Dr. Erika Reichle
Department social ethics
Eberhard-Karl University of Tuebingen
Summer term 1974
Some considerations for the problem of
Christianity as a chronic mass schizophrenia
5th special term theology
Herrenberger Str . 28
The author wrote this youthful work at the age of 21, especially evangelically enthusiastic about Je-sus, Bonhoeffer and Kierkegaard, hoping for a world without hunger and war during his lifetime, with 400 DM and coal oven in the house of Hermann Hesses at his bookseller time at Osiander on 12 sqm living with toasted bread and fried egg, to put all the money into theological books. He was angry with the rich German circumstances, could not comprehend the alleged plausibilities of the theological arguments of Jüngel, searched for evidence for God and did not find any.
Theology was a huge bubble of barely provable speculations about Jesus, Jeremiah and Isaiah. There were only text finds and a rat tail of doctrines, where one professor from the other often literally copied from his Bible commentary without quoting. Only gesture and choice of words were scientifically correct. It was about demonstrating a certain form of screaming. It was never about historically sound evidence. Even excavation finds have to be interpreted. And the power of interpretation lay in the hands of the professor, who attested to the student's scientific thinking through his expert opinion, at the student's discretion, when it converged with his own style of expression. Prof. Dr. Rolf Schäfer of the Oldenburgian Regional Church took this work as an opportunity to urgently discourage the author from continuing his study of theology and to deny him the right to serve in church service.
Only in this way could the mission of theology be fulfilled, to conjure up the next generation of pastors to preach what the church of the 20th century wanted to have done after the second war. It was not at all about real knowledge, but about the preservation of an alleged knowledge, which was in full harmony with Luther's tradition, and the church's alimony structure anchored in the Loccum Treaties did not endanger its existence as a religious institution with at that time still considerable reputation in the post-war republic.
At the Faculty of Theology in Tübingen, the change from the angry old men to the smooth-minded conformists took place, who replaced the vehement militant advocacy for the spirit of freedom (Käsemann) with meticulous collecting of information floods in the file-box as a base camp for new research approaches (engels, chairmakers). The students' struggles against standard study periods of 6 semesters wanted to reach research time instead of the timeframe of established knowledge reserves and thus secure what the future of the FRG as a knowledge location could have secured. Hengel countered the revolutionary departure by saying that Jesus was not a revolver, but a cheerful man. Laugh again, drink a wine tavern and enjoy the punting trips on the Nekar.
Moltmann was the only one who included Bloch's philosophy and scientific knowledge of the Big Bang and ecology. The author was deeply impressed by this and has tried to continue it in the fields of philosophy, psychology, social sciences and medical research. That he later landed at the recently deceased Prof. Dr. Dr. Dr. Rolf Schwendter as a central pioneer of an integration and appreciation of social marginal groups of all kinds, after the initial theological doctoral supervisor from the Moltmann Riege accused him of not advertising enough for these new therapeutical groups of aspiring young academics due to his criticism of gestalt therapy groups.
The generative theme in the Theologicum in Tübingen was the same as in the madhouse: it was about freedom of thought and the guards' gait. The Church is shrinking, as I had predicted at that time, but has been infiltrated in large parts by fellow combatants who, against the evangelical world domination wish to preserve the world, see peace for this purpose as attainable only through justice and appropriate distribution of goods. The spinners of that time are the bishops of today and have largely opened up the professors' self-satisfaction of that time to a serious dialogue with the world and its knowledge.
If we proclaim a God who slaughters his son so that he does not punish us for our sins with death, then we shall crucify our flesh as thanksgiving - what do we do with it to the little children's souls? The word from the cross can make you sick. The grace of God and the penchant for the weak and outcast need not be found on the cross.
God is the creator of the world according to Christian lip service. He made the monkeys in the zoo, who are forced to be surrounded by spectators even while they are still playing. He made the fish that rotting in the Rhine. He made the cows queuing up in front of the slaughterhouses. He made the horses, whose freedom is taken with spurs and whip to the curb. He created the soldiers, the peasant sons from which the SS recruited itself. God is the creator of the more than 6 million Jews slaughtered in the camps of our ancestors. God created mankind. God gave us eyes to see, noses to smell and rub, ears to hear, hands to stroke and create, and so much more. The theologians are left with this: 1. the reading eyes, 2. the audience ears that only suck in words, 3. the hands for writing, gesticulating and blessing weapons.
As imago dei,"man" is also the creator. Today,"he" has boomerang-like set aside everything to abolish God, perhaps the strongest, where God is cheered most. But he has also abolished himself as a creator, at least in theology, which does not allow new images of God and only considers the old to be true. The theologians are struggling to incorporate a late antiquity 2000 years into themselves. What results are empty words without action, clever chattering about a view of reality that reaches from the living room door to the seminar room, from the pulpit to the meeting room. This life lacks openness to the experience of the world as whose creator God is given to God. It impoverishes creativity. If creatures are copies of the Creator, the work represents the person, then some theologians are in a bad way.
Man is a creative worker. In his products, he makes himself an object in his own right, and he objectifies his essence in the product. "As the individuals utter their lives, so are they. (Karl Marx/Friedrich Engels, Die deutsche Ideologie, MEW 3,21) We can no longer associate these sentences with any imagination, they are abstract, because for us, neither the thesis of self-objectiveization nor that of creativity applies. If you can afford it, you may still afford it as a luxury in art. What the others produce is foreign to them, they can hardly invent themselves in a Mercedes fender like-merchant, people don't know who they are and become mutually alien, consumers only of bulk goods and mass media. Instead of production, there is nothing but reproduction in every last corner, the original is consumed greedily and immediately added to the circle of reproduction. What is unique, shimmers out of a strange world, is admired because it no longer belongs to this life. If one examines consciousness, the urge to possess is everywhere, aggressively and as a desire to consume. Everything is treated like things, there are only objects for consciousness.
Even the examination of consciousness through oneself has become an act of objectivity. The humanities also reproduce in their phrases. Theology, in the ruthless pace of reconsideration, may well fall upon its origins, thinking hot contemplation, with the urge to the archaic, a penchant for modernity and the crypt, where the priest shines with blessing. The thought of God has become a reflection on God, everything, but also all the fullness of life has become rigidly a theological thing, which the student invites to read books. For example, the phrase "the human being" is an expression of the emptiness and nonsense of thought and thought: both language and the term are things, formulae and ma-rionettes, conceived and directed by puppets. Theology illustrates how much mankind is a deficient being.
Desk Life - Theology with the Nuremberg Funnel
My situation here at the desk is characterized by fainting. While many sciences work in research teams, theology studies are highly individual studies. I am afraid to write without quoting, my knowledge is reified as a material that is motivated by the fear of examinations, which is copied and taken over by the students at the beginning of their studies. As an actor learns roles, so theologians learn to represent positions by thinking by memorizing them as best as possible. Self-thinking is undesirable, jeopardizes the exams and the further career. But whoever quotes is king - as if the thought becomes true through a recognized authority of thinking! The style of my sentences is nothing but a reproduction of the style of books consumed so far. The only service that is still unique is the choice of thoughts and their decoration. Contrary to the usual hostility of theology to psychology, sociology, political science and medicine, I move in the interdisciplinary field of anthropology. Limiting the topic to pure theology would be an injustice to the complexity of the subject matter. The spirit of the theologian usually stiffened in a piece of the past. He digs through the literature references he finds on this subject, he reads books entitled "Mensch" - and then he knows what a person is. The notion of objectifying is that people think like in a zoo without a grid. The experience of the humanities is mostly secondary, read from books. If a theologian should milk a cow, it is clear that he will only disappear once more in the library.
The division of the world into subjects and objects can be found everywhere, e. g. in the relationship between teacher and pupil, whereby the book also has a teacher's role. The teacher teaches the student (not the other way round), in which the idea of passing on knowledge as a Din-ges or the "treatment" of the student in education prevails like a raw block of wood, from which a still image is to be made, copy of the teacher, the copy of his teacher, who... (etc.). And that is a success. The student peels the teacher's thoughts back by understanding them, he puts them in storage. When a student expresses himself, he does not go beyond the cautious modification of the thoughts he has learned. His knowledge is a thing, either right or wrong, that's why the margin of usual seminar papers is also a thing, a dialogue doesn't become a dialogue anyway, because the teacher writes his criticism. The student is censored by giving his work a mark. What a dilatation to nu-merge the product of a human being with numbers from 1-6! But only the real student survives. In the student's work, the subject-object division of life - as well as research in the sciences - corresponds to the strict separation of author and topic.
Never does a bookworm make itself an issue, except for the autobiographies of marketable people whose works have a prospect of brisk sales. The author only brings himself into the topic hidden and unintentionally, almost as a mishap. The further you get away from the "thing", the more comfortable the writer is. The worker remains concealed behind his work, remains abstract, withdrawn from the viewer and has become an interchangeable function. The less personal position a book has, the more it is recommended, with the exception of the mental books, for whose quality the author's name stands as a trademark. But apart from that: anyone can continue his work, he has acquired the same complex of knowledge as his predecessor. The activity work is characterized by a passivity - increasing with increasing intensity of the offender -: grammatically correct is already: I am working, I am being lived. Because the work has become a preplanned scheme to which I have to submit. The scheme also determines me where I torture my naivety in the belief that it comes from myself, what I do, not from the teachers. The worker is in the late capitalism object of his work, the subject is cast out as a disruptive factor with whip and sugar, as evil spirit, insolence, defiance and rebellion, foolishness, reverie and cowardice, depending on the educational background with different accents.
In this work I want to show how much the believer resembles the schizophrenic. The degree of the distance from reality is approximately the same, the schizoid structure of his ego- and world-experience is similar. The central difference is that schizophrenics are locked away in madhouses, while believers in churches have found a basis for mutual reinforcement in their worldview, which has been professed against all science. Within this sect, her language and mental mythology functions as a rigid division of the world into good and evil. From the outside,"Christians" are thought to be strange fools. In my school class this was very obvious, most of them didn't believe in the existence of a god and thought I was bizarre. Rightly so. In evangelical youth circles, one could comfort each other to be so little understood by the northern people.
Speaking is a matter of meeting the world and the people of this world. Thinking of speaking unsolvable brother, was never real as l' art pour l' art. Thinking and speaking establishes a connection. People who speak to each other are connected to the community in this way, so it is part of their essence to speak and think because community is vital for people. Speaking is learned as an act of naming the world: the tender word "mum" is associated with experiencing the mother. Every word includes the imagination of what it is in the experience of which one has accepted the word. (Introduction: from the direct premonition of what is looked at and felt, one mediates-memorized imagination, in which the originally passively experienced now active-consciousness is rerepresented. In this way, all the world's experience is named, everything gets its name. The names of experiences, which have been recorded in an unordered and isolated manner, are brought into context by new associations: after the lightning a thunder follows. Language builds on memory of experience. So, finally, the word is spoken without the presence of the experience belonging to it. Fantasy and imagination are created. You pretend like you do. The desire for the presence of the person who is not present is a matter of imagination. The combination of single words (originally unconnected individual experiences) leads to more abstract words for larger world contexts, e. g. thunderstorms for lightning, thunder, rain. Real existing relationships are recognized and marked with new words. Thus, the thinking consciousness reappears and names the experienced connections. Through the awareness of the connection it becomes possible to relate one's own movements and activities to the world and its inmates. Through the experience that the world reacts to the ego, an interrelationship between people and also man and world is determined. The impressions are increasingly becoming more and more ordered into a large sense structure. The thinking now mediates with the means of the naming language between everything and gives the possibility to experience certain desired reactions through targeted activity and intention. The indiscriminate movement of the infant becomes an action that is thought through for ever greater impact, the possibility of changing the world. The metaphor of schizophrenics often seems to be at odds with convention and therefore crazy. But it has an internal logic that works on the same principle as the language of others.
Change of the world happens aimlessly or stupidly, if the act of consciousness is not carried out at all or insufficiently. This depends largely on the available language skills, which are the result of a long cultural development. The naming of the world has its most effective state where both concretion and abstraction are possible and are updated differently in the process of thinking. The abstract imparts thinking with the concrete, from which the abstract originates through thinking. Advanced consciousness is capable of meticulously capturing the details of a situation, as well as of taking a distant look at the context of the phenomena. The better the thinking connects both, the more true the word becomes, the more effective the actions that come from and with the word.
Dreams give goals to which the action now changes the world. Dreams express wishes. Desires arise because people cannot be enough for themselves, they always lack something. Satisfaction is only temporary. Dreams reveal to the consciousness what people lack. In the dream a lack becomes conscious. Not always, but the remedying of the deficiency is usually vital for people. The change of the world has the goal of procuring what is lacking and thereby eliminating the need that has arisen. So it came to agriculture, and so it went on until new needs arose from the situation in the changing world, which required new dreams and new world change, as a process. Historically, the accumulation of goods has resulted in the strongest human animals and oppression: most people do not have what they need, whereas others live in abundance. Yet they don't give it to those who need it. As a result, billions of people die of hunger, while others die of over-fatting or old-age, heart attacks and cancer. The dream of the oppressed: the world must be changed in such a way that their suffering ceases. This is an essential goal of world change; the re-volution of all unequal distribution of goods, in which domination and oppression generate bondage and suffering.
