重新评估精神病学中接触的维度。从Praecox Gefülh到人类存在形式的类型化工具

IF 0.6 4区 医学 Q4 PSYCHIATRY
Héloïse Haliday
{"title":"重新评估精神病学中接触的维度。从Praecox Gefülh到人类存在形式的类型化工具","authors":"Héloïse Haliday","doi":"10.1016/j.evopsy.2023.03.013","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div><h3>Objectives</h3><p>The clinician who adopts a psychoanalytic approach in a psychiatric context often regards the encounter between two individuals as an interplay of subjectivities, whose mode of being-in-the-world is shaped by their unique historical experiences. Despite some psychoanalytic authors exploring the concept of “contact,” it has often been reduced to its similarity with transference and countertransference, with little attention given to its distinctive qualities. This limits psychoanalysis in its ability to conceptualize an unmediated, preverbal encounter between two individuals. In this article, we argue that the dimension of “contact” cannot be equated with transference, and that it constitutes a vital tool for diagnosing and guiding therapy for various clinical conditions commonly encountered in psychiatry.</p></div><div><h3>Method</h3><p>This article is based on theoretical considerations. We first worked on the history of the concept of contact, then of <em>Praecox Gefühl</em> in the works of H.C. Rümke, to which we added the findings of current studies on the relevance of <em>Praecox Gefühl</em> in the diagnosis of schizophrenia and the study of the works of the great phenomenological psychiatrists. In so doing, we aimed to show that contact could be a tool of great use for psychiatric diagnosis, insofar that it allows for a typification of the forms of existence of different patients.</p></div><div><h3>Results</h3><p>H.C. Rümke's investigation of the concept of <em>Praecox Gefühl</em> highlights the unique mode of contact observed in schizophrenia. It is distinct from the feeling of strangeness and involves an intuitive observation of a perceived distance within the clinical relationship. Given that many psychiatric pathologies can cause patients to withdraw from the shared world, we suggest that the notion of <em>Praecox Gefühl</em>, beyond its original designation of the clinician's experience of schizophrenic dissociation and the particularities of the schizophrenic mode of being-in-the-world, may be applicable to other pathologies studied in psychiatric phenomenology. We propose four main forms of contact: the loss of vitality in schizophrenia, the untraceable authenticity of the hysteric, the impossible fluidity in the melancholic, and the failure of anchorage in mania. By approaching contact as a fractal form that reveals the entire mode of the subject's being-in-the-world, this typifying approach goes beyond a purely semiological or etiological reflection and can be diagnostically useful in guiding therapeutic efforts to enhance the subject's capacity to truly engage with others.</p></div><div><h3>Discussion</h3><p>Our paper focuses on the relationship between contact and what clinicians commonly refer to as an “encounter”. It is important to recognize that contact is not always equivalent to an encounter, and that assuming otherwise risks overlooking the possibility that certain relational modalities could actively prevent such an encounter from taking place. These “anti-contact” modalities, exemplified by the <em>Praecox Gefühl</em>, necessitate a focus on the very possibility of being in a therapeutic relationship with the clinician. Therefore, we suggest that clinicians should work to establish the possibility of being in a relation with the patient, prior to attempting to create an encounter. This approach allows for a more nuanced understanding of the ways in which patients can either facilitate or hinder the development of an encounter, and highlights the importance of working on establishing the possibility of a real encounter and being-with the clinician.</p></div><div><h3>Conclusion</h3><p>This paper has sought to challenge the prevailing assumption among psychoanalytically oriented clinicians that contact is merely a sub-dimension of the transferential dynamic. Instead, we have argued that contact warrants specific attention as a tool for both diagnosis and therapy in psychiatry. By examining the example of the <em>Praecox Gefülh</em>, we have proposed a typifying approach that could be applied to the most common clinical entities encountered in psychiatry, based on the clinician's perception of specific modalities of contact within the therapeutic consultation. This reflection on contact and anti-contact is a necessary and contemporary contribution to the psychiatric field, which is increasingly embracing a dimensional approach to psychological pathologies. By prioritizing the dimension of contact, we can deepen our understanding of the nuances of the therapeutic relationship and can enhance our ability to help patients overcome barriers to connection and encounter.