乔治-康吉雷姆作品中的科学与心理关怀

IF 0.6 4区 医学 Q4 PSYCHIATRY
Luc Surjous (psychiatre, pédopsychiatre)
{"title":"乔治-康吉雷姆作品中的科学与心理关怀","authors":"Luc Surjous (psychiatre, pédopsychiatre)","doi":"10.1016/j.evopsy.2024.01.005","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div><h3>Objectives</h3><p><em>L’Essai sur quelques problèmes concernant le normal et le pathologique</em>, a medical thesis defended in 1943 by Georges Canguilhem (1905–1995), is certainly the best-known French text on the epistemology of medicine. Canguilhem, then a young philosopher, medical student, and member of the French Resistance, defends the self-determination of the living individual, capable of judging what is normal or pathological – categories subsequently adopted by medicine and physiology – as well as a conception of the medical practice tailored to the singular situation. His argumentation is largely based on the theories of psychiatrists, yet excludes psychopathology from its scope. It is this paradox, little studied until now, that I attempt to resolve in this article.</p></div><div><h3>Methods</h3><p>I have conducted an extensive study of the texts on psychology and mental care in G. Canguilhem's archives, his recently published complete works, and current academic research.</p></div><div><h3>Results</h3><p>I propose to return to the two problems presented at the beginning of the <em>Essai</em>: “that of the relationship between science and technology, and that of norms and the normal”. Canguilhem responds to the latter by proposing the concept of vital normativity, which follows on from earlier work on psychology, presented in high school courses in the 1930s and in a <em>Traité de psychologie</em>, never published, which already promoted a subject able to value, to commit, and thus to escape from the determinism of his environment and organism. Regarding the relationship between science and technology, which Canguilhem began to conceptualize at the very end of the 1930s, in his <em>Essai</em>, he proposes a path that reverses that of positivism, moving from clinical practice to science, in which the former is clarified by the latter; however, scientific psychology cannot play a role equivalent to physiology in psychological care. Indeed, Canguilhem considers psychology's claim to objectivity incompatible with the respect for subjectivity that his <em>psychologie réflexive</em>, on the contrary, defends. To conclude, I examine Canguilhem's few writings on psychotherapy, as well as those on psychopharmacology.</p></div><div><h3>Discussion</h3><p>I discuss the clinical consequences of the inability of scientific psychology to play a role in psychotherapy similar to that of physiology in medicine.</p></div><div><h3>Conclusion</h3><p>Canguilhem's conception of psychological care is essentially a defense of human dignity, based on a philosophical, not a scientific, theory of the individual.</p></div>","PeriodicalId":45007,"journal":{"name":"Evolution Psychiatrique","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.6000,"publicationDate":"2024-02-14","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Science et soin du psychisme dans l’œuvre de Georges Canguilhem\",\"authors\":\"Luc Surjous (psychiatre, pédopsychiatre)\",\"doi\":\"10.1016/j.evopsy.2024.01.005\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<div><h3>Objectives</h3><p><em>L’Essai sur quelques problèmes concernant le normal et le pathologique</em>, a medical thesis defended in 1943 by Georges Canguilhem (1905–1995), is certainly the best-known French text on the epistemology of medicine. Canguilhem, then a young philosopher, medical student, and member of the French Resistance, defends the self-determination of the living individual, capable of judging what is normal or pathological – categories subsequently adopted by medicine and physiology – as well as a conception of the medical practice tailored to the singular situation. His argumentation is largely based on the theories of psychiatrists, yet excludes psychopathology from its scope. It is this paradox, little studied until now, that I attempt to resolve in this article.</p></div><div><h3>Methods</h3><p>I have conducted an extensive study of the texts on psychology and mental care in G. Canguilhem's archives, his recently published complete works, and current academic research.</p></div><div><h3>Results</h3><p>I propose to return to the two problems presented at the beginning of the <em>Essai</em>: “that of the relationship between science and technology, and that of norms and the normal”. Canguilhem responds to the latter by proposing the concept of vital normativity, which follows on from earlier work on psychology, presented in high school courses in the 1930s and in a <em>Traité de psychologie</em>, never published, which already promoted a subject able to value, to commit, and thus to escape from the determinism of his environment and organism. Regarding the relationship between science and technology, which Canguilhem began to conceptualize at the very end of the 1930s, in his <em>Essai</em>, he proposes a path that reverses that of positivism, moving from clinical practice to science, in which the former is clarified by the latter; however, scientific psychology cannot play a role equivalent to physiology in psychological care. Indeed, Canguilhem considers psychology's claim to objectivity incompatible with the respect for subjectivity that his <em>psychologie réflexive</em>, on the contrary, defends. To conclude, I examine Canguilhem's few writings on psychotherapy, as well as those on psychopharmacology.</p></div><div><h3>Discussion</h3><p>I discuss the clinical consequences of the inability of scientific psychology to play a role in psychotherapy similar to that of physiology in medicine.</p></div><div><h3>Conclusion</h3><p>Canguilhem's conception of psychological care is essentially a defense of human dignity, based on a philosophical, not a scientific, theory of the individual.</p></div>\",\"PeriodicalId\":45007,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Evolution Psychiatrique\",\"volume\":null,\"pages\":null},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.6000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-02-14\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Evolution Psychiatrique\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"3\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0014385524000070\",\"RegionNum\":4,\"RegionCategory\":\"医学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q4\",\"JCRName\":\"PSYCHIATRY\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Evolution Psychiatrique","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0014385524000070","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q4","JCRName":"PSYCHIATRY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