So far, the theologian's talk has hardly ever called for a just exchange and distribution of goods: they helped the suffering to bear their suffering as God's will. Where theology put the Word at the service of the liberation of suffering, the same powerlessness came into being. The word doesn't change the world. The cause lies in the world, which has been adequately protected by the gentlemen against intellectual talk. The intellectual consciousness is associated with the abstraction and has become hopelessly addicted to it. The inability to concretion means that intellectual thinking cannot impart itself to the minds of the oppressed and drive their knowledge forward. The world proletariat has no class consciousness, experiences its suffering without seeing the reason: complex international economic structures, bad prices and dumping prices/wages of capitalist competitors. Through abstraction, intellectual chatter becomes unrelated to the oppressed and the world, which can only ever be experienced as concrete, and therefore can only be changed in concrete terms. The oppressed living in the all too concrete are lacking the distance from which relations can be perceived between their situation in the dark moment and other concrete relationships that are usually not experienced, the knowledge of which is crucial in order to change the world in the above-mentioned sense. Only a synthesis, a mediation and a new unity of intellectuals and proletariat is the condition for class consciousness as a historical prerequisite for the revolution. Intellectuals recognize this and experience their inability to put into practice as guilt - as far as they experience guilt. It is almost unnecessary to stress that this situation has been further encouraged by the structure of the university. In any case, the uni language into which one has to integrate oneself in order to acquire a diploma isolates the intellectuals completely from the oppressed, yes, the intellectuals are of course in bondage to the apparatus and denounce themselves oppositely in order to survive. Competition has also crept into our thinking, from the insidious pressure of the performance ideology and the objectification of the idea to be thought. That's why thinking has become harmless. That is why all those who do not keep what they promise are making empty words, because the word has been divided into two parts and thus lost its power and life. The intellectuals have largely reduced their life horizons to books. You don't learn the concrete by yourself. Because intellectual thinking is alienated from the concrete idea, language became powerless, the naming of the world does not change the world any more.
It borders on black humour to hear the complaint about the "lack of practical relevance" of intellectuals from the entrepreneur's side. This calls for internships that better integrate the student into market economy exploitation thinking, a drop in the ballast that is seen in the fact that a student learns more about the world than is useful for his or her role as a wheel in the company. He should "not be a professional idiot", i. e. he should know what is of benefit to the company. But it is precisely the frugality of the interest in the subject that plays into the best hands of the company's boss: the division of labour brings more profit out of the people who achieve optimum potency in screw tightening, radio soldering and typing letters. And the narrow-minded consciousness works like a machine without any problems without any rejoicing. The "practice" of entrepreneurs is the practice of how the university is changed in such a way that the greatest possible profit can be made with the trained students and this with the least amount of effort: regular studies of 6 semesters, better vocational counselling in order to avoid faulty studies, which are again at the expense of the state. And so the last naïve dreamer is already included in the offer of graduates for the next year, he is number in the computer. Its benefits are statistically established. Before the chicken existed in the chicken factory, the student at least still had to be allowed to put himself in the cage.
At home in leisure time, the television set becomes a dream machine: in the innermost district of the depersonalised bundle of functions of the employee, the card in the computer file of the staff centre and Neckermannversand, in the room behind the stove, which no longer radiates warmth as in grandma's time, it stands and makes the tired anti-hero of a day without events (except for the beginning of his life). He is a crime hero 007 and, due to his mistrust, can cope with the entire Soviet spy network on his own. One of them manages it against the whole universe, Prometheus with the bulletproof vest and never-ending fantasy; the man who doesn't give up hope that the burnt-out assembly line worker has barely ever gotten to know. He is successful with the women who are always beautiful, cruel, as-thetical (not like the lady next to him) and almost tear their pants off. The man's hat will finally go off if he had him lying on his lap. In the surrection he is finally free and able to smoke what he wants, drink, eat and eat what he wants. What freedom, when there is none in the working process of those who are no longer. While Marx still thought that the workman, who was in a state of disrepair, now objects himself instead of working in his spare time, sleeping, eating, witnesses, it is necessary today to sing of a reified leisure time behaviour dominated by a cultural industry and a boundless freedom from detergents; the subject is dead.
Only: everything has become more painless, because nobody notices it anymore and in the industrial society the needs of all become perverse by their wrong fulfilment. The films are a dream world of happiness, love, adventure or disaster. They offer remote-controlled deregulation on time. Difference to schizophrenia: you can switch off the TV and not the psychosis.
Film death accustoms the consciousness of the material to the fact of death as a necessary vital act, an extra charge against the rightfulness of the blood revenge, which is raised as value in the holy state. In this brothel of anger, which once applied to the boss, in the murder of a film, there is a habit of death, in the pious belief that "it is only a film".
The one whose life can only breathe again in the film soon loses his feeling for reality and film illusion. No more bestiality frightens the cinematographers, the murder of the witch tickles the boy in his thighs; the films dealing with the treatment of Auschwitz are laughing. Who has become more bestial: the Gl behind the machine gun or the pack in front of the screen? The next morning, however, the spook is over, the witches, killers, sadists, masochists and Indians are good Germans again after law and order. This is how double the morale between day and night, the workplace and the mass dream medium that replaced the former intimacy. Television viewers (and 98% of the FRG households have a TV) are schizoid beings. The braver the day, the more brutal the night. The horror of the cinema and television programmes reveals the repression of a society.
The objectivity of spiritual work can also be called thing-thinking; the term belongs to the epoch when the natural sciences imagined that they could describe their objects so precisely that they should be accessible to every "subject". In the meantime, at least some scientists have realized that such a separation of object and observer does not correspond to reality, at most in astrophysics. (eg Niels Bohr)
A lie becomes a statement in the humanities if it is made independently of address and author. Those who deny the subjectivity of their statements are regarded as administrators of foreign opinions, which may be more generally recognised than their own. Most of the subjects in theology don't interest pigs. Except for the theologian, who just happens to be working in this peripheral area himself. Who can do anything with a Lu-ther essay in his life except the theologian who believes he is called to pass on the information of this essay. Is mediation of the "thing" possible? When can you stop being objective? At the end of the mediation process, where the "yes" of God is dished up as the content of the Gospel to the preacher? The point of theology is God, as chemistry is concerned with the molecular structure of the substance. God, when he rekindled in Jesus, there was no "thing". Jesus was not treated as a thing by those who believed in him; Jesus is distinguished by the fact that he did not treat people as goods of the life market. He was not looking for the cheapest offer, this abstract size in our marketed brains, but talked to the one he encountered. And these were never particularly favourable to dealing with each other.
Following Jesus' footsteps, wherever ever, in the work with his history and legacy. Theology itself is not beyond succession. Therefore, the method of theology must be connected with its content. The only way to talk factually about peace is by creating peace. Jesus' life was a great dialogue, his existence and his stories were always appealing to people, provocation. This dialogue, with which, according to Jesus' opinion, the kingdom of God tended to begin, is presented "factually" only in such a way that dialogue is re-established. Theology must live in dialogue. Theological objectivity is not that God is made into a matter of conversation, but rather provocation of people. Where people have to live inhumanly, even want to do so (because one often kills the objective constraints by wanting to do what one wants to do), provocation has to call for a change: from inhumanity to human beings.
If the coming kingdom of God essentially consists of dialogical life of subjects, it only comes to light where one person cooperates with the other in dialogue. There is no way to do this in scientific papers. If the address in a speech, a book or a music, an image, even human products, feels addressed in such a way that it converges with the producer to a community of knowledge: You meet exactly my feeling, my dream, my pain and my hope. Empathy, looking into the heart of others and speaking from the soul, only then does the Word of God come to the point.
David Cooper, an antipsychiatrist in Britain, says that books must be lived in the future. Living books are books where one does not talk about a thing which, with his life, is only related to the fact that both are of the same substance, in rem. There are topics that are common to all people. Food is one. Life is in such a general sense that everyone has parts of the body that are similar to those of others in some way; living beings face many common problems. But we must first recognise that the problem is a general one. Survival is such a worry factor. If only some living beings realize that they are not isolated from this problem, then they can try to solve the common problem together: they no longer devour each other, in the opinion that eating each other's food guarantees that the I will not be eaten, but seek something else to eat, organize and share in the work. That's already the case with lions, but unfortunately unvegetarian. Because of the commonality of life problems, one person can talk about his problem area in such a way that the other person understands him in such a way that he rediscovers his own problems in the problems of the other person. An analogous principle of knowledge is assumed. So it may be that what concerns me, even without my knowing it, concerns the others as well. Such as suffering from isolation at university. Since people are never general, however, the general problem is that everyone has a particular problem, it can have different forms, be perceived differently, be misunderstood. Such misunderstandings are clarified where another person communicates his experience of the particular experience of a general prob-lems. When many people encounter the same peculiarity, they tend to see it as something general, but it is only common to many. It's about how closely you determine the total quantity of "all". You have to be clear about that or come to an agreement.
Living books make the author's life experience italic. They help the reader to articulate his or her experience by articulating his/her own practical experience. Language has an ambivalent relationship to experience. It can be an expression of experience, right down to sounding and pleasure in sound; but it can also condition experience and thus withhold certain experiences from the speaker. But how is experience to be conveyed other than through language? This is a crux for nations that specialize in speaking. Beside: to impart experience? Why don't you let everyone have their own experiences? "The iron's hot," says the mother. Warnings against the biting dog are also useful; although the dog could have been educated in such a way that it does not bite. Because some experiences can be fatal, you warn.
This is also the case in the pulpit of the post-war parish priest who averages the moral means: he instructs the congregation to live in such a way that, in his opinion, everyone is happy. This seems plausible. But how incompetent do you think children are? In "1984" Orwell thinks of this approach to the bitter end:"Happiness comes at the expense of selfishness. Advertising slogans and slogans have always been good propaganda tools. Few words of input create the appearance of knowing the facts. The only experience of the fascist according to Adorno's F-Scale (Studies on the authoritarian character, Frankfurt/Main (Suhrkamp) 1973) is the slogan itself and its effects in him and then outside of him, for example in Auschwitz. Language can thus prevent personal experience. The dogma of the medieval church has thus blunted every scientific advance.
But just as well, language can point consciousness to new phenomena that have been experienced only in the dark and unconscious, if at all. Language is an agreement between people. It is an agreement on the acoustic designation of objects and experiences. Its value lies in the fact that under one word very many people develop the same idea. You can also make absent communication cable. Without language, only the eye-catching experience can ever be communicated. Whoever is not familiar with a term, but cannot make himself understood by others with a newly invented term? Language is a normatively defined system of designations of experience. Grammar is already a method of organizing and combining experiences. Since everyone learns the same grammar in school, all their experiences are classified in the same way. They are then amazed to find out that what they have experienced is general rather than recognizing that the method of language in general was only the method of understanding and classifying the experience and selecting it from the infinite pull of the experiential only minimally, because the terms minimal and meticulous denote individual excerpts of experience. Language that is too limited makes greater experience impossible, because it directs knowledge to the limited "familiar". As the vocabulary expands, sensitivity to new experiences grows. In the same picture, the view of different viewers is drawn to different phenomena, depending on their interests. One sees that it is a Munich Autobianci, the other sees the girl waving to him before the car disappears around the corner.
By exchanging both, it is possible to complete the picture, but not in such a way that one experiences the experience of the other directly, it is mediated experience and thus, it is communicable. The car fan can only imagine the girl's wink with memories of earlier similar experiences, he has no direct access to the eroticism of the other in these second. His imagination approaches the experience of the other, the more it tells, but both experiences can never come to a conclusion.
Language conveys experience, but makes the quality of experience a secondary one. In fact, secondary experience is actually a false statement; in fact, it is not an experience. What is done linguistically is only an optimal approach to the idea of each other's experience. It determines his gaze by omitting what the receiver of mediated experience would have noticed. Each one selects differently. In imparted experience, the subject is forced to confide in another person's selection, and a listener never gets all the allusions contained in the speech, one notices this with Bloch. This means that when you read a book, the system selects the foreign experience. The result can only be: mediated experience is abstract experience. It is as sociable as abstract numbers (a, b) in mathematics, which are abstraction of abstractions, because numbers themselves are the abstract of sets. But because we are used to not experiencing more concretely, we do not experience it in concrete terms. So it doesn't matter that language conveys experience abstractly. The family and school are indispensable to determine the pupils socially through conscientious language education in order to experience a situation of non-experience. If you don't find out, you can put everything you want underneath it, provided that you have a diplom, which entitles you to do so. This can only be gained by demonstrating to other people (the education authorities) that you have the desired glasses of reducing world complexity.
If you don't believe how little he learns, you should go to a room where a person is sitting in an extraordinary position, after 10 seconds to perceive the position he has to take it exactly as he did before. If one then examines the two positions afterwards on two comparing photos, the carelessness of observation becomes conscious on the blatant difference of both positions. But this is still the simplest example of a clearly manageable object of perception. A second at the window of the moving train is considerably more complicated, even more difficult to experience the stomach or orgasm. There is a lack of mindfulness. But how are people who have been made stupid by language for life and experience, how are they supposed to be ready for a new, never-able sensibility? Much of our conscious use of language is little more than a pale, squeaky copy of the strange, dark voices of our dreams and the pre-reflective forms of consciousness ("Unconsciousness").” (David Cooper, Der Tod der Familie, Rowohlt dnb 6, 22).
I don't resist against language at all, because I speak. Standard language has become indispensable. But I am opposed to the burial of experience by the frill-language of the bourgeoisie, which upholds "decency", which the formerly still tangible floggings have internalized into the language of directives, instructions, prohibitions, ordinances. Original power is essentially held up by the structural force of the paragraphs. The threat has more use as a means of power than the actual execution of itself in direct violence. Language has a moral guardianship, has a taboo function where its vocabulary ends. Language is the means of coercion in the legalized and administrated world. The perpetrators always find fine words for malpractice.
Language can also be a medium of total liberation. Language can give clues to yet un-gained experience, increasing respect for the experience. Experience can be pre-conscious, but it can also be made conscious; language helps. Knowledge is experience that has been passed on to consciousness. Insight has an effect on new experiences: it widens the gaze, clarifies it to visual acuity and increases certain experiential particles. Unfortunately, when a new door is opened, several old doors always close; new knowledge also brings more and more different insight into the background of forgetting. With new experience, other experience is suppressed. Insight carries out a permanent alternation of foreground and background. All experience never gets to the linguistic light. But the background becomes clearer overall. It is precisely this brightening of the whole of life that can bring about a certain form of language. Philosophy wants that.