</p></div>","PeriodicalId":45007,"journal":{"name":"Evolution Psychiatrique","volume":"88 3","pages":"Pages 335-344"},"PeriodicalIF":0.6000,"publicationDate":"2023-09-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"1","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Revaloriser la dimension du contact en psychiatrie. Du Praecox Gefülh à un outil de typification des formes d’existence humaine\",\"authors\":\"Héloïse Haliday\",\"doi\":\"10.1016/j.evopsy.2023.03.013\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<div><h3>Objectives</h3><p>The clinician who adopts a psychoanalytic approach in a psychiatric context often regards the encounter between two individuals as an interplay of subjectivities, whose mode of being-in-the-world is shaped by their unique historical experiences. Despite some psychoanalytic authors exploring the concept of “contact,” it has often been reduced to its similarity with transference and countertransference, with little attention given to its distinctive qualities. This limits psychoanalysis in its ability to conceptualize an unmediated, preverbal encounter between two individuals. In this article, we argue that the dimension of “contact” cannot be equated with transference, and that it constitutes a vital tool for diagnosing and guiding therapy for various clinical conditions commonly encountered in psychiatry.</p></div><div><h3>Method</h3><p>This article is based on theoretical considerations. We first worked on the history of the concept of contact, then of <em>Praecox Gefühl</em> in the works of H.C. Rümke, to which we added the findings of current studies on the relevance of <em>Praecox Gefühl</em> in the diagnosis of schizophrenia and the study of the works of the great phenomenological psychiatrists. In so doing, we aimed to show that contact could be a tool of great use for psychiatric diagnosis, insofar that it allows for a typification of the forms of existence of different patients.</p></div><div><h3>Results</h3><p>H.C. Rümke's investigation of the concept of <em>Praecox Gefühl</em> highlights the unique mode of contact observed in schizophrenia. It is distinct from the feeling of strangeness and involves an intuitive observation of a perceived distance within the clinical relationship. Given that many psychiatric pathologies can cause patients to withdraw from the shared world, we suggest that the notion of <em>Praecox Gefühl</em>, beyond its original designation of the clinician's experience of schizophrenic dissociation and the particularities of the schizophrenic mode of being-in-the-world, may be applicable to other pathologies studied in psychiatric phenomenology. We propose four main forms of contact: the loss of vitality in schizophrenia, the untraceable authenticity of the hysteric, the impossible fluidity in the melancholic, and the failure of anchorage in mania. By approaching contact as a fractal form that reveals the entire mode of the subject's being-in-the-world, this typifying approach goes beyond a purely semiological or etiological reflection and can be diagnostically useful in guiding therapeutic efforts to enhance the subject's capacity to truly engage with others.</p></div><div><h3>Discussion</h3><p>Our paper focuses on the relationship between contact and what clinicians commonly refer to as an “encounter”. It is important to recognize that contact is not always equivalent to an encounter, and that assuming otherwise risks overlooking the possibility that certain relational modalities could actively prevent such an encounter from taking place. These “anti-contact” modalities, exemplified by the <em>Praecox Gefühl</em>, necessitate a focus on the very possibility of being in a therapeutic relationship with the clinician. Therefore, we suggest that clinicians should work to establish the possibility of being in a relation with the patient, prior to attempting to create an encounter. This approach allows for a more nuanced understanding of the ways in which patients can either facilitate or hinder the development of an encounter, and highlights the importance of working on establishing the possibility of a real encounter and being-with the clinician.</p></div><div><h3>Conclusion</h3><p>This paper has sought to challenge the prevailing assumption among psychoanalytically oriented clinicians that contact is merely a sub-dimension of the transferential dynamic. Instead, we have argued that contact warrants specific attention as a tool for both diagnosis and therapy in psychiatry. By examining the example of the <em>Praecox Gefülh</em>, we have proposed a typifying approach that could be applied to the most common clinical entities encountered in psychiatry, based on the clinician's perception of specific modalities of contact within the therapeutic consultation. This reflection on contact and anti-contact is a necessary and contemporary contribution to the psychiatric field, which is increasingly embracing a dimensional approach to psychological pathologies. By prioritizing the dimension of contact, we can deepen our understanding of the nuances of the therapeutic relationship and can enhance our ability to help patients overcome barriers to connection and encounter.</p></div>\",\"PeriodicalId\":45007,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Evolution Psychiatrique\",\"volume\":\"88 3\",\"pages\":\"Pages 335-344\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.6000,\"publicationDate\":\"2023-09-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"1\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Evolution Psychiatrique\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"3\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0014385523000488\",\"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/S0014385523000488","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: 1

