Leuenberger Christine
Cornell University, Department of Science and Technology Studies, 301 Rockefeller Hall, Ithaca, NY 14853-7601, USA.
Osiris. 2007;22:180-204. doi: 10.1086/521748.
How can psychological categories be understood as historical, political, and cultural artifacts? How are such categories maintained by individuals, organizations, and governments? How do macrosocietal changes-such as the transition from state socialism in East Germany in 1989-correlate with changes in the social and organizational structures that maintain psychological categories? This essay focuses on how--pre-1989--the category of neurosis (as a mental disorder) became entwined with East Germany's grand socialist project of creating new socialist personalities, a new society, and a new science and on how diagnostic preferences were adapted, modified, and extended by local cultural and institutional practices. It also examines how post-1989 the category of neurosis became redefined in accord with a formerly West German psychotherapeutic paradigm and was eventually obliterated by the bureaucratic health care system of the new Germany. East German practitioners adopted new therapeutic guidelines and a new language to make sense of the "normal", "neurotic", and "pathological" self in terms of "individualizing forms of knowledge" that tied in with efforts to remake East German citizens as liberal democratic subjects. At the same time, practitioners' clinical practice remained based upon face-to-face encounters in which formal guidelines and stipulations were often superseded by local, interactional, institutional, and cultural practices and contingencies.
心理范畴如何被理解为历史、政治和文化产物?这些范畴是如何由个人、组织和政府维持的?宏观社会变革——比如1989年东德从国家社会主义的转型——如何与维持心理范畴的社会和组织结构的变化相关联?本文聚焦于1989年之前,神经症(作为一种精神障碍)范畴如何与东德塑造新的社会主义人格、新社会和新科学的宏大社会主义计划交织在一起,以及诊断偏好如何通过当地文化和制度实践得到调整、修改和扩展。它还考察了1989年之后,神经症范畴如何根据前西德的心理治疗范式重新定义,并最终被新德国的官僚医疗体系所摒弃。东德从业者采用新的治疗指南和新语言,依据“个体化知识形式”来理解“正常”“神经症”和“病态”的自我,这些知识形式与将东德公民重塑为自由民主主体的努力相关。与此同时,从业者的临床实践仍基于面对面接触,在这种接触中,正式指南和规定常常被当地、互动、制度和文化实践及偶发情况所取代。