But there is "philosophy" as little as "theology" as unity. Heidegger, for example, is a paradigm of bureaucracy: his language is diligently working on the classification of reality in the filing files of his spun terminology. It classifies being with scholastic severity. The mode of direct experience is outrageously rejected and thrown into the pot with the vulgarity of the school consciousness preprogrammed by proverb wisdom. "Thinking means identifying. Satisfied, conceptual order pushes itself before what wants to understand thinking. His appearance and its truth are intertwined "(Th. W. Adorno, Negative Dialektik, Frank-furt/Main 1966, p. 15) Adorno writes similarly in the critique of dialectic:" The impoverishment of experience through dialectic, however, about which the healthy views are indignant, proves to be appropriate in the administered world as their abstract monotony.
Philosophy as a medium for direct experience seems to be the result of the way a Greek drummer considers his discipline to be the only worthwhile pastime and the way to salvation anyway. By philosophy I don't mean a thorough study of the pre-docracy, Leibnitz, Fichte, Kant and Hegel. Simple reflection on the situation also brings us to a broader perspective. One must develop distrust as a basic attitude. Don't always believe everything that is made clear to you, even what you want to make yourself known. The words stand behind what you experience. With one's own experience, the internalised language habit has to be tested; not the individual word, but the context that the learnt language scheme creates in experience. I believe that the mendacious slogans of our language contain enough self-contradiction, stemming from the dual morals of the bourgeoisie, to set in motion a process of self-cleansing the language. You look closely at your mouth when you speak and intuition finds words to help you express yourself. One immediately notices the chain system of language: it hinders expression rather than allowing it to close. Word and meaning gape far apart, this contradiction can be used as a reflection and criticism of thinking about oneself.(cf Adorno, Drei Studien zu Hegel, Frankfurt/Main4 (Suhrkamp) 1970,85ff) This is exactly how what is the mediation of alienation becomes the strictest weapon against it; anyone who has sin in him knows this. Removal of alienation is only possible because of their knowledge. The best way to get to know them is to get to know them first-hand. The raping language of concepts in the recognized contradiction to experience brings language into the service of subjectivity in a difficult way, which is gagged and mutilated by the concept: "The utopia of knowledge would be to open up the conceptual uneasiness with concepts without making it equal to them" (Negative Dialektik, 19) By knowing that language is qualitatively different. The social norm language is transformed from a means of adapting consciousness to the opposite. Allied with one's own experiences, thinking exposes itself to itself. One has to persuade oneself to be brave enough to experience the contradiction of emotion and reason intensively and then grasp it just as intensely with the mind. The small perceived difference between feeling and description will become motor of greater accuracy. It leads to quantum leaps in anthropology and paradigm shifts in the epochs of the Zeitgeist.
Learning is also a term for experience. The organization for learning is the school. In the first world (Europe, USA) every person spends about 1/7 of his life in schools. Besides the family, the school is the state's most important instrument for the formation of consciousness. In schools of alienated societies, this alienation must inevitably be reproduced. Learning in schools is the best method of bringing awareness to oneself, i. e. teaching real learning. The school mutilates learning, experience, thought and subjectivity. If the parents haven't made it yet. At this point the schoolmaster regularly interrogates the students, this has to be proven. You don't trust any thought about the way that doesn't force itself on the addressed person with the logic of legal pettiness with all available matter-al, possibly statistics. Deductive reasoning triples alongside Geshas. Thinking that doesn't submit to this step sequence is being excluded as stupid stuff. Just as school needs interests through curricula, it pre-programmes experience. It does what one accuses the communist systems with raised fingers: bringing people into line.
The Church has difficulty getting rid of God as her commodity in the market of ideologies. I believe that it is because God is not experiencable. Many theologians even want God, because totalitarian aliter, to be unseen. As an "experience theology", the thought effort that wanted to train consciousness in the experience of God is disqua-liberated. As long as God's experience is reduced to the encounter with God through words that are typically administered by the ministerial church, the clergy need not worry that people have direct access to God as long as the clergy pretends to have it. As long as the priest remains legitimate, as the layman in matters of faith believes himself incompetently, that is, he does not base his existence on his own experience of God.
Certainly, theology as a reflection of experience with God is as important as thinking can be. But our theology talks about God. This is also expressed in my speech, because it is a foul language. Theology would be even more necessary where there is no peace, no love and no hope. There theology should awaken courage to the maturity of Christians, from God's experiencable power to throw away the chains of the system. The Church of the future will cede its monopoly of salvation to the experience of believers and non-believers. Perhaps one should distinguish between late capitalist objectification and Christianity. Shouldn't theology then be more silent because every word is twisted? I believe that it is impossible to speak of God in a language that is full of inconsistencies and false imputations.
Theology is paradoxical or absurd. She purifies herself from her falsehood by remaining conscious of her impossibility. God is not the one who theologians say is God. Theology points to God, that's all. She can't call him. God as the Spirit is out of language. It cannot be understood. But the concepts of thinking can keep a place free for him, at the same time place of the reconciled man. It may be useful for theology to spur on this place to open up.
So that we may now be servants in the new spirit, not in the old spirit of the Book "(Rm 7:6). Karl Barth:"' In the old sense of the letter', the religious possibility of man in any new, refined, pointed form would mean a new' piety'. In the new sense of the Spirit' it means... the possibility that begins just beyond the boundary of all old and new religious possibilities of man, beginning from God. We have tried to understand the limitations of religion. A negative truth? Yes, their positive side is that the Spirit himself stands up for us with unspoken sighs (8:26)"(Barth, Römerbrief, München 1922,222)" Neither do we know how to pray nor how to theologize, and the Spirit represents us. Words making words of the unspeakable is dangerous. (Wittgenstein, Tractatus) Forfeited is this danger the word theology. To characterize God as a word maker is an anthropological projection (Feuerbach). The more obstinate he learns to block his gaze, the more fascinated by the thought that God became word, the more he will fall for her. The path of the book religion to dogma is not far from the Logos in the darkness. Mind is far more than word.
The quality of God is determined by how resistant he is to the attacks of the theologians who are unsettled by His glory and who are ready to madigrate all the great theologians. God's madiguing is best done by chattering. So far all bourgeois theology between Barth and Bultmann. No one can leave God behind, and one tries to imprison him in the cage of a church dogmatism with all his sophistication. To establish God in the Word is an attempt to seize power and testifies to deathly love, sadism: "The pleasure of total mastery of another person... is the innermost essence of the Saudi slope. In other words, the goal of sadism is to transform a human being into a thing, something soulless into something soulless, because through the perfect and absolute control of every living being, a decisive quality of life loses - freedom "(E. Fromm, The Heart of Man, New York 1966,32) Fromm means the psychology of the oppressor.
But God's control is theology exactly where God's being is tackled. Making God teachable from the catheter is patricide by logic. How silly is the plan to "give glory to God with joyful chorales" (ECG 233), even more curious: to succeed with a quirky thesis on the existence of God, how Jüngel loves to celebrate and thus to bring his knowledge of Karl Barth and Hegel to an amortisation. We rather drive the worship of God to our own worship, to the presentation of how well we can sing, make music and think sharply. God doesn't really care about our singing. Maybe he'll be happy when we're happy. However, the fellow prayers of Ps. 139, God be big brother, always watching you and me. He hears how wrong I sing.
In the AT, God was described as the wholeness of being, as in Greek philosophy. The mana term stands for the same. This experience (!) of God is broken down to the seventh loci of dogmatics. The assertion that the systematics differentiate only the concept of God is not correct. The classification of being has driven God out into the hereafter. Adam was already afraid of God's experience. Fear creates limits. To draw God's distance from himself is a reaction of fear. So God became a "completely different". Perverted, the impertinence of naming God a completely different one. And at the same time to presume his authority! Like the master, then, so also admirers of young men in Prussian mind-prongedness. Buber corrected Barth that God is the same. I am God, I am not God. The more you talk nonsense about God, the closer you get to him who does not allow himself to be gagged by a theological system of meaning, by cute letters.
2 Cor 3:6: The letter kills, but the spirit makes alive. Eph 4:6 shows a primordial Christian wonder at God: "A God and Father of all, who is above all, with all and in all," God understands precisely through lack of precision. Thus Paul oftentimes, where he brings the unsaved concept of "everything" more than 60 times, 1 Cor 12:6: "And there is only one and the same God, who works all in all" Eph 1:23: Christ fills everything with all things. And only in the letter to the Colossians, one must imagine the crazy mood from which the author wrote: "But now you, too, put down everything, anger, wrath, malice, blasphemy, disgraceful speech from your mouth! Do not lie against each other, after you have taken off the old man with his deeds and put on the new one, who is renewed in the image of his Creator to the knowledge, where no Greek nor Jew, no circumcision nor foreskin, no foreign-language, skirt, slave or suitor is more, but characterizes everything and in all Christ "(Col. 3:8-11) classlessness of society and consciousness. This is utopia.
God calls the description of the fulfillment of history "All in all". The vagueness of the term is true precision: at last, God is no longer raped by the need for classification - a typical sign of bourgeois science that made dogmatics possible, as it was never done in the Bible. The abolition of God from the object of thought to the freedom of the new being, a subject's existence, is precisely Jesus' offer according to Paul:"But now we have peace to God - not the other way round (Rm 5, l). The term should no longer understand God. If God is everything in everything, he is in me and out of me. God is everything, everything is God. The experience of God is revealed in his successful revelation wherever borders become blurred, the clarity of the gaze must not be abandoned until they are not really blurred, outside of the recognizing subject, i. e. objectively and historically reversed. Dreams blur reality and possibility. Self-consciousness often dissolves in sleep to merge the dreamer with the universe. Sleeping experience of such nature is the anticipation of God's glory revealed in the kingdom of God as participation in space. Man will again be absorbed in nature as kti/sij qeou=, instead of being their oppressor, as is evident today in the ecological crisis, when the deformed nature corrupts man's life as part of itself. Whoever sees the Creator in creation, completely with Thomas and his proof of God five times over (S. Th. q. 2), ceases to subject himself to it, just as the later priestly scripture according to the image of God in Gen. 1.28 then questionable comes along.
We don't usually get out of being animals, we ourselves are animals that seem to suffer senselessly. But there are moments when we understand this; then the clouds tear up, and we see how we, together with all nature, push ourselves towards man as something that stands high above us... But at the same time we feel how we are too weak to endure for a long time that moment of the deepest contemplation, and how we are not the people after whom the whole nature pushes itself to its redemption."(Nietzsche, Schopenhauer als Erzieher. Unzeitgemäße Betrachtungen, Stück III, Leipzig (E.W. Fritzsch) 1874,58 = Werke in 3 Bänden Bd 1, München (Hanser) 1954,322f zit. in: Barth, Der Römerbrief10 (EVZ) 1967, 291)) Because the realizer of nature itself is a realized being, nature and man are waiting for the new men, for the abolition of the alienation of man from his being, which has led to the alienation of man from nature. This waiting is not much fun: "Because we know that everything created is sighing and painfully frightened until now. But not only that, but also we ourselves, who have the first gift of the Spirit, we also sigh in ourselves and wait... for the redemption of the body "(Rm 8,22f) We sigh in ourselves. It's psychopathy. The painful anxiety, however, must be clarified. But the cry for freedom is silenced among Christians of late capitalism: those who eject it without paying their obolus in the seminar of the primal cry therapists, wander off to the madhouse, which robs the last illusions of freedom by depriving the freedom crying in the refined straitjackets of sedatives and electric shocks, also warm tubs This is illustrated by Emil Kraepelin, Psychiatrie. Ein Lehrbuch für Studierende und Aerzte, Leipzig (Barth) 1899.
Paul, with Rm 13, already delivered the ideology that was necessary to legitimize oppression. Crusades, forerunners of imperialism, had Christian justification in the Great Commission Mt 28th Mission is perverted and the fundamental misunderstanding lies in Christian ideology itself, which is to blame for all the suffering it has blessed and continues to bless all over the world, not only in the arms blessing for Vietnam. According to Max Weber, capitalism itself is a product of Christian ideology, based on the equation of God's wealth and blessing.
Dietrich Stollberg is increasingly coming to radical materialism as a result of his thinking. Materialism is no contradiction to God. Bloch develops the dialectical concept of matter away from block-matter, immovable with the idea of sand and building material, towards process matter, the universe, which forms new forms out of itself, because matter is always in motion and changes its state, to see on planets, red in the spiral fog spectrum, volcanic activity, wandering of islands, water at all, vegetation, animal population as evolution of a (see Thomas, S. Th. q. 2,3 God as the mover of the world from the possible into the real) Her possibly highest stage of development, man, as a being subjective spirit, is capable of recognizing the objective mind: the hidden tendency of these evolutions.
Matter is, abstractly, but comprehensively understood, the possibility of everything. Bloch differentiates: "Not everything is possible and executable at any time, missing conditions do not only inhibit but also block. (Bloch, Das Prinzip Hoffnung, Frankfurt 1973,235f) Everything is "still factually impossible, for which the conditions are not yet available" (236). In the Middle Ages, moonlighting was still impossible, although it could be considered a possibility. The consciousness could anticipate this possibility in his imagination, but only as imagined, not realized. Matter is not only kata\ to\ dunato/n as far as possible, i. e. the one that is topping according to the given measure of the possible, but it is to\ duna/mei o)/n, the in-possibility being, i. e. the - at Aristotle's, of fertility, the one who in an unexhausted way, is the one who has all the world's fertility. (238) It is necessary to examine matter for the "measure (s) of what is possible in each case", as well as for the "totality of what is lastly possible" (237) The "utopian totality is implicated in duna/mei o)/n" (238) and can be presumably foreseen by cognition of the tendency latency, latency of the historical process in which matter is located "Without matter there is no ground of (real) anticipation, without (real) anticipation no horizon of matter can be grasped "(273f) In dreaming as anticipation, matter (because human beings are matter in the form of" life and spirit "(273)) comes to self-confidence of their secret activity.
