The Identity of Psychiatry and the Challenge of Mad Activism: Rethinking the Clinical Encounter

Central to the identity of modern medical specialities, including psychiatry, is the notion of hypostatic abstraction: doctors treat conditions or disorders, which are conceived of as “things” that people “have.” Mad activism rejects this notion and hence challenges psychiatry’s identity as a medical specialty. This article elaborates the challenge of Mad activism and develops the hypostatic abstraction as applied to medicine. For psychiatry to maintain its identity as a medical speciality while accommodating the challenge of Mad activism, it must develop an additional conception of the clinical encounter. Toward elaborating this conception, this article raises two basic framing questions: For what kind of understanding of the situation should the clinical encounter aim? What is the therapeutic aim of the encounter as a whole? It proposes that the concepts of “secondary insight” (as the aim of understanding) and of “identity-making” (as a therapeutic aim) can allow the clinical encounter to proceed in a way that accommodates the challenge of Mad activism.

Language mediated mentalization: A proposed model

Mentalization describes the process through which we understand the mental states of oneself and others. In this paper, I present a computational semiotic model of mentalization and illustrate it through a worked-out example. The model draws on classical semiotic ideas, such as abductive inference and hypostatic abstraction, but pours them into new ideas and tools from natural language processing, machine learning, and neural networks, to form a novel model of language-mediated-mentalization.

The double function of the interpretant in Peirce’s theory of signs

There seem to be two distinct aspects to the role played by the Interpretant in Peirce’s account of the sign relation. On the one hand, the Interpretant is said to establish the relation between the Sign and Object. That is, the Sign can “stand for” its Object, and thereby actually function as a Sign, only by virtue of its being interpreted as such by an Interpretant. On the other hand, the Interpretant is said to be “determined” by the Sign in such a way that it is thereby mediately determined by the Sign’s Object. How can we understand the relation between these two aspects of the Interpretant? This is the question with which this paper is concerned. I begin by drawing a distinction between what I call the first-order function and second-order function of the Interpretant, and illustrating this distinction using Peirce’s example of comparing the letters p and b in § 9 of the 1867 “On a New List of Categories.” I then show that this same distinction can be discerned in a significant passage in the second section of Peirce’s 1903 “A Syllabus of Certain Topics of Logic,” as well as in his early definition of the Interpretant in the “New List.” This double function of the Interpretant has been noted in the Peircean literature, specifically by Joseph Ransdell in his 1966 dissertation, and more recently by André De Tienne. However, an important aspect of what I call the second-order function of the Interpretant remains unclarified in Ransdell and De Tienne’s approaches, namely, its relation to the logical operation of hypostatic abstraction. I will show that the Interpretant, in its second-order function, plays a role formally identical in the sign process to the role played by hypostatic abstraction in Peirce’s demonstrations of the Reduction Thesis. This formal identity will afford us with a way of understanding the relation between the two aspects of the Interpretant in terms of hypostatic abstraction.

Derridean Poststructuralism, Deweyan Pragmatism, and Education

Derrida’s deconstruction and rejection of the metaphysics of presence is examined along with Ferdinand de Saussure’s influence on Derrida’s trace of différance. The influence of Edmund Husserl and Martin Heidegger is considered regarding Derrida’s commitment to a priori transcendentalism along with his strident anti-empiricism. Derrida’s approach to educational issues is surveyed with emphasis on his deconstruction of rationality and construction of a series of educational aporias providing occasion for novel topoi. It is shown that Dewey too rejects the metaphysics of presence in ways integral to his philosophy of education. Dewey and Derrida agree on the inevitable openness to otherness and difference. Dewey’s empirical pluralism and perspectivism is discussed as an alternative to Derrida’s quasi-transcendental apriorism. The conclusion proposes that Derrida’s putatively a priori quasi-transcendental deconstructive trace of différance is an a posteriori consequence within the trace of genetic inquiry; specifically, it is, a reified hypostatic abstraction.