to be recognized as an individual person, and as part of a human society, to be accepted, respected, forgiven, and loved is a fundamental disposition in human existence — as well as eating and staying alive. My existence is conditioned and articulated by the value of social recognition alongside the organic values of my biological life. […]
the essence of human existence is the tragic awareness of the fragility of the reciprocal recognition. This thesis builds on and extends a distinctly Jaspersian statement: the essence of man is the tragic awareness of the inaccessibility of the Other. […]
To become (and remain) a ‘healthy’ person, I need to be recognized by the others. I need the others to recognize me in my being-so, that is, in my otherness with respect to them, and at the same time I need their acknowledgement of the value of the otherness that I am. Also, to establish ‘healthy’ relationships, within which I can feel recognized by the Other, I need to be able to recognize the otherness of the Other — and this, we have seen, is not an easy task. Thus, recognition is at the same time a necessary precondition for mental health, as well as for the ‘good life’, and an extremely difficult achievement. Non-recognition, in milder or more severe forms, is the norm and not the exception in human life.»
чугунные тетради
Giovanni Stanghellini. Lost in dialogue: anthropology, psychopathology and care — «The need and the desire to be recognized as an individual person, and as part of a human society, to be accepted, respected, forgiven, and loved is a fundamental disposition…
Giovanni Stanghellini. Lost in dialogue: anthropology, psychopathology and care
—
«To consider phenomenology as a purely denoscriptive science of the way the world appears to the experiencing subject is a serious mistake, although it is true that phenomenology sponsors a kind of seeing that relates to something already there, rather than to what stands before, beyond, or behind what is existent. “Making the invisible visible” can instead be taken as the motto of phenomenology, just as it was the passion that possessed many of the artists of the twentieth century and the intellectual motor of the major scientists of the “invisible century”, including Einstein and Freud, in their search for hidden universes (Panek, 2005).
Phenomenology shares with Modernism, and with the Zeitgeist of the twentieth century, a passion for the invisible, and a sceptical stance towards the way things are seen in the natural attitude, that is, in straightforward cognition. It sponsors a sui generis kind of seeing — enlightening the enigmatic poetry of familiar things. But, especially in its hermeneutic coté, it is also resolutely tied to hearing and the spoken word since— as Gadamer (2004, p. 458) has acknowledged — “the primacy of hearing is the basis for the hermeneutical phenomenon”.»
—
«To consider phenomenology as a purely denoscriptive science of the way the world appears to the experiencing subject is a serious mistake, although it is true that phenomenology sponsors a kind of seeing that relates to something already there, rather than to what stands before, beyond, or behind what is existent. “Making the invisible visible” can instead be taken as the motto of phenomenology, just as it was the passion that possessed many of the artists of the twentieth century and the intellectual motor of the major scientists of the “invisible century”, including Einstein and Freud, in their search for hidden universes (Panek, 2005).
Phenomenology shares with Modernism, and with the Zeitgeist of the twentieth century, a passion for the invisible, and a sceptical stance towards the way things are seen in the natural attitude, that is, in straightforward cognition. It sponsors a sui generis kind of seeing — enlightening the enigmatic poetry of familiar things. But, especially in its hermeneutic coté, it is also resolutely tied to hearing and the spoken word since— as Gadamer (2004, p. 458) has acknowledged — “the primacy of hearing is the basis for the hermeneutical phenomenon”.»
🕊2