In addition to dreams, utopias, art and religion are of the same material. Art is a laboratory and a celebration of possibilities "(249) Religion seeks "utopian fullness in totality" and places "the salvation of the individual thing entirely in totality", "into which:" I make everything new "(248)." Thus, in the hope of the Kingdom of God, some things come to light: the alienated being of man, whose realization for the sonship of God (Rm 8,19) is understood as the goal content of the whole world, which longs for freedom. All in the concept of God is nothing more than the totality of what is possible in the end. God is matter. Because he makes everything possible. But according to the conditions. God is not a magician in the circus. God as matter has a difficult path ahead of him until his creation has come to the fullness of its possibilities, into the kingdom, where God will be praised with filled hope everything in all. However, God as the reason for the possibilities is not static, as in the given Thomas passage, but in becoming.
As matter moves and new possibilities become real, God Himself becomes a step more real on the way to the kingdom in his hidden possibilities. “If the world is convergent, and if Christ takes its center, then the Christogenesis of St. Paul and St. John is nothing less than the equally expected and surprising Christogenesis of noogenesis, in which for our experience the cosmogenesis culminates. Christ dresses organically with the majesty of his creation. As a result (and without understanding it figuratively) man is able to suffer and discover God with the moving world in all its length, breadth and depth. To be able to say literally to God that we love him, not only with our whole body, our whole heart and our whole soul, but with the whole universe on the path of becoming one, that is a prayer that is only possible in space-time. (...) Christianity alone, all alone on the Modern Earth, shows itself capable of bringing the universe and the person to synthesis in a single act originating from life. It alone can lead us to not only serve but also love the immense journey that carries us with it. What shall we say other than that it fulfils all the conditions we rightly expect from a religion of the future, and that it really, as it promises us, takes the position through which the main axis of evolution will go in future?"(Pierre Teilhard de Chardin," Der Mensch im Kosmos, München4 1959, 263f) From the expulsion of God from matter, which has not yet become paradisiacal, through Faith is anticipation of this utopia, which will only remain possible for a long time to come. Faith transcends the existing unresolved conditions in hope. But this hope remains on earth with both feet.
Christian faith is a certain form of hope for God. There are other ways to hope for God. Faith becomes rigid, where out of fear of loss around the "real", he retreats to the dogma in a biting demarcation from other religions and leaves the realness to politicians and scientists. When God is all in all, no theology makes him content himself with being above in heaven. God does not want to sit up there in pure view, because he is no longer God there. God is dead when he leaves the earth.
God does not die if his Christians and the "rest" of creation ceases to murmur "Lord, Lord" all the time. It is well known that this mesh of naming God in Pietism and the CDU was well tolerated by the Mammon, as an analysis of the budget of the Württemberg State Church and the supporters of the Albrecht-Bengel Association would show, if these documents could be approached. Theology could be confined to the dogmatic limitation of God to her sighs and silence. ("Silence, for it is the Absolute" (Sören Kierkegaard, zit. in: Bonhoeffer, Wer ist und wer war Jesus Christus? Stundenbuch 4, 9)
Then she starts her task with a clear head by denouncing via theologia negativa all relations as unholy, in which man is a humiliated, a oppressed, an abandoned and scornful being. Because talking about God means talking about people, even Bultmann.
And man's need is the need of God. God gives us to know that we must live as those who are able to cope with life without God. The God who is with us is the God who leaves us (Mark 15:34) The God who lets us live in the world without the working hypothesis of God is the God before whom we are constantly standing. Before and with God we live without God. God lets himself be pushed out of the world to the cross, God is powerless and weak in the world and just and only in this way is he with us and helps us. It's Matth. 8:17 It is quite clear that Christ does not help by virtue of his omnipotence, but by virtue of his weakness, by virtue of his suffering! (...) The Bible directs man to the powerlessness and suffering of God; only the suffering God can help. (...) God of the Bible, who gains power and space through his powerlessness in the world "(Bonhoeffer, Widerstand und Ergebung, Hamburg (Siebenstern) 1971,178) God's powerlessness is explained by Bloch's being possible. Not everything is always possible. Historically, love is utopian. With John against the world: "Jesus is the sign that contradicts exactly the sign that is contrary to the Lord's power, and it is precisely this sign that the world contradicts with the gallows: the cross is the world's answer to Christian love" (Bloch, Das Prinzip Hoffnung, Frankfurt/Main 1973,1489).
Some people think italic, in word. Others have difficulty in getting to grips with thinking. Only in this way, however, can you bring your new discoveries and joy back home in an alienated time.
Nonsense is the grasp into the formal possibility. And the formally possible contains the sugar of the formless. Form is then still visible on the photographer's darkroom product of this zone because the event distilled into the object has been cut off from its categories: time in the case of stereoscopic photography, the third dimension in mono-picture, color in black and white - in addition to the smell, taste, sense of touch and sound, right down to the sound of silence. Thus, the drying liquid of the process coagulates to a state, which is then prepared with the aid of a special preparation. Temporally as a constant alternation of static forms, as the siren constantly changes frequency. The movements of the fly are incomprehensible to the snail. The formally possible has no forms if seen in its entirety. Thus also God as a whole of matter which is in possibility. It is no coincidence that Shalom is German for salvation, wholeness, with a universal, even universal tendency. Peace is the existence of God. As we wait for peace, so also for God. But there are seconds to be gained from participating in the wholeness, where one no longer learns oneself into the self and finally notices what a narrow-mindedness the whole discussion about identity has. With our foreign language, be it German or Swedish, only particles of holistic experience can always be made communicative. An animal that is afraid retreats into itself. If it wants to survive, it has to liaise with other than itself, called food intake. It is dependent on reshaping, statically it would die, according to the never-remembering xenophobic, catatonic human being. Recollection as penance is the exchange of a - allegedly - real one with a possible one. The real becomes possible, but no longer real; the possible real.
The so-called "freaking out" of the hippie movement is a norm exchange, which only selectively breaks through individual norms and generally harmonizes quite well with the rest of a society's normative structure. Drug users, for example, tend to become established in dealing and become businessmen. Permanent norm exchange would be freaking out the flip-flop. The so-called sex plays a central role in the youthful subculture. This is where the freaked out ones want to come, to the possibility of penetrating deep into them, into this wonderful womb of matter with its ability to grasp the root, to be radical in the semi-understood. The door of all doors is the urge for more. Doors border. Pioneers cross thresholds. The radicals have swelling roots. With them they take up the matter more and more, become rooted in the ground, knowing that the more they penetrate into the ground, the larger the doors become. Therefore, the root must swell further. There is no turning back from this lap, anachronism is impossible. The storm of history blows the angel Benjamin's incessantly into the future, however much rubble he has to leave behind him. As the world's sexual and scientific exploration progresses, the basis of what is experienced and known widens, knowledge swells into wisdom - often only on the ruins of failure. Israel's desert migration is such a failure story.
Stress deformed. Urge seeks. He's got directions, never just one. Urgent people know that. Deformation is movement. Movement causes deformation. Mind movement is in the air. Whoever never thinks is spirit-dead. He baths in his own dogmatic juice, does not learn any more from his mistakes and never has to accept paradigm shifts. Just as intellectual-historical new approaches by such assurances of existence are called nonsense - for example the theory of relativity, one could describe the - also historical - wholeness of mental sense motions as a general sense. The totality of all individual thoughts, of all faculties in the dispute over the most advanced state of their diversified knowledge, is unthinkable for the Central European dignitaries. They would have to become interdisciplinary. Then, in the face of totality of all knowledge, no single thing is conceivable without the feeling that you are wrong. This is the engine of Hegel dialectics. The totality of sense is no longer comprehensible to the individual subject. From this surrender of academics to the experience of meaningfulness comes aggression against all those who are perceived as having contact with the possibility of the whole. The aggression of the citizen against all youth versions and even more against consistent radicalism, no matter which direction, springs from the envy not to participate in the wealth of experience and spiritual freedom of the aggrieved.
In order to show how much of my starting points come from Anglo-Saxon antipsychiatry, I would like to start with a book that is hardly commented on. The jäen crevices between the sections are intended. The collage is deliberately not surrounded by textual embroidery with connecting transitions.
How is human experience constituted? Everything begins with you and I between mother and child, the dialogic principle of human life: "I see you and you see me. I find out about you, and you find out. I can see your behavior. You see my behavior. But I don't see your experience of me, I've never seen it and I'll never see it. Neither can you' see' my experience of you. My experience of you is not in me. She's just you, the way I find out. And I don't experience you as in me. Likewise, I don't suppose you'll know me as in you. My experience of you' is just another term for' you as I experience you', and' your experience of me' corresponds to' I as you experience me' (Ronald D. Laing, Phänomenologie der Erfahrung, ES 314, Frankfurt (Suhrkamp) 1969,11f)
Experience as the invisibility of man for man is at the same time more evident than anything else. Only experience is evident. Experience is the only evidence "(ibid. 11)
The relation of experience to behaviour is not that of' inwardly' to' externally'. My experience is not in my head, my experience of this room is outside in the room. To put my experience as intra-psychic would presuppose that there is a psyche in which my experience is. My psyche is my experience, my experience is my psyche."(15)
"Behavior is a function of experience. Experience and behavior are always in relation to anyone or anything other than the self."(25) Fantasy is a tuned way to establish relationships with the world. Imagination is a - sometimes essential - part of meaning or sense... of an action."(25)
Every experience is active and passive, uniting the given and the interpreted. The element of negation is inherent in every relationship and in every experience of relationships "(31)" (31)"We experience the objects of our experience as there in the outer world. The source of our experience seems to be outside ourselves. In the creative experience we experience the source of created images, sketches, sounds as in us and yet beyond us. (...) We are physically separated from each other and interrelated. Persons as physically existing persons have relationships to each other through the medium of space. We are separated and connected by the diversity of perspective, education, background, organization, group loyalty, commitment, ideology, socio-economic class interest and temperament "(Laing aaO32)
"It's not enough to destroy your own and other people's experience. One has to superimpose this devastation by a false consciousness, which (according to Marcuse) is accustomed to one's own falseness. We'll start with the kids. They must be caught in time. Without careful and quick brainwashing, her dirty mind would see through our dirty tricks, (...) From the moment of birth, when the Stone Age baby is confronted with the mother of the 20th century, it is subjected to those forces of violence that are called love - (...). These forces are primarily aimed at destroying most of its facilities. In general, the company is successful "(Laing aaO 50 f)" They teach us what we have to experience and what not, how to teach us, what movements we have to make and what sounds we have to make of ourselves. (...)"As one teaches the child from the multitude of possible movements how to move in a certain way, one also teaches him to learn from the multitude of possible experiences" (Laing aaO 52f)
Every description presupposes our ontological premises - the nature of man, animals and the relationships between them. (...) A positivist description is not' neutral' or' objective'."(Laing aaO 53) (cf. Habermas, Erkenntnis und Interesse, Frankfurt/Main 1973,90)" In the sign of alienation, every aspect of human reality is subject to falsification. A positivist description can only continue the alienation that it cannot itself describe; it deepens it, it covers it up and masks it even more."(Laing aaO 54) "The theoretical and descriptive idiom of social science research often seems to be' objective' neutrality. However, we have seen how deceptive that can be. The choice of syntax and vocabulary is a political act; it defines and rewrites how' facts' are to be experienced. In a certain sense, he even creates the facts that are examined "(Laing aaO 54)
People differ from things by experiencing the world while things behave in the world. There are no real events. Experiencing personal events. Science is the mistake of transforming people into things through a process of maturing that itself is not part of the truly scientific method. Results obtained in this way must be de-quantifiable and de-ripe before they can be re-assimilated into the discussion of the people. The error is basically that one does not realize the ontological discontinuity between people and things "(Laing aaO 55)
The libidinal performances demanded of the individual who behaves healthily in body and soul are such that they can only be accomplished by means of the deepest mutilation, an internalization of castration in the extroverts, facing... the old task of identification with the Father is the child's play in which it was practiced. (...) No research reaches down to the present day into hell, in which deformations are shaped, which later come to light as cheerfulness, open-mindedness, companionability, as a successful adaptation to the unavoidable and as an unspoiled practical sense. It is reason to believe that they fall into even earlier phases of childhood development than the origin of neuroses: if these results of a conflict in which the drive was beaten, the condition as normal as the damaged society he resembles results from a kind of prehistoric intervention that breaks the forces before the conflict even occurs, and the later non-conflict reflects the (...) Little is missing, and one could consider the one who proves to be able to prove its brisk vitality and exuberant power to be prepared dead bodies, to whom the news of its not entirely successful demise due to considerations of population policy was withheld. Death lies on the basis of the prevailing health. (...)"Desolate, but the thought that the illness of the normal is not confronted with the health of the sick person without further ado, but that this is usually only presented in a different way by the scheme of the same disaster" (Th. W. Adorno, Minima Moralia, Frankfurt/Main 1973,69 - 7l)
"The others have been installed in our hearts; we call them' we ourselves'. Each is neither for himself nor for the other, nor for himself, nor for ourselves, nor for us; each is a different one for the other, and recognizes neither himself in the other nor the other in himself "(R. D. Laing, Phenomenology of Experience, aaO, 65f)
The history of heresies of all kinds not only shows the tendency to break off communication (ex-communication) with those who have divergent dogmas or opinions, but also testifies to our intolerance of divergent fundamental structures of experience (Laing aaO 69).
