{"title":"I Am Because They Tell Me I Am: Mental Health and Performativity","authors":"Uenderson Wesley Rodrigues Ribeiro","doi":"10.11648/j.pbs.20231202.12","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":": This article discusses madness and its production, aiming to circumscribe Butler's performativity and Foucault's Theory of Discourse in the field of mental health. Madness has historically had different conceptions and social functions. In different contexts and cultures, care practices were created to heal, rescue and disalienate. All these practices built modes of subjectivation and ways of controlling what would become mental illness and psychopathology. But what is madness without medical-psychiatric discourse based on biological practices? How to understand madness from a critical epistemology based on the assumptions of applied human and social sciences? Thus, this article has as its methodology a bibliographical review research, having as main references the post-structuralist philosophy and the sociology of health, rescuing the history of madness and its conceptions: critical and tragic, based on Foucault's theory in dialogue with authors classics of the sociology of health. It is also observed how practices of medicalization of madness were systematized in Brazil, with the Sistema Único de Saúde (SUS) having the principle of universality and equity. With this, it was possible to observe and conclude how the language system and performativity build dissident subjectivities and produce mental patients, insofar as language produces subjects within a pre-established norm, dictating the molds of normal and pathological. The criticism carried out is not just to remove the logic of the biological discourse, but to build epistemologies that find the subject of experience and transform him into a subject of self-knowledge.","PeriodicalId":93047,"journal":{"name":"Psychology and behavioral sciences (New York, N.Y. 2012)","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2023-05-24","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Psychology and behavioral sciences (New York, N.Y. 2012)","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.11648/j.pbs.20231202.12","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
Abstract
: This article discusses madness and its production, aiming to circumscribe Butler's performativity and Foucault's Theory of Discourse in the field of mental health. Madness has historically had different conceptions and social functions. In different contexts and cultures, care practices were created to heal, rescue and disalienate. All these practices built modes of subjectivation and ways of controlling what would become mental illness and psychopathology. But what is madness without medical-psychiatric discourse based on biological practices? How to understand madness from a critical epistemology based on the assumptions of applied human and social sciences? Thus, this article has as its methodology a bibliographical review research, having as main references the post-structuralist philosophy and the sociology of health, rescuing the history of madness and its conceptions: critical and tragic, based on Foucault's theory in dialogue with authors classics of the sociology of health. It is also observed how practices of medicalization of madness were systematized in Brazil, with the Sistema Único de Saúde (SUS) having the principle of universality and equity. With this, it was possible to observe and conclude how the language system and performativity build dissident subjectivities and produce mental patients, insofar as language produces subjects within a pre-established norm, dictating the molds of normal and pathological. The criticism carried out is not just to remove the logic of the biological discourse, but to build epistemologies that find the subject of experience and transform him into a subject of self-knowledge.
本文探讨疯癫及其产生,旨在界定巴特勒的表演理论和福柯的话语理论在心理健康领域的作用。疯狂在历史上有不同的概念和社会功能。在不同的背景和文化中,护理实践是为了治疗、救助和疏离而创造的。所有这些实践都建立了主体化模式和控制精神疾病和精神病理学的方法。但是,如果没有基于生物学实践的医学-精神病学论述,疯癫又是什么呢?如何从基于应用人文和社会科学假设的批判认识论来理解疯癫?因此,本文以文献回顾研究为方法论,以后结构主义哲学和健康社会学为主要参考,以福柯与健康社会学经典作者对话的理论为基础,挽救了疯癫史及其概念:批判性和悲剧性。报告还观察到,巴西的疯病医学化做法是如何系统化的,系统Único de Saúde (SUS)具有普遍性和公平性的原则。有了这个,就有可能观察和总结语言系统和表演如何构建不同的主体性并产生精神病人,只要语言在预先建立的规范中产生主体,规定正常和病理的模式。所进行的批判不仅仅是去除生物学话语的逻辑,而是建立认识论,找到经验的主体并将其转化为自我认识的主体。