PHILOSOPHIC AND CLINICAL DISCOURSE OF THE TWENTIETH CENTURY

• Main Authors: V. M. Skyrtach, R. S. Martynov, A. O. Karpenko
• Format: Article
• Language: English
• Published: Dnipropetrovsk National University of Railway Transport named after academician V. Lazaryan 2016-12-01
• Series: Antropologìčnì Vimìri Fìlosofsʹkih Doslìdžen'
• Subjects: subject; clinical discourse; philosophical and clinical discourse; identity; care
• Online Access: http://ampr.diit.edu.ua/article/view/87056/83260

The purpose is to identify common and distinctive features of concepts and methodology of the problem of subject within different discourses, implicitly or explicitly relevant to the definition of "clinical" mode of human existence. The research methodology combines techniques of discourse analysis and basic principles of historical and philosophical studies. Originality of the research lies in definition of the clinical philosophical discourse as a special communicative process, where utterances not only focus on disease syndromes, and reveal phenomenology of inner experience of a pathological self, but also structure a certain type of sociality. Clinical discourse represents the space where the patient is treated not as a subject but as an object of disease. Ontology of clinical discourse prevails over ontology of disease, since its structures determine the notion of disease as such. Categorization of the disease, the idea of disease as a phenomenon subdued to professional authority leads to the idea of the need for patient’s isolation from the natural environment and removing him to special social institutions. The clinicist doctrines share the intention to reduce the patient’s self to its bodily dimension, while ignoring social determinants of psychological deviations. Conclusions of the study are summarized in the following positions: the current clinical discourse is based on the positivist-biological trend in humanitarian knowledge and it is the basis for the production and reproduction of medical and pharmaceutical repressive ideology; criticism of philosophical clinical discourse opens the possibility of overcoming the dominance of purely clinicist discourse; such a transformation is possible only after a paradigm shift in understanding the category of subject.