The human scene is a scene of pretending and demonic psyeudo realities: everyone believes everyone else would believe in it "(Laing aaO 70)" If I imagine you and him as belonging to me and others as not belonging to me, I have already created two elementary syntheses: the' we' and the' they'. In order for' we' to become a group, it is not only necessary that I - let's say once - consider you and him and me as' we', but also that we are' we' in you and him."(Laing aaO 76)" A group whose union is achieved by the reciprocal interiorisation of each one through each and in which neither a' common object' nor organizational or institutional structures, etc. as a group of' we' is to be seen as' we'. (...) The nexus exists only insofar as each person incarnates the nexus. The Nexus is everywhere in every person, and he's nowhere but in her."(Laing aaO 77f)
The stability of the nexus is a product of terror generated by the members of the group through the influence (violence) of the members of the group on each other. Such family' homeostasis1 is a product of reciprocity according to the laws of violence and terror.
"The invention of' she's creating' us', and perhaps' we' need' the invention of' she' to reinvent' ourselves'.""If there is no external danger, then danger and terror must be invented and upheld." (Laing aaO 82,79)
"' Russia' or' China' have nowhere else' existence' but in everyone's imagination,' Russians' or' Chinese' - nowhere and everywhere. An' existence' - in the fantasy' of the Russians': they are in it and have to defend it; in the fantasy of the non-Russians: a foreign super-subject-object against which one has to defend his' freedom'. If we all act according to such preontological serial mass imagination, we can all be destroyed by an' existence' that never existed, except in so far as we have all invented it or it or him."(Laing aaO 86)
Those who seek to control the behaviour of many people have an impact on their experiences. Once people can be persuaded to experience a situation like this, you can expect them to behave in a similar way. Make people want the same thing, hate the same thing, feel the same threat, then their behavior is already fixed, and you have your consumers or your cannon fodder."(86)
The problem of mental illness, against the background of these findings (which I do not see as blindness and lack of experiential autonomy), is a power problem: psychopaths are opposed to the universally accepted norms, experiences and ways of behaving and, by their rebellion against the social values and words, they question these values and words, item also the bearers of these collective fantasies; they feel in their existence and legitimacy.
The church in particular has rendered outstanding services in the various spin-off campaigns. Not only heretic and witch burnings, inquisition, heathens, Jewish and persecution of Christian sects (Hussites, Albingians and many more) were on the mission's agenda (' Go into all the world and teach all peoples..., Mt. 28:19). The ghettoisation of people with seizures (Bethel), children at risk (' Rauhes Haus' in Hamburg), orphans (Francke in Halle) around the middle of the 19th century, which was carried out under the keyword Caritas, has the double character of aid and road blocks. The control staff was provided by the simultaneous invention of deaconesses who, as the brides of Christ, took care of the outsiders.
It is not necessary to argue about the social necessity in the historical context, it is important for me to show how the church - with whatever good intentions - made a substantial contribution to the formation of a dissociation apparatus.
The social death sentence' mentally ill' is a means of rendering harmless people who experience other experiences and do not allow themselves to be misled. There are similar sentences: criminals, alcoholics, tramps, anarchists, rebels. All of them are threatened with discrimination (starting with the use of the term classifying them) and dissocialisation in asylum of various forms, i. e. deprivation of liberty at different levels, as a punishment for their otherness. The introduction of political enemies into madhouses, which is played up against the USSR in the FRG, especially in ecclesiastical leaflets, is nothing but honesty in the logic that all outsiders belong away from the window, no matter what kind. Sorting by reason of their' offence' is irrelevant and serves only to eliminate problems of legitimation in the penitentiary, which a totalitarian state has hardly any more because its standardization has become totalitarian. In Hitler's concentration camps, there were countless different' A-socialists', from the murderer, gay men to Jehovah's Witnesses. Communists and Jews were the same for Hitler anyway, and no one attached more importance to differentiation than the detainees themselves, who naturally destroyed each other by their extremely high contrast. (Eugen Kogon, Der SS-Staat, München 1974,46,52,300,312,318-22,362,371-374,384)
Psychopathy is just protest. Protest against the mutilation that everyone in an alienated society must be subjected to in order to live what is called living. Whether it is extroverted or introverted is another matter, but it doesn't change the fact that the' psychopath' wants to find and retain his identity in front of himself. Attack or escape are two types of psychopathic reaction that are structurally the same.
Karl Menninger sees psychopathy as the withdrawal of a person to a smaller territory. Its size and levels leave considerable scope for the' subject' to re-assemble the last remnant of his threatened life, to become a hidden small island of the Self. If the entire being of the individual cannot be defended, the Individuum shifts its line of defense back to a central citadel. It is prepared to write off everything it is, but not its' self'.
The emigration of man from himself is madness. This' self' is determined by its opposite: You are not yourself. Man is not (more or not yet) man. It is a mechanism in the dehumanized system of capitalism. Everything here is perverse, therefore even the speech of being human and' remaining human' (Tegtmeier) indicates the non-existence of what should be meant. Humanity has become the function of the master, which is why it has ceased to be the seed of it.
In bourgeois psychiatry (Manfred Bleuler, Die schizophrenen Geistesstörungen im Lichte langjähriger Kranken- und Familiengeschichten, Stuttgart (Thieme) 1972) it was often said that the psychopath suffers from an organic disorder of the brain. This shall be the first cause. It is only through them that deviating behaviour in the social sphere of action can be observed. In earlier investigations, people who were politically committed to liberation were also described as pathologically hypersensitive and overloaded with emotions, fanatical of predisposition. (M. Bauer/M. Richartz, Angepasstte Psychiatrie als Psychiatrie der Anpassung, in: The Argument, Nr. 60,154) The socially divergent behaviour is said to come from organically divergent functions. By "organizing", one denies any interaction between sociality and organicity and sets the social, i. e. the existing social conditions, absolutely, inviolably for each criticism. However, social changes lead to organic changes, or more generally: the social situation shapes the character and influences the body. For example, a blamed pupil becomes promptly red in the face, so that desk workers and assembly line workers have a completely cramped back at the moment the master passes by, while heart and circulatory complaints are a historically conditioned form of illness, which is partly due to "agitation" or stress (although this phenomenon urgently needs to be clarified). I also think it is probable that a socially intolerable situation can cause the soul and its organic locales in the whole body to deviate, which is then diagnosed as psychopathy with an organic cause. The question of guilt lies behind this: if it were a purely physical, perhaps genetically inherited soul pity, the whole social environment would have no fault in the disease. It is not uncommon for mental illnesses to be caused by genetic factors that are completely independent of the situation. However, if organic disorders are only the result of social disturbances, the therapy should have an effect on the primary cause (i. e. in moralic category: source of blame) in order to heal the suffering. But this is Sissyphosar's work. Not only mother, father, family, grandparents, relatives and acquaintances should be treated, but also all social conditions, since they are indirectly connected with the whole social reality. In addition to purely organic-biological genetics, there is always the family environment, family missions to unhappiness, devaluation rituals through generations up to the seventh generation, which then leads to measurable organic changes for every member of the family, which are subjected to these rituals, as a chain of multiple noxae, in which the psychological illness gets its somatic correlate.
The denial of a mutual influence of the social life with the soul life and the organic life in explaining the cause of psychopathy corresponds also to the method of therapy and treatment in the madhouse.
The usually forced underclass psychopath is an examination and the-therapy object of the psychiatrist and care object of the guards. In nursing care, only the physical maintenance of the occupants of an asylum is taken care of, here the object function of the psychopath becomes very clear, namely his isolation from any freely chosen social world. With what a misunderstanding for the secret logic of his behavior he is studied there, shows a classic of the psychiatric branch: Emil Kraepelin, Psychiatrie. Ein Lehrbuch für Studierende und Aerzte, Leipzig (Barth) 1899, this work reads like a zoological treatise and shows in the scattering effect with which cynical brutality the guards at the behest of the Heidelberg professor, without habilitation, tampered with the patient. If someone would jump around with me like that, I would develop the same symptoms as a protest and self-protection.
In analytical therapy for the neurotic middle class, the patient speaks alone, while the therapist only cleverly mirrors and remains silent. Only the client's experience is to be discussed, not the consultant's experience. There is one-sided communication, because the psychotherapist only says what the patient says, in other words.
This isolation of the patient is already based on the anthropology of psychoanalytic theory. The father of classical analysis, whose influence on the entire development of western culture is probably underestimated, sees a human being as a closed system, an independent organism. "Freud's human being is the physiologically driven, unmotivated homme machine.” (E. Fromm, Analytische Sozialpsychologie, und Gesellschaftstheorie, Frankfurt am Main (Suhrkamp) 1970, Edition suhrkamp 125,,175) "He is the isolated, self-sufficient person who has to enter into a relationship with others in order to be able to live and work with others. Modern academic and experimental psychology is largely a science in which estranged researchers examine alienated people with alienated and alienating methods,"(ibid. 145f) By leaving the patient's relationship to all possible factors of his past, present and future environment unexplored, one can actually find Freud's hypotheses confirmed.
If psychopathy is a protest against the living conditions under which it occurs - as I said above - then classical psychoanalysis and therapy is an attempt to distract this protest from the object of protest on the protesters themselves. In this way, the protest-causing living conditions are protected from any criticism and aggression. Such a psychiatry helps the ruling system to become protest-free and totalitarian, i. e. not to allow deviating experiences and behaviours. It's repressive against the patient. Faschism is essentially characterized by the fact that all politically dissenting and even individualistic artists etc. are persecuted. (e. g. the prohibition of expressionism under the Nazis) That is why an isolating psychiatry has at least this one fascist trait. It can therefore be used well in fascist systems.
The choice of psychiatric methods is essentially a political act. The decision on mental health or illness lacks any objective basis. The statement that this and that this is sick has only as a quasi-official decree about behaviour and its chemical and biological basis. He who says to someone, "You are sick," carries out an act of mastery. He defines a person to a level of being that is only superficially comprehensible in the immediate appearance. The sick person has no right to his illness, it is a natural evil that must be cured.
Sick people have special status, lepers are outside the healthy. They are ostracized, they seek to protect themselves from infection. The risk of infection seems to be present in psychopaths as well. They pose a threat to society and to themselves, which is the legitimacy of their compulsory admission. Every description of a person as sick is based on the assumption that the others, the normal ones, are healthy. The general is never the sick, but the healthy. Health is therefore only what many people have in common. The seventh toe, the overlegs, the tonsils, the appendix and the age blindness are no longer considered to be healthy peculiarities, but are considered pathological. Progressive medicine saws, drills and cuts people all into a uniform format. The greater the medical progress, the more uniform people will look. Medicine, the inventor of the distinction between healthy and sick people, provides as compensation for the mutilations caused by the rule to the oppressed, an apparatus for pepping up the ruined, similarly as the paramedic in the military produces repeated cannon fodder. The body is superficially plastered and mended, without even thinking about what tears it apart and sets it apart. I suspect that the historical reason for the emergence of disease as a form of existence is the suffering of a human being. The term "psychopathy", suffering of the soul, bears witness to this. I do not dare to doubt the reality of pain, I am willing to show any doubters its existence.(Rudolph Bilz, Studien über Angst und Schmerz. Paläanthropologie Band 1.2, Frankfurt/Main (Suhrkamp) 1971,101-124) Criticism deserves the question of healing. Healing as a cure for symptoms is common, but rarely sustainable. Genuine healing was seen as knowledge and fight against the causes of the disease. If the causes of an illness lie outside the patient, healing here means fighting against what is destroying it from the outside. Sleeping sickness, for example, was combated by the contamination of the Lake Constance area with DDT, a structurally correct but short-sighted action. It also helps to do nothing, for example, to give alcoholics, fixers, stoners and Jesus People a withdrawal cure, as long as the reason for the addiction, the suffering society without meaning and concretely: the specific near field of a patient, has not become meaningful. You can talk frigid women into it as long as their husbands keep frigidizing them. Manically depressed people probably hardly suffer from the cage they are in contact with, but rather from the cage they have been pushed into. "The social system must be the object of investigation, not the individual that is extrapolated from it." (R. D. Laing, Phänomenologie, 104)
Conventional psychiatry distinguishes a number of different mental illnesses. These typification are based on obvious observations essentially to the person defined as patients. Like in the medicine, symptom constellations are summarized to an overall picture. The purpose of such diagnosis is the choice of a well sounding illness name for the patient; only this then shall make a cure possible. Due to structures more humanly I, it, superego with Freud, this Freudian theory also comes in existence but by intrapsychic models always (Ego, It, Superego by Freud; Persona, animus/anima and himself at C.G.Jung). It was not possible for this theory to understand mental illnesses from the structure of his human experience and the world and others in the mutual relationship here. Instead of understanding contextually such a diagnosis forgives tickets. The child shall have a name.
A variety of manifestations of psychopathy is surely existing. But just like it when recovering a variety of manifestations gives a society to live humanly although the healthy one everyone is connected under a common and simply writeable reason stands, also gets by at the explanation of a psychic abnormality on few simple insights one so.
Such a fundamental insight is the contradiction. There are paradoxical situations in which everything you do is wrong, in which the right thing cannot be done at all. This is the example of the barber, who is supposed to shave all those who do not shave themselves. The barber cannot follow this instruction if he shaves himself. A paradoxical situation is untenable. Mental illness is a form of opposition to such contradictory situations. Manic depression, hysteria, paranaia and the like are expressions of contradictory experience of reality and its processing. These symptoms can be understood even more clearly if we recognize the problem in the deviating experience of what we call reality. In the following, I will confine myself to describing schizophrenia, because here the structure of the contradiction of the worlds of experience is most obvious.
