0 What is madness? There is a monologue of reason about madness, Michel Foucault once said. The madness has been too long silenced by rational discourse there: we assume that the crazy has nothing to add, because their experience often is not part of shared reality for us normal people. However, it is important to keep in mind that, like any human phenomenon, madness is historically constructed. According to each season, with each sociopolitical context, madness is defined and understood. However, we tend to think that speaking is crazy talk in psychiatry. An analysis of the history of madness in the show, however, that mental illness as an expression of madness began to exist only in a particular historical moment. The constitution of madness does not happen from psychiatry, but the division between reason and no reason. Inclusive, is because of the insanity that psychiatry itself can exist. Modern thought, structured in bourgeois society that is geared to reason philosophically imprisons madness; in Cartesian philosophy that supports this society, I do not think there is, and if the madman is not endowed with reason, does not exist and can be deleted, played on General Hospital - semijurídica structure that decides, judges, and executes. At that time, the religion appropriates the madness ambiguously, explicit desire to help the binomial x need to punish, giving it a moral character that justifies forced labor in hospitals. The objective of these studies was to create a wise repentance which would help in overcoming the condition of madness, but always dialoguing strongly with ideas of repression During the Middle Ages, madness was seen as part of everyday life, circulating freely in the street. After the outbreak of leprosy and its demise after the Crusades, the lepers shall contain poor, vagrants and alienated heads, beginning the tradition of excluding crazy society. In the Renaissance, the known Naus of Fools with crazy sailed aboard ships, taking them to different places in an attempt to send the madness away. In the seventeenth century, madness is fixed in the hospital. It is important however, to remember that the hospital does not have the same value of place of healing that we have today. He was a deposit which were unwanted people - among them fools. In the eighteenth century, madness is best delineated as a manifestation of non-being. The company fears that this folly continues to infect and chaining her crazy to general hospitals, with the goal of protecting society from the possible threat of madness. I think this has been the historical period in which madness was treated more grotesque way, exposing it to a spectacle: the idea was to show the animality of madness in an attempt to meet a desire of the bourgeoisie of exaltation of the moral and reason. It is only in the nineteenth century that madness becomes the object of psychiatry. Until that time, the insane were literally chained in hospitals, living in appalling sanitation and hygiene. Doctors as Philippe Pinel accounted for unchain the crazy, crazy feeling that this is a patient, therefore, the object of study of medicine. However, it is important to note that although the physical situation in which they lived madmen have been vastly improved from the understanding of the mad as a human being with dignity, you begin to create crazy around the asylee an invisible circle of moral judgments . The hospital becomes a space of observation, diagnosis and therapy, but lets not also be a social space where the patient undergoes a process of indictment, trial and conviction. Crazy remorse for being what it is, and so does not discredit the discourse of medicine, within the logic of the exaltation of reason, silent madness as possible existence and apprehension of the world - although in many cases, be a good intention of the practitioner who wants to cure the insane. Crazy, being deemed unable delegates to medical care of itself, ie, delegates learn about yourself to another person, an expert who supposedly know more about his madness than himself. As said, the conception of madness varies with the historical context. When we speak of madness becomes clear that there is no clear definition of what is to be mad. John Frayze-Pereira, in his book What is madness? Brings data from a study he did with his psychology students about what is madness. The madness is viewed in different ways: as a loss of self-consciousness-the-world, as a disease, as an organic disorder or emotional imbalance that lead to deviant behavior, such as emotional disorder whose origin is the social awkwardness of individual as deviant in relation to a socially sanctioned norm, as a state of disconnection from reality or, finally, as awareness of self and the world. I particularly see madness as a chance to see the world. The reality is there for all of us, but each one appropriates it in a way, according to the experiences we have in the world and with others. Often, madness is the courage of the truth that Foucault says, is allowed to be, regardless of preconceived norms; is do not be afraid to show the truth to the world, as Frayze-Pereira says. Obviously, this way of being brings suffering, since it is expected that the share of crazy way of apprehending the world we perceive as normal. The way hes been denied to exist, which causes arise a feeling that he does not belong anywhere - this feeling is reinforced every time we do not recognize the madman as an agent of its own history and the history of society, saying that madness is only a disease that must be cured. We can not forget what Foucault talks about the madness in the book Mental Illness and Psychology: . Disease only have reality and value of illness within a culture that recognizes it as such Thus, it is essential to keep in mind that just as the madness is not without reason, our beloved and worshiped reason does not exist without insanity; the two coexist in relationship. Madness is within reason, it is characterized by behaviors not crazy, but by breaking the rules of what is considered normal. Thus, the error in the conceptualization of madness taken by scientific discourse is to take it as a fact in itself, when in fact, it is essentially relational and varies according to the context histórico.Você save what s being crazy? Drajosiane Odila
Posted on: Sat, 26 Jul 2014 11:24:57 +0000
Trending Topics
Recently Viewed Topics
© 2015