首页> 外文期刊>Frontiers in Psychology >The Grand Challenge for Psychoanalysis a?? and Neuropsychoanalysis: Taking on the Game
【24h】

The Grand Challenge for Psychoanalysis a?? and Neuropsychoanalysis: Taking on the Game

机译:精神分析的巨大挑战和神经心理分析:参与游戏

获取原文
       

摘要

As Ebbinghaus (1908) tells us in the opening words of his popular textbook of psychology, “psychology has a long past but only a short history.” In my opinion, there are three foundational moments in the history of psychology and, paradoxically, all three are moments of great advancement in biology. First, in the long past of psychology, psychology did not exist as such but was part of philosophy. It is extremely interesting to understand why it has been necessary, at one point of time in the sixteenth century, to invent this field and to create a signifier – namely “psychology” – separate from philosophy, which enabled the field to distinguish itself from philosophy (Mengal, 2000/2001). In this century of religious violence, bare corpses lay everywhere and progresses in anatomy are major. In 1540, the German religious reformer Philippe Melanchthon publishes a book which comments the De anima of Aristotle and he completes the Aristotelian text with a long treaty of anatomy (Mengal, 2000/2001). On the basis of this new knowledge, Melanchthon attributes functions to the body which were previously reserved for the soul. The brain becomes the principal organ of sensory functions and displaces the heart as the seat of emotional life and of thought. To the Aristotelian position that all living beings, whether plant, animal, or human, to varying degrees possess a soul which organizes the body, Melanchthon opposes a dualistic anthropology which divides the human in body and soul. The two-dimensional “anthropologia” is articulated in “anatomia,” science of body, and “psychologia,” science of the soul. It is this new anthropology that is diffused into the world of the Reformation (Mengal, 2000/2001). The Dutch reformer Snellius (1594), for example, defines the body and the soul by their respective essential property: “The rational soul of man is the thought that, coupled with the body, completes man. (…) The physical things closer to natural bodies that move naturally, have an extension and for that reason occupy a space. (…) The faculty of the rational soul is the mind or will. Thought is the faculty of the soul to discourse and think about things which are and which are not.”1 (Snellius, 1594, pp. 26–27). It is as a philosopher that René Descartes proposes his dualist vision much in line with the reformist opinions. Descartes dissects animals and human cadavers and is familiar with the research on the flow of blood (Fuchs, 2001). He comes to the conclusion that the body is a complex device that is capable of moving without the soul, thus contradicting the Aristotelian doctrine of the soul. The metaphysical order, which states that the body exists by the soul, is broken.
机译:正如埃宾豪斯(Ebbinghaus(1908))在他流行的心理学教科书的开篇中告诉我们的那样,“心理学有很长的历史,但只有很短的历史。”我认为,心理学史上有三个基础时刻,而矛盾的是,这三个时刻都是生物学取得重大进展的时刻。首先,在心理学的悠久历史中,心理学并非如此,而是哲学的一部分。理解为什么为什么有必要在16世纪的某个时候发明这一领域并创建一个与哲学分开的指称符(即“心理学”),这使得该领域将自己与哲学区分开来是非常有趣的。 (Mengal,2000/2001)。在本世纪的宗教暴力活动中,光秃秃的尸体随处可见,解剖学的进步至关重要。 1540年,德国宗教改革家菲利普·梅兰希顿(Philippe Melanchthon)出版了一本书,对亚里士多德的《动物世界》进行了评论,并通过长期的解剖条约完善了亚里士多德的文字(Mengal,2000/2001)。基于这一新知识,Melanchthon将功能归功于先前为灵魂保留的身体。大脑成为感觉功能的主要器官,并取代心脏,成为情感生活和思想场所。对于亚里士多德的立场,即所有生物,无论植物,动物还是人类,都有不同程度的灵魂来组织身体,梅兰奇顿反对将人类在身体和灵魂上划分的二元人类学。二维“人类学”用“解剖学”(身体科学)和“心理学”(灵魂科学)来表达。正是这种新的人类学传播到了宗教改革的世界中(Mengal,2000/2001)。例如,荷兰改革者斯内利乌斯(Snellius,1594年)通过其各自的基本属性来定义身体和灵魂:“人的理性灵魂是与身体结合在一起,完善人的思想。 (…)更接近自然物体的自然事物会自然运动,具有延伸性,因此占用空间。 (…)理性灵魂的能力是思想或意志。思想是讨论和思考什么是或不是的事物的灵魂的能力。” 1(Snellius,1594,pp。26-27)。伦纳·笛卡尔(RenéDescartes)作为哲学家,提出了他的二元论构想,这与改革派的观点非常吻合。笛卡尔解剖动物和人的尸体,并熟悉血液流动的研究(Fuchs,2001)。他得出的结论是,身体是一个复杂的装置,能够在没有灵魂的情况下移动,因此与灵魂的亚里士多德学说相矛盾。形而上学的秩序被打破了,身体被灵魂存在了。

著录项

相似文献

  • 外文文献
  • 中文文献
  • 专利
获取原文

客服邮箱:kefu@zhangqiaokeyan.com

京公网安备:11010802029741号 ICP备案号:京ICP备15016152号-6 六维联合信息科技 (北京) 有限公司©版权所有
  • 客服微信

  • 服务号