As a consequence of the insight that schizophrenia is often a consequence of paradoxical situations outside the individual, it would be worth considering an investigation of such fundamentally paradoxical living conditions. In order to prevent division of minds, the fundamental division of being that is the cause of it would then have to be lifted. For example, one might think of a conversation with the person who gave the barber the tricky double-binding instruction; one could forbid him to order so. (Bateson, Gregory/ Jackson, Don D. / Haley, Jay & Others, Schizophrenie und Familie, Frankfurt/Main (Suhrkamp) 1969)
A criticism of Christian religion is also jumping off, which Kierkegaard has recognized precisely in its paradoxicality. The basic contradictions here are the scheme of flesh/mind, just/healthy, person/work, christian/world citizen. It would be necessary to examine whether this ideology primarily described an existing reality, or whether it was only created by an interpretation of the world in a sense that served to preserve and justify the existence of an overly absolutist cult.
Theory of cognitive science also belongs in psychiatry. How is it possible to know about what you can't see in other people, their soul? The only way to do this is to draw conclusions from their behaviour. Thus, one can only proceed inductively if one does not want to stick with the purely deductive description of regularities of behaviour. So we are in a dilemma: the inductive method is necessary speculative and without sufficient certainty; the deductive method is wrong, because it means that the "inner" of man, his experience and sensations can be completely dispensed with and. only output and input, while the rest is ignored as a "black box". Thus, because the entanglement of experience with behaviour also leads to the concealment and revelation of mankind, an appropriate method of recognizing human beings is structurally condemned to unity (and thus again inappropriateness) or non-consequentiality of their actions.
Each theory then restricts its possible results by itself, as only results that correspond to it are acceptable as an answer to un-investigation hypotheses. Thus, each theory and methodology already implies the expected results. An intrapsychic object theory is incapable of grasping human dyads or even more complex social entities than ever before from the individual and its object relationships. Game theory can testify against the interactions, but no longer about the identity of the gamblers as individuals (cf. Laing et al., Interpersonelle Wahrnehmung, Frankfurt/Main 1971,17-19) The conflict of the individual and society is also reflected in humanological theory formation, which is held as incompatible approaches to justify the fact that, in the end, society is the individual
Similarly, of course, there is no longer any experience of an antagonistic dialectic of the individual and society - it is nowhere conceivable in late capitalism, not even in the municipalities of Marxists, because even these cannot live without influencing the life principles of the barter and oppressor society.
Psychoanalytic theory must become clear about how it wants to see its objects. In particular, man can be seen as a person or a thing. (...) The initial perspective with which we see a thing determines all our later dealings with it." (Laing, Das geteilte Selbst, 1974, Editione Continua 1974, 23) "The Science of the Persons is a study of human beings that starts from the relationship to the other... as a person and arrives at a representation of the other, still as a person. In the human being, seen as an organism, there is therefore no room for his desires, fears, hope or despair as such. The essence of our explanations are not his intentions towards his world, but energy quanta in an energy system "(Laing, aaO 26) Of course the consideration of man as a thing is even useful when one wants to explore biochemic phenomena.
But also the interests of biochemistry in human knowledge must not be ignored. In addition to the medical successes in healing, the researchers have discovered a rather peculiar field of research: genetic manipulation and pills for everything. More than here, it is hardly possible to realize that man is the product of his environment. Even into the state of mind, people can be controlled and made to become addicts. The straitjackets as a sign of physical violence that society is doing to the abnormal are largely set by sedatives and measures such as hot water baths and electric shocks. (Electro-shocks were more common in the USA than in Germany, but their application is generally declining. In 1961, however, Erving Goffman could still write:"The use of electroshock treatment as a means of intimidation, on the recommendation of the warden, by which patients are to be disciplined and calmed, is a less serious example of the same practice, but it is widespread. The pigs who did not die immediately showed remarkable changes in their behaviour, and so he came to treat the mentally ill with electric shock to change their behaviour, similar to Hitler' s' experimental' and' improvement of the race', similar to Hitler' s' death of the family', Reinbek (Rowohlt)1972,65 "(D. Cooper, Der Tod der Familie, Reinbek (Ro-wohlt)1972,65). As with the epilepsy attack, which is only simulated artificially in the electroshock treatment, the deliquent is unconscious afterwards and has fewer living brain cells than before - which, if used sufficiently frequently, can lead to the de-cadence of its personality to the limit of vegetation. But the bioche-my is far less overtly brutal. The only therapy in German mental institutions is the treatment of psychiatric drugs, apart from the morning visit,"in which 500 patients are" visited "by the medical team in an hour, and the work obligation issued as" employment therapy ", which only precedes the assembly line that no chord is guaranteed. If patients are forced to take drugs at night in the ward at night, which makes it possible to reduce the number of night staff, this is known as drug or sedative therapy "(E. Goffman, Asyle, Frankfurt am Main (Suhrkamp) 1973,362). The future may teach us to influence directly the energy quantities and their distribution in the emotional appetite with special chemical substances… for the time being nothing better than psychoanalytic technology..."(Freud, Ges. Werke XVII, 108) This physiological attitude to the soul" apparatus "is theoretically also reflected in the psychohydraulic energy distribution modell.
His mentalistic reinterpretation of physical concepts of energy (drive' energy', lust = energy discharge etc.) remains abstract and only a model of thought. Physical energy is measurable, but not drive energy. The model of the mental apparatus is structured in such a way that observability is linguistically associated with the events about which metapsychology makes statements, but cannot actually be redeemed - and cannot be redeemed "(J. Habermas, Erkenntnis und Interesse, Frankfurt am Main (Suhrkamp) 1973,308). It is possible to link up with the paracelsic concept of health from the equilibrium of body juices. The depersonalisation required in biochemical research is the beginning of a treatment of people who are not at the service of the personhood of the treated people.
It is to be expected that the development of biochemistry will continue until the total psychic and somatic manipulation and control of human beings. The methodological implication of the reification of the research object man leads to results, which represent nothing but the optimization of the same. While it was initially possible to legitimize the objectification of man in the sciences of Na-turia by their rationality of purpose: that the results should provide the physical and psychological conditions for personal existence by recognizing and correcting the external causes of human decay and destruction, today this legitimation possibility is no longer possible in several respects.
1) The practice of adapting scientific findings has indeed led to the optimal maintenance of somatic existence in medicine. But the practice of mental institutions proves that psychologically speaking, a decay is more likely to occur as far as simple vegetation due to the unsatisfactory living conditions there.
2) The medicine has been able to almost eradicate epidemics and threatening diseases. Today's threats to existence, on the other hand, can be lifted from an individual historical perspective with far greater expenditure of resources than in the past, e. g. costs and frequency of the successful application of heart-lung machines. On the other hand, however, the existential threats posed by medicine have become stronger, not less, by the economic exploitation of the 3rd world in this continent. The application of scientific knowledge is, measured by the question of the proportionality of the means, a relevant possibility for the abolition of threat to existence in the 3rd world, which is only possible according to our moral code influenced by the Hippocratic oath. Objectively more relevant are economic issues, on the solution of which the abolition of a far more essential threat to existence, the hunger of mil-lions, is dependent. In the context of the daily thousandfold death caused by hunger and war, the question arises of how to justify the costly, high-tech treatment material of medical care in industrialized countries. This trend remains humanly understandable, at least economically absurd.
Like all scientific knowledge, pharmacokology also shows an ambivalence with regard to its possibilities for application in human conditions: How atomic energy can be used to support or destroy life can also be used as a medicine as toxins. In short: with further progress in pharmacology, it is possible to completely remediate all human beings physically (except for the 3rd world, which needs economic upheavals) and to subject them to total subjugation by drugs. It is evident in sanatoriums that the more drugs are used, the less discipline is required. If there are any drugs of happiness, one only needs to make a society dependent on them and is able to guarantee total adaptation to the totalitarian system bio-chemically. The USSR is already partially realizing this by introducing political opponents of the system as abnormalities in sanatoriums, where they experience exorcision of their systemic transcending powers. The depersonalistic input of human energies thus leads to an ambivalence of total reorganisation or total objectification.
My question now is whether one thing will not turn into the other's flip side. Because even total health cannot get rid of its pathological properties: that the human being affected by it has become a product of an oversized technology to which it has to submit itself and its body. Whether personal self-determination is still possible in this context can be disputed if the influence of technology on the soul is reflected introspectively. For the time being, technicization makes gestures precise and raw, and thus human beings. She exorcises from the gestures all hesitation, all deliberation, all decency. It places them under the irreconcilable, almost historical demands of things. (...) In the movements, which the machines demand of the servants, lies the violent, conspiratorial, intermittent incessant fascist maltreaters." (Th. W. Adorno, Minima Moralia, Frankfurt am Main (Suhrkamp)1973,42f) The difference between the physical reification formulated here on the assembly line and the biochemical reification practiced in sanatoriums becomes irrelevant in view of the equally unworthy inhumanity based on the absence of a dialogical presence.
The diagnosis in the psychiatric practice is confronted with the same phenomenon of reproducing methodological implications in terms of results. She remains incapable of transcendence of her system when she sees an examination object in the patient. There are two diagnostic options. The doctor can try to classify the patient on a clinical picture and fathom the genesis of his abnormality. The next step is to determine the treatment method, which can be separated from the diagnosis. This model is used for almost every hospitalization. The doctor has a scheme, the patient fills out a questionnaire by responding in a certain way to the actions of the doctor. The physician evaluates the reactions and information from the patient and then orders the therapy. This model is taken from somatic medicine. It is, however, not transferable to psychoanalytical knowledge, because it has to follow a completely different path of diagnosis due to the different nature of the object of knowledge. The word diagnosis (knowledgement) is no longer appropriate.
So the clever question goes back to the first question: How is knowledge of sea-learning possible? Scientific knowledge includes subject and object. The knowledge must exist for all subjects, to whom knowledge is accessible at all, and must be reproducible as often as required under the same starting conditions. These conditions of scientific knowledge are not given in the same way in psychoanalysis. The object of knowledge is a human being (patient), the subject is a human being (doctor). What I had called soul does not exist in the patient, nor does it exist apart from him. What is meant is the unity of his behaviour and experience. The physician can directly access the behavior as a knowledge subject. The experience, on the other hand, is hidden from him. It can only be conveyed in linguistic form. Thus, a first condition is recognized: subject and object must have a common behavioral and linguistic context, i. e. redundancy as probabilistic regularity inherent in a sequence of symbols or events. (P. Watzlawick et al., Menschliche Kommunikation, Bern Stuttgart Wien, 3rd edition, 35)
If communication about the object is necessary for knowledge, the special crux of psychoanalysis lies in the fact that the object itself is already something like communication. Psychoanalysis must therefore communicate through communication. She's a me-takom-member. In contrast to mathematical knowledge, however, here communication and metacommunication lie in a single linguistic context, although two different levels. Another aspect is the fact that communication always goes from one person to another. Thus, if the soul of a person only becomes apparent in communication, it is thus a function to the subject of knowledge. However, if the revelation of sea-le is bound to the subject, psychoanalysis does not require that the condition of reproducibility, which is constitutive in the natural sciences, of the epistemological condition of reproducibility for every subject, which is possible in the natural sciences, is omitted while maintaining all initial conditions. This is because the initial condition itself means that there is a relationship between the subject and the object. (Alfred Lorenzer, Sprachzerstörung und Rekonstruktion. Vorarbeiten zu einer Metatheorie der Psychoanalyse, Frankfurt/Main 1973,215) The soul is in this relation of the context of experience and behaviour, which is formed in the patient by a constant movement of information of any form between subject and object. There can therefore no longer be any talk of an object of knowledge and a subject of knowledge, since both are one function of the other, so that the subject is forced to include itself in the act of knowledge as an object. Now it is only possible to say: two people enter into communication. This is presented as a formal cycle of Person As's experience of Person B, following action to B, B?'s experience of this action of A? as the only possibility of experience of A's at all, B?'s behavior on everything that has happened so far, A?'s experience of that, etc. This spiral of interexperience and interaction naturally has elements in terms of content that cannot be reconciled with the concept of the circle. Each of the two persons is the same subject of knowledge for himself and the other, as well as the object of knowledge for himself and the other. The communication system is a feedback system in which a complex interweaving of information exchange makes the isolation of an informant impossible. The knowledge of the other person, as he is in relation to me, demands self-reflection from me, as well as from the other person, if he wants to communicate. But self-reflection alone is insufficient. Rather, the relationship spiral of mutual experience and action must be reflected:
You = how I experience your action
I - as I believe you see me
You = I believe that you believe that I see you
I - how I imagine your image of my image of your image of me, etc.
The same thing can happen from your side. Our two images of us, each other, the metaphors, will have to interweave fantasy with real perception, because fragments of these images flow into the messages, but never completely. Therefore, it is usually not possible that all images of both persons agree with those of the other person. Unless they have the time and motivation to clarify their relationship by having this falsification or verification carried out by providing as complete a communication as possible of all perspectives. Correct cognition will try this instead of a flimsy diagnosis. Much more complicated is psychological knowledge in groups, where everyone acts in relation to everyone and their perception is influenced by everyone. Clarifying the pictures in a group during one minute is likely to take several hours since
Now psychoanalysis would not be carried out without certain interests of knowledge. These are in sad experiences. In order to explain this, I would like to fall back on a theory of language and behavioral pathology gained with generalized findings of psychoanalysis. Every human being enters into a socialization context with his or her procreation, the influence of which is intensified after birth and is not dependent on his or her motivations and intentions. He is thrown into existence. However, his existence necessarily entails his own intentions and motivations. He needs to be able to continue his existence of certain circumstances, the securing of which forms the line of his intentions. Since these circumstances are only accessible to him within a communication context, his intent on is dependent on communication. In addition, communication itself is a fact which, free of its mediating function to needs such as food, care, warmth, etc., forms a need itself. In order to attain what is needed, every human being is dependent on an interpretation of needs in the form of communication. However, articulation does not yet achieve what is needed. It depends on the primary caregivers (parents) as the embodiment of the social norms within which they are socialized, whether the needy (child) is given the necessities, i. e. whether the intentions can be affirmed. The interpretation of the need is either confirmed or not confirmed. The child absorbs these experiences and concludes that it is pointless to continue to make certain needs communicable if there is no permanent confirmation. This conclusion can be called a learning experience. Since existence expresses itself in time and with it modifies itself, learning experience and behaviour expresses itself as a process. Life is an educational process. Language plays a major role here. It is in a complementary context to the non-linguistic communication behaviour.