ObjectivesL'Essai sur quelques problèmes concernant le normal et le pathologique(关于正常与病理的几个问题的论文)是乔治-康吉伦(Georges Canguilhem,1905-1995 年)1943 年通过答辩的医学论文,无疑是法国最著名的医学认识论著作。康吉伦当时还是一名年轻的哲学家、医科学生和法国抵抗运动成员,他为活生生的个体的自我决定权辩护,认为个体有能力判断什么是正常或病理--医学和生理学随后采用了这些分类--以及一种针对特殊情况的医疗实践概念。他的论点主要以精神病学家的理论为基础,但又将精神病理学排除在外。我对 G. Canguilhem 档案中有关心理学和精神治疗的文本、他最近出版的全集以及当前的学术研究进行了广泛的研究。结果 我建议回到《随想录》开头提出的两个问题:"科学与技术的关系以及规范与正常的关系"。坎吉拉姆针对后者提出了 "生命规范性 "的概念,这一概念源于他早先的心理学研究,在 20 世纪 30 年代的高中课程和从未出版的《心理学教程》中都有介绍。关于科学与技术之间的关系,康吉雷姆在 20 世纪 30 年代末就开始将其概念化,在他的《随想录》中,他提出了一条与实证主义相反的道路,即从临床实践转向科学,前者通过后者得到澄清;然而,科学心理学在心理治疗中并不能扮演与生理学相同的角色。事实上,康吉伦认为心理学的客观性主张与他的反思心理学所捍卫的对主观性的尊重是不相容的。讨论我讨论了科学心理学无法在心理治疗中发挥类似于生理学在医学中的作用所带来的临床后果。结论康吉伦的心理治疗概念本质上是对人类尊严的捍卫,其基础是关于个人的哲学理论,而非科学理论。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Science et soin du psychisme dans l’œuvre de Georges Canguilhem

Objectives

L’Essai sur quelques problèmes concernant le normal et le pathologique, a medical thesis defended in 1943 by Georges Canguilhem (1905–1995), is certainly the best-known French text on the epistemology of medicine. Canguilhem, then a young philosopher, medical student, and member of the French Resistance, defends the self-determination of the living individual, capable of judging what is normal or pathological – categories subsequently adopted by medicine and physiology – as well as a conception of the medical practice tailored to the singular situation. His argumentation is largely based on the theories of psychiatrists, yet excludes psychopathology from its scope. It is this paradox, little studied until now, that I attempt to resolve in this article.

Methods

I have conducted an extensive study of the texts on psychology and mental care in G. Canguilhem's archives, his recently published complete works, and current academic research.

Results

I propose to return to the two problems presented at the beginning of the Essai: “that of the relationship between science and technology, and that of norms and the normal”. Canguilhem responds to the latter by proposing the concept of vital normativity, which follows on from earlier work on psychology, presented in high school courses in the 1930s and in a Traité de psychologie, never published, which already promoted a subject able to value, to commit, and thus to escape from the determinism of his environment and organism. Regarding the relationship between science and technology, which Canguilhem began to conceptualize at the very end of the 1930s, in his Essai, he proposes a path that reverses that of positivism, moving from clinical practice to science, in which the former is clarified by the latter; however, scientific psychology cannot play a role equivalent to physiology in psychological care. Indeed, Canguilhem considers psychology's claim to objectivity incompatible with the respect for subjectivity that his psychologie réflexive, on the contrary, defends. To conclude, I examine Canguilhem's few writings on psychotherapy, as well as those on psychopharmacology.

Discussion

I discuss the clinical consequences of the inability of scientific psychology to play a role in psychotherapy similar to that of physiology in medicine.

Conclusion

Canguilhem's conception of psychological care is essentially a defense of human dignity, based on a philosophical, not a scientific, theory of the individual.

求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
CiteScore
0.70
自引率
50.00%
发文量
72
期刊介绍: Une revue de référence pour le praticien, le chercheur et le étudiant en sciences humaines Cahiers de psychologie clinique et de psychopathologie générale fondés en 1925, Évolution psychiatrique est restée fidèle à sa mission de ouverture de la psychiatrie à tous les courants de pensée scientifique et philosophique, la recherche clinique et les réflexions critiques dans son champ comme dans les domaines connexes. Attentive à histoire de la psychiatrie autant aux dernières avancées de la recherche en biologie, en psychanalyse et en sciences sociales, la revue constitue un outil de information et une source de référence pour les praticiens, les chercheurs et les étudiants.
×
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