Moralna normativnost i duševno zdravlje: lakanovsko razumevanje neuroze i psihoze u svetlu integrativne terapije

Abstract

U tekstu je reč o fundamentalnom razumevanju duševnog zdravlja kao nekoj vrsti društvene idealizacije: konceptualizacija idealno zdrave ličnosti u praksi je slična idealizaciji onih osobina ličnosti koje se u odgovarajućem društvu smatraju idealno poželjnim. Stepenovanje duševnog zdravlja zatim se vrši na osnovu aproksimacije tom idealu. Ova vrsta shvatanja duševnog zdravlja podrazumeva i razumevanje dobro integrisane ličnosti kao manje ili više sinoniman pojam dobro socijalizovanoj ličnosti. U lakanovskoj psihoanalizi osnovni činilac socijalizacije, istovremeno nosical simbolizacije iskustva, pre svega moralno normativne simbolizacije, upravo je glavni signifikator "Ime Oca", koji upućuje na funkciju očinske figure u socijalizaciji deteta koju mogu vršiti različiti akteri u životu pojedinca. Na osnovu razumevanja signifikatora Ime Oca, Lacan i lacanovci izvode jasno razgraničene koncepcije neuroze i psihoze, i, na osnovu toga, sasvim različite, metodološki radikalno raznorodne, pristupe u lečenju jednog i drugog. U tekstu se razmatra različita funkcija moralne normativnosti u konstituciji subjektiviteta u slučaju neuroze i psihoze i nudi se jedna donekle originalna perspektiva u duhu lakanovskih interpretacija do sada, prema kojoj svest o značaju i instrumentalnoj korisnosti moralnog normativiteta definiše duševno zdravlje, a funkcioniše dinamički i strukturno različito u slučaju neuroze i slučaju psihoze.

The paper focuses on an understanding of mental health as a sort of social idealisation: the conceptualisation of an ideally healthy personality, in practice, usually overlaps with the idealisation of those personality traits which, in the respective society, are considered particularly desirable. The quantification of mental health is then conducted based on the approximation of an individual's situation with the mentioned ideal. The described view of mental health presupposes a corresponding understanding of a well integrated personality as more or less synonimous with a well socialised personality. In Lacanian psychoanalysis, the main factor of socialisation, and at the same time the carrier of symbolisation of experience (primarily of its morally normative symbolisation) is the main signified "Name of the Father", which suggests the morally formative role of the father figure in the socialisation of a child (a function which, admittedly, can be performed by others, as well as by the actual father). Based on an interpretation of the signifier Name of the Father, Lacan and the Lacanians derive clearly delineated conceptualisations of neurosis and psychosis and, consequently, methodologically radically different approaches to treating the former and the latter. The paper discusses the roles of moral normativity in the constitution of subjectivity in the case of neurosis and of psychosis, and offers a perspective which is to some extent novel, however still in line with the main Lacanian interpretations offerred so far: the interpretation whereby it is the awareness of the significance of one's choices and the instrumental usefulness of the moral normativity one adopts that define mental health. This awareness of moral normativity functions dynamically and structurally differently in neurosis and in psychosis.