Watzlawick uses the different concepts of analog and digital communication (Watzlawick, Human Communication, aaO 62ff) for non-verbal behaviour and language. Analog communication obviously has its roots in much more archaic developmental plots and therefore has a much more general validity than the much younger and more abstract digital communication "(aaO 63) The analogy has a" fundamental similarity relation to the subject "(62), while digital communication" is merely a semantic agreement for this relationship between word and object (62). Analogue communication is to be maintained with animals and foreign-language beings, there is no need for a socialization, no explicit agreement on meaning. The scholastic dispute over universals is likely to experience a certain solution through this distinction as soon as the notion of "universals" or general concept is extended to that of "meaningful communication". The thesis of realism would correspond to analog communication, the thesis of nominalism to digital. Human and animal life operates with both dimensions. Especially the art amalgamates both modes.
But language is indispensable for human culture. There is no doubt that most, if not all human achievements would be unthinkable without the development of digital communication. This is especially true for the transmission of knowledge from one person to another and from one generation to the next. (63) Digital messaging material is far more complex, versatile and abstract than analogue. Language is clear, gestures are ambiguous, although the opposite is also possible. Mutual translations of analogue to digital communication (and vice versa) are always accompanied by a loss of information. Analogue communication defines the relationship between people, while digital communication is responsible for the transmission and definition of additional content. If soul is a communication phenomenon in a relationship between humans (or animals), it is based primarily on analogous communication, which is available for the definition of relationships. Only through the cultural shift of the main communication level from analogue to digital does the soul become an phenomenon that is produced in language and thinking. Within the framework of this educational process, as human ontogenesis can be characterized, the adaptation to digital communication, i. e. to the language norm and thus to the entire code of social norms that can be formulated linguistically, takes place. The fact that digital communication is not possible due to a lack of vocabulary and certain intentions of needs, also constitutes a norm which annihilates the unpronounceable intention by not confirming it. The Code of social norms thus suppresses part of a person's intentions, while emphasizing other intentions by affirming them in public communication. This is not an ontological statement, but characterizes repressive societies. Ours is one of them. We must distinguish between ontological findings and the mention of the particular characteristics of our own backgrounds of experience in order to be able to imagine a non-representative form of society. The mechanisms of learning that Freud reckons with (choice of object, identification with the model, introjection of abandoned love objects) make the dynamics of the emergence of ego-structures on the level of symbolically mediated interaction understandable. The mechanisms of defence intervene in this process, insofar as the social norms embodied in the expectations of the primary relationship persons, the infantile ego confronted with intolerable violence, are embodied in the expectations of the primary relationship persons, which necessitate the flight against themselves and for the objectification of their own in the "it" (Habermas, Hindsight and Inte-resse, aaO 315).
The last one also includes the paradoxical communication discussed below, i. e. double bonds, to which schizophrenia will prove to be an escape measure. Double bonds are usually achieved by contradictions between analog and digital communication, but if gestures say the opposite of the words, they are also possible on only one of the two levels.
Luther's small catechism is a prime example:"We are to fear and love God..." The ten times repetition seems like a mantra hypnotizing. The formula corresponds to the peccator et iustus and Luther's depressive/moderate self-evaluation as a dirt (poor smelly Maggotssack) and grandiose/manic self-sugar as a doctor of theology, whose cranach image he loved to see hung in churches everywhere in the Professorial tale: after all, a saint. The catechism functions as an exercise in an ambivalent fear-love relationship with God, who wants to be worshipped in the commandments as a jealous, demanding Lord and does not have some good rules of life ready for dispute settlement. You can't feel the merciful God here.
According to Freud's model, the intentions confirmed by analogue and digital communication are the ego, the forbidden and unconfirmed intentions are the “It”. The public communication, social norms, language and its incarnation in the primary reference persons correspond to Freud's “Superego”. The public text is internalized by the individual, so that the suppressed intentions remain suppressed by representatives of this text even in the absence of external influences of violence. External violence has become internal violence, which the “Ego” retroflexively directs against itself, more precisely against all aspirations that are in accordance with the public text. It must be objected to the last sentences formulated that they only serve as a visual aid, because there is no real outside and inside for the soul; if at all, then it is their mediation. The I makes it the object of his suppression, rides it like a dressage rider, as it was (and remains) the object of social oppression before, but the same applies in the opposite direction: the I makes itself the object of oppression, which is experienced by the I as an inexplicable compulsion to actions not desired by him. (Alfred Lorenzer, Sprachzerstörung und Rekonstruktion, Frankfurt/Main 1973 116,200ff) "These are bent and distracted intentions, which have turned into causes out of conscious motives and subject the communicative action to the chewing gaze of natural conditions. It is the causality of destiny, and not of nature, because it reigns by the symbolic means of the Spirit - only therefore it can be conquered by the power of reflection." (Habermas, Erkenntnis und Interesse, aaO 312)
On the linguistic level, this mutual suppression of I and Es in Alfred Lorenzer's linguistic pathology (aaO 118ff) presents itself as follows:"The original defensive process takes place in a childlike conflict situation as an escape from a superior partner. It deprives public communication of the linguistic interpretation of the defended motive for action. This keeps the grammatical context of the public language intact, but parts of the semantic content are privatized. Symptom formation is a replacement for a symbol, which now has a different significance. The split-off symbol has not completely fallen out of the context of the public language, but this grammatical connection has become, as it were, underground. He gains his power by confusing the logic of public language use through semantically false identifications. The symbol is linked to the level of the public text according to objectively understandable rules resulting from the contingent circumstances of the life history, but not according to the rules recognised by the intersubjective. (Habermas, aaO 313) The subject experiences itself as being compulsorily controlled and interferes with the interaction that follows the public text. The confusion and disturbance of the interaction is now taken either by the person experiencing the disturbances or by relatives, representatives of his environment, as an occasion to give the person who is perceived as disturbing in psychiatric treatment. There are two possibilities: psychotherapy or admission to a hospital. On the experience of confusion, E. Goffman writes: "This experience that a human being can have, is apparently one of the greatest threats to the self in our society, especially as it usually occurs at a time when the person concerned is already worried that he or she could also show the self-discovered symptom externally" (Goffman, aaO 131) From the effort The first measures, the construction of asyle for troublemakers, arose out of the same interest as prisons (Michel Foucault, Wahnsinn und Gesellschaft. Eine Geschichte des Wahns im Zeitalter der Vernunft, Frankfurt/Main (Suhrkamp) 1973, 68ff, 482ff; Irma Gleiss/ Rainer Seidel/ Harald Abholz, Soziale Psychiatrie. Zur Ungleichheit in der psychiatrischen Versorgung, Frankfurt/Main (Fischer) 1973,74ff) and then the concentration camps of Hitler's state of action, justified by German workmanship: Ex-communication of all heresy. Even today's madhouse operation with its rededication as a "sanatorium" cannot completely hide this function. The concentration of many disturbances in interaction in hospitals made it possible to arrive at a theory through comparisons and research on the inmates, which interpreted their similarities and particularities. From this situation, psychiatry has emerged as a clinical theory, psychoanalysis and psychology. Because consciousness about a phenomenon is only possible through an exception, a deviation from the phenomenon. This is the case with norms; psychological normality or psyche in general only becomes noticeable through abnormality, which manifests itself in disturbances of interaction with "abnormalities". (Kurt Schneider)
Psychology originated as psychopathology. Later on, psychopathology realized that there was a causal connection between the disorder and communication experiences learned in the past time of life. Especially early childhood traumatic experiences have a strong influence on the further communication behaviour, as Freud stated. Even in the embryo's intimate experience, damaging effects are traumatizing, determining for basic moods and atmospheres that can no longer be made tangible. The psychopathic communication disorder is thus the result of earlier communication contexts. These communication contexts have now become the subject of research in psychiatry. The result is that one can no longer speak of normal and abnormal, but only of behavioural forms and symptoms that have arisen as adequate behaviours in perverse communication contexts. Psychiatric symptoms must appear abnormal in a monadically isolated view, but in the broader context of the patient's interpersonal relationships they prove to be adequate behaviours, which can even be the best possible in this context "(Watzlawick aaO 49).
But first of all, however, back to the aspect of life as an educational process, in which "the dispositions of needs not licensed by society" (Habermas aaO 330) seem to lead a life of their own. Psychiatry has formulated a general theory on the etiology of behavioural disorders from clinical experience. It can be empirically verified to a certain extent. Their situation of cognition was the situation of conversation with patients. Freud formulated in the "basic analytical rule" the "conditions of a repression-free reserve, in which the pressure of social sanctions, i. e. the pressure of the social sanctions, is suspended as credibly as possible for the duration of the communication between doctor and patient of the' serious situation' (Habermas, aaO 306). Since a person is not always aware of everything, the life story is fragmentary at first, so the psychoanalytic reconstruction is "science-logically bound to the prerequisites of an interpretation of mutilated and deformed texts with which the authors deceive themselves". (Habermas aaO 307; Lorenzer aaO 27,228f, 171) For experience shows that the barriers to remembrance are particularly strong, especially in the case of the life experiences deleted from the public text, which are the reason for behavioural disorders.
The paradoxical nature of the analysis lies in the fact that it is precisely the traumatic scenarios, texts and memories that are most difficult to access for the genesis of pathology, which are most crucial for the genesis of pathology, that are most difficult to access through protective repression. They are most difficult to access for the genesis of pathology (Lorenzer aaO 197): "When one becomes aware of a memory, one remembers - let us say - the last opportunity when one roofs it... The difficulty, however, is that some doors close when others open. The 'unconscious' is what we do not communicate - ourselves or each other.” (Laing, Das Selbst und die Anderen, Editione Continua 1973,30) The general interpretation of clinical experience" (Laing, Das Selbst und die Anderen, Editione Continua 1973, 30) allows a systematic generalization of what would otherwise remain history.... according to the elastic procedure of the circularly proven hermeneutical preliminaries.... But these experiences were also already subject to the general anticipation of the scheme of disturbed educational processes "(Habermas, aaO 316; cf Lorenzer aaO 95)
“Every historical representation implies the claim of uniqueness. A general representation, on the other hand, although it does not leave the plane of narrative representation, must break this spell of history. (...) It is a systematically generalized story, because it provides the pattern for many stories with predictable alternative progressions, although each of these stories must then be able to appear with the claim of an autobiographical representation of an individual. (....) Every story, however contingent, contains a general information, because from each story a different example can be read. (...) We can apply the 'typical' case to our own case: it is we ourselves who carry out the application, abstract the comparable from the different and in turn concretise the deduced model under the particular circumstances of our own case. (...) The systematic generalization consists in the fact that in previous hermeneutral experiences of many typical stories with regard to many individual cases has already been abstracted." (Habermas, aaO 32lf) This characterizes the function of the doctor. He is a specialist in this general interpretation.
The cognitive context in the situation of the doctor and patient is carried by the patient, who is to achieve the knowledge of himself/herself with the help of the general interpretation of the doctor. The patient is guided by the hypotheses derived from the typology of empirically researched, disturbed educational processes and offered by the physician as suggestions for interpretation. This is of course done in the most subtle way, e. g. by reformulating the patient's own sentences in the mirror method, by means of targeted questions which implicitly contain a whole series of statements, etc. These hypotheses are only valid if they are accepted by the patient and confirmed in his self-reflection on the process of his or her genesis. The danger of this idea lies in the fact that there is no possibility of checking whether the patient only selectively reconstructs his educational progress towards it on the basis of the hypotheses in his reflection, so that an insufficient hypothesis position cannot perceive the decisive trauma or the many small no-xes of his disturbed educational process, so that the general interpretation of the doctor cannot perceive the causal connection of the pathology with previous traumatic However, since in our experience there are no psychic states which can be observed introspectively outside of a human being, the behavior of the archetypes cannot be investigated at all without the influence of the observing consciousness, and therefore the question whether the process starts with consciousness or with the archetype can never be answered "(Carl Gustav Jung, Answer to Job, O.
Freudian theory has become so well known in higher educational circles (where neurosis occurs much more strongly than in other "strata") that the internalisation of the intrapsychic energy distribution model itself is one of the socialisation conditions that have become a paradigm of self-interpretation in an analysis. Freudian catharsis often finds vulgar applications, e. g. when one advises an angry person to "repel his or her aggressions". (Adorno, Minima Moralia, Frankfurt/Main 1973,78ff) Mostly not the one whose misconduct led to the emergence of anger. Sport is then allowed, but no demonstrations against maladministration, according to the rector of the University of Tübingen. The idioms of Freudian theory meanwhile form a reservoir of the teasing, with which contemptuous educated people can injure others by "patientizing" or exposing them.
