Heliana de Barros Conde Rodrigues

Cura, culpa e imaginário radical em Cornelius Castoriadis: percursos de um sociobárbaro

This article accosts the theoretic-political procedure of Cornelius Castoriadis within the period which extends itself from the immediate post-war to the decade of 1970 - moment of the publication of The Imaginary Institution of Society. The ties between theoretic and social constitutions of the castoriadian concepts and analysis are emphasized, as well as the relevance of the same within a discussion of the contemporary world.

Psicologia, Filosofia, encruzilhadas, experimentações: caminhos possíveis no diálogo com Kierkegaard e Foucault

O presente artigo parte do dilema apontado na conferencia de Canguilhem Que e a Psicologia? de 1956, a fim de mostrar sua atualidade e tambem que e possivel acrescentar-lhe as problematizacoes contemporâneas que tratam da psicologizacao e da neurocientifizacao dos atuais processos de subjetivacao. O que temos feito de nossas vidas e de nossas praticas e como agir livremente perante a ameaca crescente de robotizacao e de cerebralizacao dos modos de subjetivacao? A fim de nao ficarmos paralisados frente a tais impasses, sugerimos caminhos possiveis a partir do encontro com Kierkegaard e Foucault, filosofos que se inscrevem, para usar a expressao foucaultiana, em uma via de experimentacao nao metafisica, caminho esse que ja foi bastante privilegiado se voltarmos o olhar para a Filosofia antiga dos exercicios espirituais, porem, que foi sendo esquecido aos poucos pela tradicao filosofica ocidental. Uma psicologia experimentante e, por fim, sugerida como caminho possivel, na tentativa de reconhecer e/ou de evitar os perigos inicialmente apontados. Sabendo-se que nao se pode elimina-los do cotidiano das praticas psi, pode-se ao menos estar mais atento aos mesmos, sendo esse o objetivo do presente texto.The present paper is part of the dilemma mentioned in the 1956 conference of Canguilhem entitled “What is psychology?” It aims at showing the dilemma’s present relevance as well as its contemporary problematization, which deals with the processes of psychologization and neuroscientificization of current subjecticization processes. What have we been doing with our lives and our practices and how can we act freely before the ever growing threat of robotization and cerebralization of the processes of subjectivization? In order not to be paralyzed by such deadlocks, we suggest possible paths departing from encounters with Kierkegaard and Foucault, philosophers who are inscribed, to use the foucaultian expression, in a route of non-metaphysical experimentation. Such route has been privileged and it can be seen if we focus back on the ancient western philosophy of the spiritual exercises, which has been, however, neglected by the western philosophical tradition. Finally, an experiential philosophy is proposed as a possible alternative in an attempt to recognize and/or avoid the “dangers” mentioned in the beginning. Knowing that it is not possible to eliminate them from the daily psi practices, it is at least feasible to be more aware of them, and this is the final aim of the present paper.

Psychology, Philosophy, crossroads, experimentations: the possible ways in the dialogue with Kierkegaard and Foucault

