Paradis A
Sante Ment Que. 1992 Autumn;17(2):13-33.
This article suggests that the notion of madness varies with the social context, the dominating values of each cultural community and the position given to agents and social workers in the field and in the hierarchy of knowledge. As an interplay of representations and cognitive strategies, madness can be considered as a "symptom" of the "normative" and "reductive" biases of each era, but also as a revealing trait of the sensibility of each culture toward certain dimensions of unusual experiences. Following a review of the magical, prophetic, theological, moral, pathological and analytical versions of madness, the author concludes by emphasizing the necessity of always taking into consideration the cultural standpoint that characterizes the experience of madness as much as it does its study.
本文指出,疯狂的概念会因社会背景、每个文化群体的主导价值观以及该领域和知识层级中行为者与社会工作者的地位而有所不同。作为表征与认知策略的相互作用,疯狂可被视为每个时代“规范性”和“简化性”偏见的一种“症状”,但同时也是每种文化对某些异常经历维度敏感性的一种揭示性特征。在回顾了关于疯狂的神奇、预言、神学、道德、病理学和分析性版本之后,作者强调始终考虑文化立场的必要性,这种文化立场既塑造了疯狂体验,也影响着对它的研究。