Could Understanding Harm?

IF 2.6 0 PHILOSOPHY
Iskra Fileva, Linda A.W. Brakel
{"title":"Could Understanding Harm?","authors":"Iskra Fileva, Linda A.W. Brakel","doi":"10.1353/ppp.2023.a908270","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Could Understanding Harm? Iskra Fileva, PhD (bio) and Linda A.W. Brakel, MD (bio) We would like to thank the editors for organizing this symposium and our commentators—Marga Reimer and James Phillips—for the thought-provoking feedback. Although we had thought about the ideas we discuss from many different angles, our commentators raised several interesting issues we had not considered. We are grateful for the opportunity to continue the conversation. Reply to Reimer As Professor Reimer notes, we advocate an approach to self-constitution that we dub “understanding first.” On this approach, non-moral and non-normative understanding of the origin of maladaptive traits must precede moral evaluation and attempts to free oneself—or as we say “prune”—undesirable traits. Professor Reimer presents several interesting cases meant both to extend and test the limits of our proposal. We appreciate this approach and respond to each case in turn. Genes and Alcoholism Suppose Alejandro, an adult raised by adoptive parents, struggles with alcohol addiction. He learns that his biological parents died of alcoholic liver disease and comes to believe that his alcohol problem is caused by a genetic propensity toward alcohol abuse. One can ask: “Does an understanding first approach have the potential to undermine the sense of agency that is necessary for the effective treatment of maladaptive traits?” Answer: It can be explained to Alejandro that genetic proclivities are just that—proclivities—that can be overridden. In fact, behavior can alter our very genes—although not at the sequence level— changes known as “epigenetic.” And the liver disease of the biological parents can serve as a cautionary tale. If even in light of these considerations, Alejandro’s tendency to see genetic propensities as deterministic persists, it is worth asking why. There is no evidence that “genes are destiny,” so the disposition to see them that way must have a psychological explanation. What is the explanation? A self-destructive desire? Fear of freedom? This exploration can itself be empowering. [End Page 211] Adaptive Forgetting Suppose Beata, who has an eating disorder, was molested by her own father when she was a child. Subsequently, her father shot himself and now she has no recollection of the molestation. However, Beata’s eating disorder is largely a result of those experiences. It is quite possible that if Beata were to recall being molested, that would do more harm than good. In this connection, one can ask together with Reimer: “Does an understanding first approach have the potential to undermine an adaptive ‘forgetting’ of root causes of maladaptive traits?” Answer: Here, understanding the history, instead of forgetting it, might allow Beata to gain insight into and empathize with possible motives that may have led to becoming obese. For example, she might have the phantasy that if she had been obese and unattractive, she could have prevented the molestation—hence, become that way now to prevent it from happening again, and more wishfully reverse it. (In unconscious goings-on time is thought to be in the “unexamined present” (Brakel 2009, p. 63; 2015, p. 131; 2022, p. 4; 2023, p. 404.) One benefit of this is that in gaining this type of recognition, Beata might find it easier to change her behavior that she otherwise would not have; it was never her responsibility to prevent her own molestation, and there is no reason whatsoever for her to now make herself unattractive to her deceased father, and very little reason to remain obese in an attempt to deter current day men. Ego-Syntonic Maladaptive Traits Claire is a concert pianist and alcoholic. Importantly, Claire does not see her own desire for alcohol as destructive but rather, as something constitutive of her own identity. “I wouldn’t be myself without alcohol,” she says. Reimer asks whether our approach would “work for cases where the agent sees a maladaptive trait as constitutive of their identity?” Answer: Although no approach can guarantee success, our claim is that our approach has a better chance than the main alternative known as the pruning view. Since Claire, by stipulation, is not inclined to see her own drinking as a problem, a...","PeriodicalId":45397,"journal":{"name":"Philosophy Psychiatry & Psychology","volume":"13 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":2.6000,"publicationDate":"2023-09-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Philosophy Psychiatry & Psychology","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1353/ppp.2023.a908270","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"0","JCRName":"PHILOSOPHY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Could Understanding Harm? Iskra Fileva, PhD (bio) and Linda A.W. Brakel, MD (bio) We would like to thank the editors for organizing this symposium and our commentators—Marga Reimer and James Phillips—for the thought-provoking feedback. Although we had thought about the ideas we discuss from many different angles, our commentators raised several interesting issues we had