Clinical Approach to the fickleness of the faculty of judgment denial of the doubt

Résumé du document

The purpose of the initial research and slides of pathology, "case", is to study the report at work and subjective analysis of psychic and collective constructions developed to meet the actual mission. Clinical data was collected from human volunteers, both individually and in interviews, and referred to clinical research. It was also collected collectively by a method inspired by the investigation of psychodynamic work. The comparison of the amount of data used to formulate the original hypotheses presented below, and answer set that are not strictly academic. Following the formulation of these assumptions, many NGOs will be supporting research that will refine, or renew the hypotheses proposed.

Extraits

[...] H. Arendt, Responsibility and trial [1971], Paris, Payot P. Pharo, injustice and evil [1996], Paris, L'Harmattan, coll. Social logics C. Dejours, ibid. The etiology of mental disorders encountered in the ranks of humanitarian causes, we have said, a difference of interpretation. Subscribe to the centrality of work permits to reconsider completely the tracks of prevention and care. This certainly does not refer to trauma, but put back into a more precise and operating a clinical perspective. [...]

[...] A comprehensive approach focused on the real work and ethical twinges that stirs offers participants an opportunity to regain their ability to judge. Such opportunities do not interest the professionals responsible for counseling humanitarians. Far from it! The consequences of such development work lead to a critical assessment on the basis of criteria only defensive. As reported Brauman (1996) "From the moment that we will evaluate its actions in these different angles, I think we begin to guard against the manipulation or, in some cases, the dehumanization of humanitarian action. [...]

[...] The return mission is the abrupt cessation of surgical operation and collective ideology. The escape engine is no longer possible rationalizations can not find full agreement, and "suffering Ethics might be called" hindsight can then occur, ie conflict resulting from the mismatch between the intent of the original commitment and participation in the actual practices may arise. The risk of doubt, which was denied, hit the seal of the forbidden, returns, or in any case is asked to return if the subject comes to identify collective strategies and initiate a restructuring of cleavage (12). [...]

[...] Beyond the theoretical arguments, it is well praxis issues that are fundamental in the discussion. H. Arendt, ibid. In this perspective, guilt is secondary to the activity and is not the prime mover strictly unconscious originates in the impasses of infantile sexuality. C. Dejours, Suffering in France. The trivialization of social injustice [1998], Paris, Seuil Clinically, the divide is the existence of two divergent attitudes, even opposite in the same subject, and which do not influence each other. The doubt corresponds to the conscious confrontation of these two attitudes partitioned by cleavage and the possibility of a conflict reflective around this schism, this internal dichotomy where I can ask questions and receive answers Arendt , ibid.). [...]

[...] This paradox of psychic point of view also looks at the ambiguity of humanitarian action that are actors. Taking this time on this puzzle made by the researcher, who can not be resolved through a strictly projective explanation! Recovery of ability to judge: the emergence of the doubt To identify defensive strategies to think beyond the collective ideology implies not to evacuate the risk of suffering, and agree to be disoriented, being inhibited in its ability to act and to doubt his work . [...]