MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4313855859

Psychoanalysis, Democracy, and Dialogism / Psicanálise, democracia e dialogismo

2010· article· en· W4313855859 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Clive Thomson

Bibliographic record

VenueDOAJ (DOAJ: Directory of Open Access Journals) · 2010
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPsychology
TopicPsychology and Mental Health
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsDemocracyPsychoanalysisSociologyPolitical sciencePhilosophyPsychologyLawPolitics
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

ABSTRACT: Psychoanalysis (theory and practice) is alive and well in some parts of the world like France, Brazil, and Argentina, but in countries like Canada and the United States it struggles to surviveas it competes with other kinds of therapies. Psychoanalysts in these latter countries have been seeking to understand why psychoanalysis is "under siege" and to invent new, more relevant clinical and theoretical approaches. "What kind of psychoanalysis contributes best to the creation of a democratic mind?" is a (political) question asked by some contemporary relational psychoanalysts. The objective of my article is to suggest some answers to this kind of question byexploring the lessons we might learn from the work of a few key thinkers: the members of the Bakhtin Circle, Freud, Derrida, and some relational psychoanalysts of today. Two underlying assumptions of my article are: 1) an agreement with Stephen Mitchell that the practice and theory of psychoanalysis should provide a better understanding of "the relational matrix that makes our individual consciousness possible"; 2) that the dialogic principle (as developed by Bakhtin, Tzvetan Todorov, and others) can help achieve this goal. RESUMO: A Psicanálise (teoria e prática) está viva e bem em algumas partes do mundo como, por exemplo, na França, Brasil e Argentina, mas em países tais como o Canadá e os Estados Unidos ela tem lutado para sobreviver uma vez que compete com outros tipos de terapias. Psicanalistas nesses últimos países têm procurado entender o porquê de a psicanálise encontrar-se 'sitiada' enquanto buscam formas novas e mais relevantes de abordagens clínicas e teóricas. "Que tipo de psicanálise contribui melhor para a criação de uma mente democrática?" é uma questão(política) indagada por alguns psicanalistas relacionais contemporâneos. O objetivo do meuartigo é sugerir algumas respostas para este tipo de questão, através da exploração das lições que nós podemos aprender com trabalho de alguns pensadores fundamentais: os membros do Círculo Bakhtin, Freud, Derrida e alguns psicanalistas relacionais de hoje. Duas hipóteses demeu artigo são: 1) um acordo com Stephen Mitchell, que a prática e a teoria da psicanálise deve fornecer uma melhor compreensão da "matriz relacional que torna a nossa consciência individual possível", 2) que o princípio dialógico (desenvolvido pelo Bakhtin, Tzvetan Todorov,entre outros) podem ajudar a alcançar este objetivo.

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

How this classification was reachedexpand

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow), Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.156
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0030.001
Research integrity0.0010.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0310.000

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.228
GPT teacher head0.602
Teacher spread0.375 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.

Study designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".

Quick stats

Citations0
Published2010
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueDOAJ (DOAJ: Directory of Open Access Journals)Same topicPsychology and Mental HealthFrench-language works237,207