Luka Janeš

English

Janeš, Luka

Hrčak - Portal of scientific journals of Croatia

IntroductoryThis	selection	of	papers	mereologically	encloses	the	initial	tripartite	publica-tion	project,	 also	consisting	of	 a	dedicated	 issue	“Aporia	of	Psyche”,	pub-lished	 in	 the	 interdisciplinary	 philosophy	 journal	 Filozofska istraživanja (Philosophical Investigations),1	 and	 the	collected	papers	 Integrativna bioe-tika i aporije psihe [Integrative Bioethics and Aporia of Psyche].2	They	are	a	part	of	a	larger	transdisciplinary	and	pluriperspective	research	project	whose	historical	cornerstone	was	a	public	discussion	“Psychopharmacology	in	the	Psychotherapy	Process	–	Violence	or	Necessity?”,	held	on	8	March	2016	in	the	Conference	Hall	of	the	Library	of	the	Faculty	of	Humanities	and	Social	Sciences	of	the	University	of	Zagreb.	A	fragment	of	the	text	belonging	to	the	invitation message provides an orientational insight into the motives behind the	original	idea	and	outlines	the	borders	of	its	teleological	formation:“Despite	its	long	history,	medical	and	social	significance,	and	the	public	presence	of	psychiatry	as	theory	and	practice,	an	abundance	of	psychiatric	topics	are	still	a	taboo.	One	such	question	concerns	the	usage	of	medicines	that	affect	mental	states,	more	precisely,	the	psychopharmaco-logical	therapy	which	dominates	the	contemporary	psychiatry.	If	we	take	in	account	the	fact	that	the	number	of	mentally	ill	and	disordered	persons	around	the	globe,	as	well	as	in	Croatia,	is	in	constant	growth,	a	permanent	reconsideration	of	institutional	psychiatry	becomes	a	necessity.	The	main	aim	of	this	public	discussion	is	to	contribute	to	the	field	of	critical	questioning	of	the	positive	and	negative	aspects	of	psychopharmacological	therapies,	that	is,	the	mental	and	physi-cal	effects	of	the	application	of	medicines.	Unavoidably,	that	type	of	therapeutic	organon	will	also	be	researched	historically,	and	so	will	be	the	wider	context	of	its	existence.”The	discussion	contributed	to	the	framework	of	the	yearly	project	of	public	discussions	Bioethical Tuesday,	organised	by	the	Croatian	Bioethics	Society,	but	it	was	envisioned	by	Luka	Janeš	and	Luka	Perušić	as	an	experiment	to	explore	the	degree	of	necessity	of	such	inquiries,	to	be	followed	by	a	more	orchestrated	attempt	at	contributing	to	the	field	to	which	the	topic	belonged.	Hence,	these	text	lines	are	typed	anew	because	they	contain	the	key	method-ological	compound	of	the	general	project	“Bioethics	and	Aporia	of	Psyche”	–	 in	 a	 transdisciplinary	 environment	 to	 critically,	 pluriperspectively,3  and  integratively	approach	 the	mental	health	of	 living	persons.	From	 the	given	viewpoint,	their	psyche	is	observed	primarily	as	living	energy	in	the	circularly	1   Filozofska istraživanja 39	 (2019)	 1.	Available	 at:	 https://hrcak.srce.hr/index.php?	show=toc&id_broj=17915&lang=en.2   Luka Janeš (ed.), Integrativna bioetika i apori-je psihe [Integrative Bioethics and Aporia of Psyche],	Pergamena,	Zagreb	(forthcoming).3   Pluriperspectivity	 appears	 to	 be	 a	 crucial	methodological	 prerequisite	 for	 reaching	scientific	 objectivity	 and	 avoid	 subjective,	bifurcative	 stances	 of	 exclusive	 mono-perspective	 views	 regarding	 any	 topic	 in	question.	On	principles	of	pluriperspectivity,	transdisciplinarity,	 integrative	 thinking	 and	bioprotectionistic	 orientational	 knowledge,	 a	Philosophy and Aporia of Psyche4SYNTHESIS	PHILOSOPHICA69	(1/2020)	p.p.	