摘要

目的在精神病背景下采用精神分析方法的临床医生通常将两个人之间的相遇视为主观因素的相互作用,主观因素在世界上的存在模式是由他们独特的历史经历决定的。尽管一些精神分析作家探索了“接触”的概念,但它往往被简化为与移情和反移情的相似之处,很少关注其独特的品质。这限制了精神分析对两个人之间未经中介的、言语前的相遇进行概念化的能力。在这篇文章中,我们认为“接触”的维度不能等同于转移,它是诊断和指导精神病学中常见的各种临床状况的重要工具。方法本文基于理论思考。我们首先研究了接触概念的历史,然后在H.C.Rümke的作品中研究了Praecox Gefühl的历史,我们在其中添加了当前关于Praecox Gefühl在精神分裂症诊断中的相关性的研究结果,以及对伟大现象学精神病学家作品的研究。通过这样做,我们的目的是表明,接触可以成为精神病诊断的一种非常有用的工具,因为它可以代表不同患者的存在形式。结果H。C.Rümke对Praecox Gefühl概念的研究突出了在精神分裂症中观察到的独特的接触模式。它不同于陌生感,涉及对临床关系中感知距离的直观观察。鉴于许多精神病理学会导致患者退出共同的世界,我们认为,Praecox Gefühl的概念,除了最初对临床医生精神分裂症分离经历和精神分裂症生存模式的特殊性的指定之外,可能适用于精神现象学中研究的其他病理学。我们提出了四种主要的接触形式:精神分裂症患者失去活力,歇斯底里的真实性无法追踪,忧郁症患者不可能流动,躁狂患者无法固定。通过将接触视为一种分形形式,揭示受试者在世界上的整个存在模式,这种典型化的方法超越了纯粹的符号学或病因反思,可以在诊断上指导治疗工作,以提高受试者真正与他人接触的能力。讨论我们的论文关注的是接触和临床医生通常所说的“相遇”之间的关系。重要的是要认识到,接触并不总是等同于相遇,否则的话,就有可能忽视某些关系模式可能会积极阻止这种相遇发生的可能性。这些“反接触”模式,以Praecox Gefühl为例,需要关注与临床医生建立治疗关系的可能性。因此,我们建议临床医生在尝试制造遭遇之前,应努力确定与患者建立关系的可能性。这种方法可以更细致地理解患者促进或阻碍遭遇发展的方式,并强调了建立真正遭遇的可能性和与临床医生在一起的重要性。结论本文试图挑战以精神分析为导向的临床医生的普遍假设,即接触只是迁移动力学的一个子维度。相反,我们认为接触作为精神病学诊断和治疗的工具,值得特别关注。通过研究Praecox Gefülh的例子,我们提出了一种典型的方法,可以应用于精神病学中遇到的最常见的临床实体,基于临床医生对治疗咨询中特定接触模式的感知。这种对接触和反接触的反思是对精神病学领域的必要和当代贡献,精神病学领域越来越多地采用维度方法来研究心理病理。通过优先考虑接触的维度,我们可以加深对治疗关系细微差别的理解,并提高我们帮助患者克服联系和遭遇障碍的能力。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Revaloriser la dimension du contact en psychiatrie. Du Praecox Gefülh à un outil de typification des formes d’existence humaine

