Prescriptive 'selves' and self-illness ambiguity.

IF 1.3 1区 哲学 Q1 HISTORY & PHILOSOPHY OF SCIENCE
Synthese Pub Date : 2025-01-01 Epub Date: 2025-07-17 DOI:10.1007/s11229-025-05147-8
Jodie Louise Russell
{"title":"Prescriptive 'selves' and self-illness ambiguity.","authors":"Jodie Louise Russell","doi":"10.1007/s11229-025-05147-8","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>Recent work on the phenomenon of self-illness ambiguity has sought to not only understand how tensions arise between one's experience of self and one's disorder experiences, but also how best to resolve said ambiguities to relieve the suffering of the person in question (Sadler, Psychiatry: Interpersonal and Biological Processes, 70(2), 113-129, 2007; Dings & Glas, Philosophy, Psychiatry, & Psychology, 27(4), 333-347, 2020; Dings & de Bruin, American Journal of Bioethics, 22(6), 58-60, 2022; Jeppsson, Philosophical Explorations, 25(3), 294-313, 2022). While the involvement of other people has been emphasised as important in regulating the self and thus will play a part in self-illness ambiguity, the impact of this social dimension has not been sufficiently explored. The goal of this paper is to provide an account of how social norms may be implicated in the enactment of the 'self' and experiences of self-illness ambiguity. To do this, I will provide a plausible account of what it means to have a coherent or understandable self, drawing on the mind-shaping view of social cognition (McGeer, Folk Psychology Re-Assessed, 137-156, 2007; Mameli, Biology & Philosophy, 16(5), 595-626, 2001; Zawidzki, Philosophical Explorations, 11(3), 193-210, 2008; Zawidzki, Mindshaping: A new framework for understanding human social cognition. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press, 2013; Zawidzki, Mindshaping and self-interpretation. In J. Kiverstein (Ed.), The Routledge Handbook of Philosophy of the Social Mind, 495-513. London & New York: Routledge, 2016). Mind-shaping suggests that we are successful in social coordination tasks because we are able to negotiate and follow shared norms that facilitate understanding. These norms indicate and shape what kinds of people we understand ourselves to be, as well as how others understand us, which we might refer to as the 'self'. Given that disorder experiences can be transformative, fundamentally changing how the world is meaningful for someone, we may therefore expect that disorder experiences can transform norms of the self that may undermine seamless social coordination. Following this, I argue that individuals with self-illness ambiguity face unique challenges when it comes to navigating social problems that other individuals with disorder experiences may not face. This is because, as I argue, some discourses around mental disorder are deemed more or less <i>valuable</i> strategies for conceptualising the relationship between self and disorder. Since self-illness ambiguity doesn't 'fit' into these discourses, individuals with self-illness ambiguity may feel isolated not just from their wider community but also from mental disorder communities themselves. I suggest, then, that individuals with self-illness ambiguity might experience an acute form of alienation that is yet to be discussed in the literature.</p>","PeriodicalId":49452,"journal":{"name":"Synthese","volume":"206 2","pages":"64"},"PeriodicalIF":1.3000,"publicationDate":"2025-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC12271293/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Synthese","FirstCategoryId":"98","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1007/s11229-025-05147-8","RegionNum":1,"RegionCategory":"哲学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2025/7/17 0:00:00","PubModel":"Epub","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"HISTORY & PHILOSOPHY OF SCIENCE","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Recent work on the phenomenon of self-illness ambiguity has sought to not only understand how tensions arise between one's experience of self and one's disorder experiences, but also how best to resolve said ambiguities to relieve the suffering of the person in question (Sadler, Psychiatry: Interpersonal and Biological Processes, 70(2), 113-129, 2007; Dings & Glas, Philosophy, Psychiatry, & Psychology, 27(4), 333-347, 2020; Dings & de Bruin, American Journal of Bioethics, 22(6), 58-60, 2022; Jeppsson, Philosophical Explorations, 25(3), 294-313, 2022). While the involvement of other people has been emphasised as important in regulating the self and thus will play a part in self-illness ambiguity, the impact of this social dimension has not been sufficiently explored. The goal of this paper is to provide an account of how social norms may be implicated in the enactment of the 'self' and experiences of self-illness ambiguity. To do this, I will provide a plausible account of what it means to have a coherent or understandable self, drawing on the mind-shaping view of social cognition (McGeer, Folk Psychology Re-Assessed, 137-156, 2007; Mameli, Biology & Philosophy, 16(5), 595-626, 2001; Zawidzki, Philosophical Explorations, 11(3), 193-210, 2008; Zawidzki, Mindshaping: A new framework for understanding human social cognition. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press, 2013; Zawidzki, Mindshaping and self-interpretation. In J. Kiverstein (Ed.), The Routledge Handbook of Philosophy of the Social Mind, 495-513. London & New York: Routledge, 2016). Mind-shaping suggests that we are successful in social coordination tasks because we are able to negotiate and follow shared norms that facilitate understanding. These norms indicate and shape what kinds of people we understand ourselves to be, as well as how others understand us, which we might refer to as the 'self'. Given that disorder experiences can be transformative, fundamentally changing how the world is meaningful for someone, we may therefore expect that disorder experiences can transform norms of the self that may undermine seamless social coordination. Following this, I argue that individuals with self-illness ambiguity face unique challenges when it comes to navigating social problems that other individuals with disorder experiences may not face. This is because, as I argue, some discourses around mental disorder are deemed more or less valuable strategies for conceptualising the relationship between self and disorder. Since self-illness ambiguity doesn't 'fit' into these discourses, individuals with self-illness ambiguity may feel isolated not just from their wider community but also from mental disorder communities themselves. I suggest, then, that individuals with self-illness ambiguity might experience an acute form of alienation that is yet to be discussed in the literature.