(3–5)L.	Janeš,	Philosophy	and	Aporia	of	Psycheentangled	 life	 space,4	 and	 thus,	 it	 counters	 standpoints	described	as	neuro-cognitive,	machine-applicable	to	engineering	research,	stripped	of	bioethical	sensibility,	both	in	the	sense	of	disciplinary	interaction	and	in	the	sense	of	un-derstanding the ethos of the biosphere. This bioethical sensibility, therefore, offers	a	guiding,	subject-intentionality	starting	point	of	our	projects,	aimed	at	the	destigmatisation	of	the	psychiatric	patients	and	rethinking	psychiatry	and	psychotherapy.	It	challenges	existing	modes	of	technicising	both	human	beings5	and	other	dwellers	of	the	biosphere,	in	all	of	its	identifiable	manifesta-tions and on all graspable levels of relation.The	initial	public	discussion	was	of	proportionally	significant	interest,	which	indicated	a	relevance	of	the	topic	on	a	large	public	scale.	It	spun	off	a	new	project	of	yearly	public	discussions	named	“Aporia	of	Psyche:	Psychiatric,	Bioethical	 and	 Philosophical	 Perspectives”,	 continuously	 recording	 a	 high	attendance.	With	the	participation	of	foreign	experts,	in	short	time	the	proj-ect	 advanced	 to	 an	 international	 level.	The	 format	 became	 too	 narrow	 for	the	requirements	and	width	of	the	given	initiative,	and	so	it	was	further	ex-tended	with	an	international	transdisciplinary	symposium	Bioethics and Apo-ria of Psyche.	The	papers	included	in	the	tripartite	collection	were	presented	throughout	the	first	three	years	of	the	symposium.	Given	the	profile	of	Synthe-sis philosophica,	selected	were	the	papers	of	high	philosophical	relevance	and	propulsion,	indicating	an	inevitable	demand	to	include	critical	philosophical	thinking	into	the	frame	of	mental	health	research.The term psyche	–	relatively	synonymous	with	the	notions	of	soul and mind, and	most	often	understood	as	the	totality	of	conscious	and	unconscious	con-tent	or	the	sum	of	characteristics	belonging	to	the	(in)tangible	self	–	has	an	important	place	 in	 the	historical	development	of	humanity,	and	 it	 is	one	of	the	most	researched	yet	 least	understood	phenomenon	of	 life.	Philosophers	developed	footholds	for	scientific	research	of	psyche	in	Ancient	Greece,	and	it	was	philosophers	who	continued	to	examine	psyche	to	the	contemporane-ity,	in	personal,	interpersonal	and	social,	cultural	and	political	contexts	and	aspects	likewise,	 through	a	multitude	of	scientific	 and	cultural	perspectives	and	approaches	to	the	subject.	Similarly,	doctors	showed	great	interest	in	the	problems	of	the	psyche,	and	newly	developed	branches	of	psychiatric,	neuro-logical	and	neurosurgical	research	and	therapy	gained	an	important	place	in	the	social	structure	that	opened	new	horizons	and	complex	problems	through	globalised	techno-scientific	and	political-economic	progress.In	this	issue,	we	present	seven	variously	dedicated	papers.	Bernard	Špoljarić	reflected	on	maybe	the	most	rudimentary	psychiatric,	but	also	philosophical	motive	–	the	complexities	of	the	human	ego,	narcissism	and	selfhood.	Jelena	Seferović	provided	a	socioanthropological	study	on	the	(un)power	of	men	in	the	context	of	 the	post-war	period,	 thematising	Croatian	war	veterans	with	mental	 disorders	 from	World	War	 I,	 and	 their	 social	 reintegration	 into	 the	community.	