not considered. We are grateful for the opportunity to continue the conversation. Reply to Reimer As Professor Reimer notes, we advocate an approach to self-constitution that we dub “understanding first.” On this approach, non-moral and non-normative understanding of the origin of maladaptive traits must precede moral evaluation and attempts to free oneself—or as we say “prune”—undesirable traits. Professor Reimer presents several interesting cases meant both to extend and test the limits of our proposal. We appreciate this approach and respond to each case in turn. Genes and Alcoholism Suppose Alejandro, an adult raised by adoptive parents, struggles with alcohol addiction. He learns that his biological parents died of alcoholic liver disease and comes to believe that his alcohol problem is caused by a genetic propensity toward alcohol abuse. One can ask: “Does an understanding first approach have the potential to undermine the sense of agency that is necessary for the effective treatment of maladaptive traits?” Answer: It can be explained to Alejandro that genetic proclivities are just that—proclivities—that can be overridden. In fact, behavior can alter our very genes—although not at the sequence level— changes known as “epigenetic.” And the liver disease of the biological parents can serve as a cautionary tale. If even in light of these considerations, Alejandro’s tendency to see genetic propensities as deterministic persists, it is worth asking why. There is no evidence that “genes are destiny,” so the disposition to see them that way must have a psychological explanation. What is the explanation? A self-destructive desire? Fear of freedom? This exploration can itself be empowering. [End Page 211] Adaptive Forgetting Suppose Beata, who has an eating disorder, was molested by her own father when she was a child. Subsequently, her father shot himself and now she has no recollection of the molestation. However, Beata’s eating disorder is largely a result of those experiences. It is quite possible that if Beata were to recall being molested, that would do more harm than good. In this connection, one can ask together with Reimer: “Does an understanding first approach have the potential to undermine an adaptive ‘forgetting’ of root causes of maladaptive traits?” Answer: Here, understanding the history, instead of forgetting it, might allow Beata to gain insight into and empathize with possible motives that may have led to becoming obese. For example, she might have the phantasy that if she had been obese and unattractive, she could have prevented the molestation—hence, become that way now to prevent it from happening again, and more wishfully reverse it. (In unconscious goings-on time is thought to be in the “unexamined present” (Brakel 2009, p. 63; 2015, p. 131; 2022, p. 4; 2023, p. 404.) One benefit of this is that in gaining this type of recognition, Beata might find it easier to change her behavior that she otherwise would not have; it was never her responsibility to prevent her own molestation, and there is no reason whatsoever for her to now make herself unattractive to her deceased father, and very little reason to remain obese in an attempt to deter current day men. Ego-Syntonic Maladaptive Traits Claire is a concert pianist and alcoholic. Importantly, Claire does not see her own desire for alcohol as destructive but rather, as something constitutive of her own identity. “I wouldn’t be myself without alcohol,” she says. Reimer asks whether our approach would “work for cases where the agent sees a maladaptive trait as constitutive of their identity?” Answer: Although no approach can guarantee success, our claim is that our approach has a better chance than the main alternative known as the pruning view. Since Claire, by stipulation, is not inclined to see her own drinking as a problem, a...
理解会造成伤害吗?
理解会造成伤害吗?Iskra Fileva,博士(生物)和Linda A.W. Brakel,医学博士(生物)我们要感谢编辑组织这次研讨会和我们的评论员——marga Reimer和James phillips——为发人深省的反馈。虽然我们从许多不同的角度思考了我们讨论的观点,但我们的评论员提出了几个我们没有考虑到的有趣问题。我们很感激有机会继续对话。正如雷默教授所指出的,我们提倡一种自我建构的方法,我们称之为“理解为先”。在这种方法中,对不适应特征的起源的非道德和非规范的理解必须先于道德评价和试图释放自己——或者正如我们所说的“修剪”——不受欢迎的特征。Reimer教授提出了几个有趣的案例,旨在扩展和测试我们建议的局限性。我们赞赏这种做法,并对每个案件轮流作出回应。假设由养父母抚养长大的成年人亚历杭德罗与酒精成瘾作斗争。他得知他的亲生父母死于酒精性肝病,并开始相信他的酗酒问题是由酗酒的遗传倾向引起的。有人可能会问:“理解第一的方法是否有可能破坏有效治疗适应不良特征所必需的能动性?”回答:可以向亚历杭德罗解释,遗传倾向只是可以被推翻的倾向。事实上,行为可以改变我们的基因——尽管不是在序列水平上——这种改变被称为“表观遗传”。而亲生父母的肝脏疾病可以作为一个警示。即使考虑到这些因素,亚历杭德罗将遗传倾向视为决定性的倾向仍然存在,我们也有必要问一下为什么。没有证据表明“基因决定命运”,所以这样看待它们的倾向一定有心理学上的解释。解释是什么?自我毁灭的欲望?害怕自由?这种探索本身就是一种力量。适应性遗忘假设贝娅塔患有饮食失调症,在她还是个孩子的时候被她自己的父亲猥亵过。后来,她的父亲开枪自杀了,现在她对性骚扰没有任何记忆。然而,贝娅塔的饮食失调很大程度上是这些经历的结果。很有可能,如果贝娅塔回忆起自己被猥亵过,那将弊大于利。在这方面,我们可以和雷默一起问:“理解第一的方法是否有可能破坏对不适应特征根源的适应性‘遗忘’?”回答:在这里,理解历史,而不是忘记它,可能会让Beata深入了解和同情可能导致肥胖的动机。例如,她可能会幻想,如果她肥胖且没有吸引力,她就可以阻止性骚扰——因此,她现在变成那样是为了防止性骚扰再次发生,更希望能逆转它。(在无意识的进行中,时间被认为存在于“未经检验的现在”中)(brake 2009, p. 63;2015,第131页;2022,第4页;2023,第404页。)这样做的一个好处是,在获得这种类型的认可后,Beata可能会发现改变自己的行为更容易,否则她不会这样做;防止自己被骚扰从来都不是她的责任,她现在也没有理由让自己对已故的父亲失去吸引力,也没有理由为了阻止现在的男人而保持肥胖。克莱尔是一名钢琴演奏家和酒鬼。重要的是,克莱尔并不认为自己对酒精的渴望是破坏性的,相反,这是她自己身份的组成部分。她说:“没有酒精,我就不是我自己。”雷默问道,我们的方法是否“适用于行为人将适应不良特征视为其身份组成部分的情况?”回答:虽然没有一种方法可以保证成功,但我们的观点是,我们的方法比被称为修剪视图的主要替代方法有更好的机会。既然根据规定,克莱尔不倾向于把自己的酗酒视为一个问题,那么…
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
CiteScore
3.60
自引率
4.30%
发文量
40
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信