Objectives

The clinician who adopts a psychoanalytic approach in a psychiatric context often regards the encounter between two individuals as an interplay of subjectivities, whose mode of being-in-the-world is shaped by their unique historical experiences. Despite some psychoanalytic authors exploring the concept of “contact,” it has often been reduced to its similarity with transference and countertransference, with little attention given to its distinctive qualities. This limits psychoanalysis in its ability to conceptualize an unmediated, preverbal encounter between two individuals. In this article, we argue that the dimension of “contact” cannot be equated with transference, and that it constitutes a vital tool for diagnosing and guiding therapy for various clinical conditions commonly encountered in psychiatry.

Method

This article is based on theoretical considerations. We first worked on the history of the concept of contact, then of Praecox Gefühl in the works of H.C. Rümke, to which we added the findings of current studies on the relevance of Praecox Gefühl in the diagnosis of schizophrenia and the study of the works of the great phenomenological psychiatrists. In so doing, we aimed to show that contact could be a tool of great use for psychiatric diagnosis, insofar that it allows for a typification of the forms of existence of different patients.

Results

H.C. Rümke's investigation of the concept of Praecox Gefühl highlights the unique mode of contact observed in schizophrenia. It is distinct from the feeling of strangeness and involves an intuitive observation of a perceived distance within the clinical relationship. Given that many psychiatric pathologies can cause patients to withdraw from the shared world, we suggest that the notion of Praecox Gefühl, beyond its original designation of the clinician's experience of schizophrenic dissociation and the particularities of the schizophrenic mode of being-in-the-world, may be applicable to other pathologies studied in psychiatric phenomenology. We propose four main forms of contact: the loss of vitality in schizophrenia, the untraceable authenticity of the hysteric, the impossible fluidity in the melancholic, and the failure of anchorage in mania. By approaching contact as a fractal form that reveals the entire mode of the subject's being-in-the-world, this typifying approach goes beyond a purely semiological or etiological reflection and can be diagnostically useful in guiding therapeutic efforts to enhance the subject's capacity to truly engage with others.

Discussion

Our paper focuses on the relationship between contact and what clinicians commonly refer to as an “encounter”. It is important to recognize that contact is not always equivalent to an encounter, and that assuming otherwise risks overlooking the possibility that certain relational modalities could actively prevent such an encounter from taking place. These “anti-contact” modalities, exemplified by the Praecox Gefühl, necessitate a focus on the very possibility of being in a therapeutic relationship with the clinician. Therefore, we suggest that clinicians should work to establish the possibility of being in a relation with the patient, prior to attempting to create an encounter. This approach allows for a more nuanced understanding of the ways in which patients can either facilitate or hinder the development of an encounter, and highlights the importance of working on establishing the possibility of a real encounter and being-with the clinician.

Conclusion

This paper has sought to challenge the prevailing assumption among psychoanalytically oriented clinicians that contact is merely a sub-dimension of the transferential dynamic. Instead, we have argued that contact warrants specific attention as a tool for both diagnosis and therapy in psychiatry. By examining the example of the Praecox Gefülh, we have proposed a typifying approach that could be applied to the most common clinical entities encountered in psychiatry, based on the clinician's perception of specific modalities of contact within the therapeutic consultation. This reflection on contact and anti-contact is a necessary and contemporary contribution to the psychiatric field, which is increasingly embracing a dimensional approach to psychological pathologies. By prioritizing the dimension of contact, we can deepen our understanding of the nuances of the therapeutic relationship and can enhance our ability to help patients overcome barriers to connection and encounter.

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