Labinot	Kelmendi	evaluated	the	link	between	literature,	madness	and	language	in	the	context	of	Foucault’s	philosophy,	setting	“the	archaeology	of	psychology”	(Serres),	and	“deconstruction	of	psychology”	(Caputo)	into	a	working	 thesis.	Damir	Smiljanić	 presented	 and	 explored	 a	 less	 known	but	very	interesting	practician,	author	and	personality	Oscar	Panniza,	discussing	his	self-proclaimed	“demons”	and	providing	a	psyche-hermeneutical	reading	of	Panizza’s	heritage.	Darija	Rupčić	Kelam	and	Ivica	Kelam	overviewed	of	some	of	the	contemporary	approaches	within	the	philosophy	of	happiness	and	discussed	key	issues.	Demétrius	Alves	França	presented	an	innovative	psy-5SYNTHESIS	PHILOSOPHICA69	(1/2020)	p.p.	(3–5)L.	Janeš,	Philosophy	and	Aporia	of	Psychechotherapeutic	approach	substantially	developed	in	Latin	America	–	peripa-tetic psychotherapy	–	that	also	takes	into	account	a	variation	of	the	phenom-enological	 approach	 to	understanding	mental	health	 issues.	Finally,	Matjaž	Potrč	extended	and	further	elaborated	on	the	idea	of	chromatic	illumination	in	relation	to	the	issues	of	cognitive	content,	raising	neuro-cognitive	research	on	an	entirely	new	height	with	a	set	of	proposals	and	solutions	to	some	of	the	ongoing debates.As	the	subject	of	inquiry,	the	phenomenon	of	psyche	consolidates	philosophy	and	psychiatry	on	the	bioethical	plane,	the	reason	why,	precisely	because	of	the	multitude	of	approaches	and	problems,	from	philosophical	theories,	over	psychoanalysis,	etnopsychiatry,	antipsychiatry,	psychological	theories,	to	dif-ferent	types	of	therapies	and	corresponding	theories,	the	project	of	integrative	bioethics	offers	a	chance	to	develop	new	understandings	and	methodological-ly	new	types	of	inquiry.	Considering	that	the	project	of	integrative	bioethics	presupposes	theoretical,	practical	and	educational	dimension	of	activity,	that	is,	 its	 character	 is	 transdisciplinary,	 and	 it	 strives	 towards	 implementation,	it	is	only	natural	to	make	the	subject	of	psyche	public,	and	by	dire	necessity	organise	events	and	arrange	publications	 that,	by	using	dialogical	enchain-ing	of	perspectives,	open	thus	far	the	inadequately	examined	problems	of	the	psyche,	 to	 open	 further	 possibilities	 of	 connecting	 the	potential	 carriers	 of	united	projects	that	are	going	to	have	a	direct	influence	on	the	situation	in	so-ciety.	The	final	goal	is,	thus,	to	illuminate	barriers	and	the	“aporia	of	psyche”	by	providing	orientational	knowledge	and	concrete	personal	and	social	solu-tions	to	those	problems	that	seem	without	a	way	out,	that	is,	aporetic.Luka Janeš“scientific	building”	of	integrative	bioethics	is	being	raised	and	developed	for	more	than	two	decades.	 For	 a	 brief	 introduction,	 see:	Ante	Čović,	 Hrvoje	 Jurić,	 “Epochal	 Orientation,	New	 Ethical	 Culture	 and	 Integrative	Bioethics”,	 Formosan Journal of Medical Humanities	19	(2018)	1–2,	pp.	19–30.4   Cf.	Thomas	Fuchs,	“The	Interactive	Phenom-enological	Field	and	the	Life	Space:	A	Sketch	of	an	Ecological	Concept	of	Psychotherapy”,	Psychopathology	52	(2019)	2,	pp.	67–74,	doi:	https://doi.org/10.1159/000502098.5	   Cf.	Luka	Janeš,	“Biopolitical	Laboratory	and	the	Genetic	Modification	of	the	Psyche”,	Jahr 10	 (2019)	 2,	 pp.	 341–360,	 doi:	 https://doi.org/10.21860/j.10.2.4.

Introductory: Philosophy and Aporia of Psyche

Abstract

Similar works

Full text

Available Versions

Hrčak - Portal of scientific journals of Croatia