Discussions of modern cognitive science and philosophy about the nature of the pathological subject
ISSUE PDF (Українська)

Keywords

суб'єкт, патологія, мозок, свідомість, онтологія, феноменологія, дискурс

Abstract views: 153
PDF Downloads: 13

How to Cite

Skyrtach, V., Diakovska, H., & Martynov, R. (2021). Discussions of modern cognitive science and philosophy about the nature of the pathological subject. Multiversum. Philosophical Almanac, 2(2), 156-168. https://doi.org/10.35423/2078-8142.2021.2.2.10

Abstract

The purpose of the work is to analyze modern cognitive and philosophical studies of the subject's pathology. The theoretical basis of the article is based on the reception of alternative physicalist and phenomenological-hermeneutical methods, which made it possible to study the historical forms of subjectivity at the level of individuality, not community. With the help of the phenomenological method, the ontological conditions for the constitution of the subject in the philosophical and clinical discourse and the meaning of its existence were discovered. It is also, as it happens, that phenomenology does not overcome the objectivity of physicalism, formally asserting the uniqueness of Dasein, but actually isolating deviants within the personal inner space. That is why the concept of the cultural-historical nature of the psyche has become methodologically the most appropriate. The methods of interdisciplinary epistemology, primarily structural and semiotic, are used in the article, which made it possible to comprehend materials in which the traditional philosophical problems of the subject are synthesized with clinical texts. The scientific novelty consisted in the philosophical and clinical analysis of the pathological nature of the subject, aimed at eliminating the categorical matrix of physicalism in the context of integrating various philosophical discourses. In the diachronic section of the philosophical tradition, certain diagnostic and therapeutic strategies for rethinking the metaphysics of the subject formed the subject of a paradigm generalization of philosophical and clinical discourse in the horizon of modernity. The necessity of transforming the subject's conceptualizations from those oriented towards self-assertion and autonomy (ie, pathological subjects) into theories linking the subject's normality with responsibility and concern for existence is shown. Conclusions. It is proved that the cognitivist restoration of biologism in clinical theories of subjectivity is a symptom of the fact that modern philosophy has lost its actual connection with the clinic. The philosophical discourse of the pathology of the subject, which is formed by the existential-phenomenological tradition and representatives of the paradigm of socio-cultural anthropology of the disease, is analyzed. The understanding of the shortcomings of personal development, excluding organic pathologies, as rooted not in the physicality of the individual, but as derivatives of the system of relations in which this subject is included, has been proved.

https://doi.org/10.35423/2078-8142.2021.2.2.10
ISSUE PDF (Українська)

References

Binswanger, L. (1999). Being-in-the-world. SPB: PCB +, Juventa. [Іn Russian].

Putnam, H. (1999). Philosophy of consciousness. Moscow: The House of the Intellectual Book. [Іn Russian].

Skуrtach, V. M. (2018). Transformation of the concept of "subject" in the clinical discourse of philosophical anthropology. Anthropological dimensions of philosophical research, 13, 7-16. [Іn Russian].

Heidegger, M. (2011). Being and time. M.: Academic Project. [Іn Russian].

Heidegger, M. (2012). Zollikon Seminars. Moscow: European Humanities University. [Іn Russian].

Bennett, M., Dennett, D, Searle, J. (2009). Neuroscience and Philosophy: Brain, Mind and Language. Introduction and Conclusion. Columbia Universi-ty Press.

Bloom, F., Leisserson, A. (1986). Brain, mind, and behavior. New York: W.H. Freeman.

Boss, M. (1988). Recent considerations in Daseinsanalysis Psychotherapy for freedom. A special issue of the human psychologist, 16(1), 62-65.

Churchland, P. S. (2013). Touching A Nerve: The Self As Brain. W. W. Norton & Company.

Cutting J. (2015). A Metaphysics of Psychopathology. The British Journal of Psychiatry, 206(6), 524-525.

Fodor J. (1981). The Mind-Body Problem. Scientific American, 124-132.

International Conference on Psychiatry and Philosophy «Contributions of Neuroscience», 19th (2017). Retrieved from http://www.icpp-congress.com

Miller, J., Schwarz, W. (2014). Brain signals do not demonstrate unconscious decision making. Consciousness and Cognition, 24, 12-21.

Philosophy of Psychiatry (Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy) (2015). Retrieved from https://plato.stanford.edu/entries/psychiatry

Schultze-Kraft, M.; Birman, D. (2016). The point of no return in vetoing self-initiated movements. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences. 113(4), 1080-1085.

Zachar, Peter (2014). A Metaphysics of Psychopathology. MIT Press.

Creative Commons License

This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.

Downloads

Download data is not yet available.