O presente artigo parte do dilema apontado na conferencia de Canguilhem Que e a Psicologia? de 1956, a fim de mostrar sua atualidade e tambem que e possivel acrescentar-lhe as problematizacoes contemporâneas que tratam da psicologizacao e da neurocientifizacao dos atuais processos de subjetivacao. O que temos feito de nossas vidas e de nossas praticas e como agir livremente perante a ameaca crescente de robotizacao e de cerebralizacao dos modos de subjetivacao? A fim de nao ficarmos paralisados frente a tais impasses, sugerimos caminhos possiveis a partir do encontro com Kierkegaard e Foucault, filosofos que se inscrevem, para usar a expressao foucaultiana, em uma via de experimentacao nao metafisica, caminho esse que ja foi bastante privilegiado se voltarmos o olhar para a Filosofia antiga dos exercicios espirituais, porem, que foi sendo esquecido aos poucos pela tradicao filosofica ocidental. Uma psicologia experimentante e, por fim, sugerida como caminho possivel, na tentativa de reconhecer e/ou de evitar os perigos inicialmente apontados. Sabendo-se que nao se pode elimina-los do cotidiano das praticas psi, pode-se ao menos estar mais atento aos mesmos, sendo esse o objetivo do presente texto.The present paper is part of the dilemma mentioned in the 1956 conference of Canguilhem entitled “What is psychology?” It aims at showing the dilemma’s present relevance as well as its contemporary problematization, which deals with the processes of psychologization and neuroscientificization of current subjecticization processes. What have we been doing with our lives and our practices and how can we act freely before the ever growing threat of robotization and cerebralization of the processes of subjectivization? In order not to be paralyzed by such deadlocks, we suggest possible paths departing from encounters with Kierkegaard and Foucault, philosophers who are inscribed, to use the foucaultian expression, in a route of non-metaphysical experimentation. Such route has been privileged and it can be seen if we focus back on the ancient western philosophy of the spiritual exercises, which has been, however, neglected by the western philosophical tradition. Finally, an experiential philosophy is proposed as a possible alternative in an attempt to recognize and/or avoid the “dangers” mentioned in the beginning. Knowing that it is not possible to eliminate them from the daily psi practices, it is at least feasible to be more aware of them, and this is the final aim of the present paper.

Psicología, Filosofía, encrucijadas, experimentaciones: caminos posibles en el diálogo con Kierkegaard y Foucault

O presente artigo parte do dilema apontado na conferencia de Canguilhem Que e a Psicologia? de 1956, a fim de mostrar sua atualidade e tambem que e possivel acrescentar-lhe as problematizacoes contemporâneas que tratam da psicologizacao e da neurocientifizacao dos atuais processos de subjetivacao. O que temos feito de nossas vidas e de nossas praticas e como agir livremente perante a ameaca crescente de robotizacao e de cerebralizacao dos modos de subjetivacao? A fim de nao ficarmos paralisados frente a tais impasses, sugerimos caminhos possiveis a partir do encontro com Kierkegaard e Foucault, filosofos que se inscrevem, para usar a expressao foucaultiana, em uma via de experimentacao nao metafisica, caminho esse que ja foi bastante privilegiado se voltarmos o olhar para a Filosofia antiga dos exercicios espirituais, porem, que foi sendo esquecido aos poucos pela tradicao filosofica ocidental. Uma psicologia experimentante e, por fim, sugerida como caminho possivel, na tentativa de reconhecer e/ou de evitar os perigos inicialmente apontados. Sabendo-se que nao se pode elimina-los do cotidiano das praticas psi, pode-se ao menos estar mais atento aos mesmos, sendo esse o objetivo do presente texto.The present paper is part of the dilemma mentioned in the 1956 conference of Canguilhem entitled “What is psychology?” It aims at showing the dilemma’s present relevance as well as its contemporary problematization, which deals with the processes of psychologization and neuroscientificization of current subjecticization processes. What have we been doing with our lives and our practices and how can we act freely before the ever growing threat of robotization and cerebralization of the processes of subjectivization? In order not to be paralyzed by such deadlocks, we suggest possible paths departing from encounters with Kierkegaard and Foucault, philosophers who are inscribed, to use the foucaultian expression, in a route of non-metaphysical experimentation. Such route has been privileged and it can be seen if we focus back on the ancient western philosophy of the spiritual exercises, which has been, however, neglected by the western philosophical tradition. Finally, an experiential philosophy is proposed as a possible alternative in an attempt to recognize and/or avoid the “dangers” mentioned in the beginning. Knowing that it is not possible to eliminate them from the daily psi practices, it is at least feasible to be more aware of them, and this is the final aim of the present paper.

A Psicologia Social como especialidade: paradoxos do mundo Psi

The article problematizes the creation process of a specialty in Social Psychology. Unlike other fieldsofourprofessionalarea,SocialPsychology was until recent seen as immune to the constitution of speciality. The study is based on the concepts of Institucional Analysis, such as Weber Effect, Lukacs Effect, intervention field and analysis field. Such concepts are used as tools in order to appreciate the recent history of the Social Psychology in Brazil and the official definition of Social Psychology as a specialty. KEY-WORDS: Social Psychology, specialty, Institutional Analysis.