规定性的“自我”和自我疾病的模糊性。
最近关于自我疾病模糊现象的研究不仅试图理解一个人的自我体验和一个人的疾病体验之间的紧张关系是如何产生的,而且还试图了解如何最好地解决这种模糊,以减轻患者的痛苦(Sadler,精神病学:人际关系和生物过程,70(2),113-129,2007;心理学报,27(4),333-347,2020;丁斯和德布鲁恩,美国生物伦理学杂志,22(6),58- 60,2022;杰普森,哲学探索,25(3),294- 313,2022。虽然其他人的参与在调节自我方面很重要,因此会在自我疾病的模糊性中发挥作用,但这一社会维度的影响尚未得到充分的探索。本文的目的是提供一种解释,说明社会规范如何与“自我”的制定和自我疾病模糊的经历有关。要做到这一点,我将提供一个合理的解释,什么是有一个连贯的或可理解的自我,借鉴社会认知的思维塑造观点(McGeer,民间心理学重新评估,137-156,2007;《生物与哲学》,16(5),595- 626,2001;柴维茨基,哲学探索,11(3),193-210,2008;思维塑造:理解人类社会认知的新框架。剑桥,马萨诸塞州:麻省理工学院出版社,2013;Zawidzki,心智塑造与自我诠释。在J. Kiverstein(编辑),社会心理哲学的劳特利奇手册,495-513。伦敦和纽约:劳特利奇出版社,2016)。思维塑造表明,我们在社会协调任务中是成功的,因为我们能够协商并遵循促进理解的共同规范。这些规范表明并塑造了我们对自己的理解,以及别人对我们的理解,我们可以称之为“自我”。鉴于失序经历可能具有变革性,从根本上改变世界对某人的意义,因此我们可能期望失序经历可以改变自我规范,从而破坏无缝的社会协调。在此之后,我认为,当涉及到其他有障碍经历的人可能不会面临的社会问题时,自我疾病模糊的个体面临着独特的挑战。这是因为,正如我所说,一些关于精神障碍的论述或多或少被认为是概念化自我与障碍之间关系的有价值的策略。由于自我疾病的模糊性不“适合”这些话语,自我疾病模糊性的个体不仅会感到与更广泛的社区隔绝,而且会感到与精神障碍社区本身隔绝。因此,我认为,自我疾病模棱两可的个体可能会经历一种尚未在文献中讨论的急性异化形式。
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
Synthese
Synthese 管理科学-科学史与科学哲学
CiteScore
3.30
自引率
13.30%
发文量
471
审稿时长
1 months
期刊介绍: Synthese is a philosophy journal focusing on contemporary issues in epistemology, philosophy of science, and related fields. More specifically, we divide our areas of interest into four groups: (1) epistemology, methodology, and philosophy of science, all broadly understood. (2) The foundations of logic and mathematics, where ‘logic’, ‘mathematics’, and ‘foundations’ are all broadly understood. (3) Formal methods in philosophy, including methods connecting philosophy to other academic fields. (4) Issues in ethics and the history and sociology of logic, mathematics, and science that contribute to the contemporary studies Synthese focuses on, as described in (1)-(3) above.
×
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:604180095
Book学术官方微信