In addition to the inadequate hypothesis, the fact that the patient cannot be aware of the pathogenic causality of the split intentions of the latter due to the lack of interpretation in the public text constitutes a second factor that renders the correctness of an analysis indecisive. Lorenzer shifts the verification of the analysis to the analyst's field of evidence, where it can no longer be operationalized with empirical methods - in the sense of the condition of reliable scientific knowledge to be comprehensible for every recognizable subject under the same starting conditions. According to Freud, neither the refusal of a hypothesis by the patient may be regarded by the doctor as a falsification, nor the confirmation. The patient's "no" vote does not prove that the interpretation is correct.... we are free to assume that the analyzed person does not actually deny the part he has been informed of, but considers his contradiction to be justified by the proportion not yet revealed "(Freud, WW XVI, 49f) Even confirming dreams that lag behind the analysis do not have the potential to be verified, since they are only based on the hypotheses of the A direct yes of the patient does not mean anything. It can indeed indicate that he recognises the construction heard as correct, but he can also be meaningless or even, what we can call' hypocritical', in that his resistance is comfortable enough to continue to conceal the unrevealed truth through such agreement. This "yes" has a value only if it is followed by indirect confirmations, if the patient produces new memories immediately following his yes, which complement and expand the construction "(Freud, WW XVI, 49) Thus, the only possibility of "Verification and falsification is the entire course of the analysis, the decisionability of psychoanalytic knowledge results from the context of the entire analysis.” (Lorenzer aaO 228f)
Under this condition, the analysis becomes an infinite process, a game without end, although the following condition still applies: With the analytical reappraisal of the past, the previous traumas have been eliminated to a certain degree. But new traumatic experiences are constantly being added. Through the therapeutic reflection, the patient may calmly achieve an integration of his needs, which conform to the society of himself/herself and which he/she does not previously licensed, so that it can be ridden more gently by the ego. But the ego is a function of the social environment, a reflection of the society in which it lives. And the analysis integrates in the individual the defended aspirations into the accepted ones. But it does not alter the fact that the horizon of social normation continues to fend off intentions by denying them public interpretation. When a patient has learned to accept his or her defended intentions, the people with whom he or she lives have not yet learned to accept them, which is why they also make it impossible for him or herself to carry out a full interpretation of all his or her intentions. Although he may have a certain influence on others through his ability to metacommunicate, which he learnt in psychoanalysis, his basic social experience remains that of becoming mutilated, remains traumatic. What has changed from previous traumas is its expanded reflection, the more intensely consciousness of the mechanisms of its vulnerability. But this consciousness alone does not make the social injuries more painful and does not cancel the function of the mechanisms of social adaptation in it. Reflection is only able to reveal the completed adaptation, which is constantly lagging behind. In a hurtful environment, no identity remains intact.
Therefore, a permanent reflection on the intent defended by others in the self will be necessary, so that the self can recognize the causality of the split that has become lawful and thus cancel it out. Is reflection capable of reversing its own causality in the process? This is what analysis is all about. "Deep hermeneutic understanding takes over the function of explanation. It proves its exploratory power in self-reflexion, which also eliminates an understood and at the same time explained objectification, that is the critical achievement of what Hegel has brought under the title of comprehension."(Habermas, aaO 332) If analysis is metacommunication, the subject in it places itself on a higher level from where it is able to recognize the causality that conditioned it. However, the possibility of meticulous communication is the necessary new condition on which the abolition of causality depends. In order to remove an old communication context, a new one is necessary. However, as soon as this - for example, when the analysis is discontinued - ceases and the old context - such as the uncotherapied family - becomes again conditioned for existence, the patient expires again. It is well known that relapse rates are depressingly high in all integration and rehabilitation campaigns. This is the business of psychiatrists, guardians of total institutions and social workers: they enjoy a loyal clientele. As holders of a service profession with a future, they represent the vacuum created by the decaying process of understanding, trust and love in a repressive society - especially in the ruins of bourgeoisie. They are supposed to rekindle the repressed intentions of tenderness, love, eroticism, autonomy, understanding and understanding, basic trust and need for meaning, because otherwise the quotas of abnormalities increase. The causalities of the interaction disturbances may be removed for the duration of the therapy, but they come relentlessly back during reintegration. If annulment is an emancipatory act, if the-therapy is to emancipate the patient from old causalities, it remains at best an island from which there is no way out to the realm of freedom, unless doom. No emancipation without that of society "(Adorno, Minima Moralia, 228)" There can be no talk of a concept in the sense of a' free speech' as a substitute for revolution (...). (...) Any other assumption would be precisely the presumption repeatedly implicit in psychoanalysis, namely that an idealistic reconnaissance project would replace a politically achievable lifting of the deformation conditions."(Lorenzer aaO 35)
Reflection may thus be able to cancel out their causality in the process. But only on the point. Whether the term has the possibility to change is still far from being decided. Reflection has therefore also genuinely psychopathic aspects.
In philosophy, isolated from active practice, it leads to pure contemplation in the Ivory Tower. (Adorno, Negative Dialektik, Frankfurt/Main 1966, 144f) There is also a stage of stupidity that begins to become aware of its total conditionality, namely, that in this reflection the reflective is forgetting that precisely this realization is also a conditionality in which it stands; the dialectical moment of transgression of the merely given is in favor of a stubborn Sch Nevertheless, it is essential for reflection, which the reflective wants to cancel, to recognize the particular case of its pathology as a product of a general. Analysis in which the patient does not get rid of himself through reflection, is not good. Especially the unswerving self-contemplation - the kind of behavior that Nietzsche called psychology - i. e. insistence on the truth about one's own self, repeatedly reveals, already in the first conscious experiences of childhood, that the emotions to which one reflects are not quite' real'. They always contain something of imitation, play, wanting to be different. The will to encounter the existence of the existing by immersing oneself in one's own individuality, rather than the absolute necessity of social recognition, leads to the inferior infinity which since Kierkegaard the concept of authenticity is supposed to exorcise. (...) Not only is the ego intertwined with society, but it is to it that it owes its very existence in the literal sense of the word. All its content comes from her, or worse from the relationship to the object. The richer it becomes, the more freely it unfolds and reflects it back, while its demarcation and hardening, which claims it to be its origin, makes it impoverish and reduces it, precisely so that it limits it."(Adorno, Minima Moralia, 202f) Self-reflection can therefore also become a cause of causality; this is what shapes the depressive states of the puzzlers. The causality must be accepted in reflection, rather it is not transcendible. For the patient, this means that he will not be free of a symptom until he has accepted the hidden intention behind it. But he cannot do this, if the others do not accept it. The decay of reflection to its causality, if it is not accepted, is most noticeable in the exaggerated self-knowledge of schizophrenia. The schizoid individual is often tormented by this compulsive consciousness of his own processes..."(Laing, Das geteilte Selbst, aaO 13l) So, as a failed attempt to gain ontological certainty through reflection, reflection itself forms a symptom, the causality of which can mean to reflect, succumbing to it, and being conquered by a stand-increasing of the meta, metamet..." (Laing, Das geteilte Selbst, aaO 13l). Self-reflection does not help against ontological uncertainty. It's hopeless. If the symptom is fear of something, then it is not more likely to be reversed than until the object of anxiety is reversed, in real life. If the object of fear is the non-existence of one's own existence, fear remains. In this fear of mental illness, the horror that the collective creates is revealed to the individual, even the extermination camps are far away.
Nevertheless, no less is needed in the analysis of reflection than before. It is precisely their decay that leads to satisfaction with Freudian schematism. The Diwan is a relaxed setting for a demonstration of what was once the ultimate tension of the thoughts of Schelling and Hegel on the catheter: the deciphering of the phenomenon. But such a decrease in tension affects the quality of thoughts: the difference is hardly less than that between the philosophy of revelation and the chatter of mother-in-law. The same movement of the mind, which was once intended to elevate its' material' to the conceptual level, becomes itself a mere material for conceptual order. What comes to mind is just good enough for educated people to decide whether the producer is a compulsive character, an oral type, a hysterical person "(Adorno, Minima Moralia, 83). As a specialist in a general theory, the physician has two ways of applying it. Either he classifies the patient as a special case of general typology. What the patient communicates to him/her is evaluated on a meta level, in which the patient only participates in the follow-up by experiencing what kind of illness he/she has. The patient provides information, but the doctor interprets it, not without getting feedback in between. Walter Loch is an example of such an analysis theory: "I explain to the patient, interpreting the contexts, i. e. motives of his being like this, by presenting them as hypotheses. At one point comes the' aha' -experience, then comes the' Now I know why', accompanied by a' joyful licking up'. My explanation has led the patient to understand, meaning that he is able to use it "( Loch, Voraussetzungen, Mechanismen und Grenzen des psychoanalytischen Prozesses, Bern/Stuttgart 1965, 38)
The functional stock is one-sided and complementary. The doctor needs the patient to diagnose, without him he would not be a doctor, as no mother is such without her child. A further legitimation of the physician is that the patient must be ill. If he were not, the doctor would have to feel useless as a doctor, he would then only be a simple partner of the other. However, since the patient is considered ill - and the doctor considers himself to be healthy - the physician has attained a stabilising function for his or her self-confidence. The psychotherapeutic process consists to a large extent in the fact that the patient gives up his false subjective perspectives in favour of the therapist's objective perspectives "(Bert Kaplan (ed.), The Inner World of Mental Illness. A Series of First Person Accounts of What It Was Like, New York/Oxford (Harper and Row) 1964, VII, zit. in Laing, Phänomenologie der Erfahrung, 99) A doctor is thus dependent on the fact that there will continue to be patients. Psychiatrists spoil their business and self-confidence if they see healthy people in their patients.
This does not apply to all analysts. In the near future, psychoanalysis will be able to completely reverse the concept of healthy, normal or sick people in psychoanalysis, which has been implemented in Schneider's psychopathic term' deviation from an average norm of a cultural group' in the discourse of psychoanalytic theory formation and the diagnostic glossaries of the WHO. (Kurt Schneider, Klinische Psychopathologie, Stuttgart7 (Thieme) 1966 distinguishes 1. anomalies of mental beings with mental retardation and their psychoses and 2. anomalies as a result of illnesses. This became the basis of the ICD and DCM) On the one hand, the attestation of deviance and abnormality is mostly here-perspective or buffer-ranking. On the other hand, however, this option allows an abnormality to be ennobled in a different setting or culture, a different subculture, as something legal or even desirable, e. g. as an optimal prerequisite for the shamanic profession. Abnormality says less about the patient's suffering than about his or her work in the capitalist exploitation context. The perspective stems from the self-legitimization of the medieval internment houses, in which a similarly colourful mixture of weird birds was trapped as later in concentration camps and gulags.
The complementarity of the doctor-patient relationship already implies their symmetry. The dilletance which is subordinated to the patient (also in his own consciousness, otherwise he would not consult a psychiatrist!), together with the analyst's specialist knowledge, provides the prerequisite for the analyst's control over the patient. The construction of the unconscious allows the doctor to constantly change the patient's interpretation suggestions. If the patient rejects an interpretation of the analyst, the analyst can always say that his or her interpretation refers to something that the patient cannot be aware of because he or she is unconscious. If the patient tries to cite unconsciousness as a justification for something, the analyst can reject it, if necessary, with the remark that the patient could not speak of it if it were unconscious." (Watzlawick, aaO 230)" The patient is in a dilemma. According to Watzlawick, there are further double binds which can indirectly support the hierarchy, in the mutual transfer of responsibility for the success of the therapy. The patient expects explanations and instructions from the physician, which should lead to the cancellation of the interaction disturbances, because of which the patient undergoes the therapy. The doctor places the responsibility for' success' in the patient's ability to be spontaneous, honest and sincere, in the willingness to let oneself be ripped off the body, which commands the repressive society to bear. The doctor can see improvement as an escape attempt from the real problem, while he can also do the same with the patient's complaint about the absence of improvement of the symptom. If the patient behaves like an adult, i. e. with a full assembler of the social behaviour necessary for keeping secret unlicensed needs, the physician interprets this as resistance to the analysis; if he does not behave like an adult, the physician is entitled to the treatment as infantile syndrome formation. (Cf. Watzlawick aaO 229)
In all of these possibilities within the analysis process, the physician has an advantage. However, the physician is legally entitled to a further possibility of exercising the doctor's authority when he is admitted to a sanatorium. He has the reputation of a man in his hand. It depends on his opinion how the patient will be seen by society in the future and how it will be treated, whether as a psychopath or a normal person, one of them or one of us. He has the social death sentence against a person in his hand and that is then the responsibility over life and death, which legitimizes the high fee of the doctors in the FRG and the USA, according to official accounts, even here in Tübingen seriously represented by medical professors. The difference between domination within or outside the direct doctor-patient situation lies in their understanding of the healing process. If diagnosis and healing therapy are separated, as with all admissions to sanatoria, the rule takes place through a socially conceded power of the doctor, which lies outside the direct situation, to decide on the patient's future. It is comparable to the power of a judge who sentences a defendant for the first time in his life as' guilty' and thus determines his continued life determined by a cycle of prison, release into the society rejecting him, despair, material threat to existence through unemployment, influence by the' criminal' circle of friends into which every detainee is soon socialized, and the power of a prisoner. In this vicious circle, a progressive destruction of self-esteem takes place.
The circulus vitiososos in the Christian's case is somewhat different. The ideology of sects lives from dissociation to social normality. Incommensurability with the children of this world becomes an insignium of the new being with a just indestructible and unflinching sense of self-esteem, especially in mystical practices that abandon the self into God and strengthen it. It is true that the faithful had always enjoyed social recognition in the West. He knew himself as part of a strong group, collective narcissism made him feel strong. His status within the congregation gave him self-respect, even though he gave him fun-damentalist curiosities that are denounced in the secular world as spleen, confused or delusional. Perhaps the abnormality in the madhouse may also find like-minded, perhaps equally sensitive people who can respect and love it just as much as the children of God love themselves. They looked at each other and smiled and knew that "D" was not the worst station at all, but the most honest. The other stations had to maintain a "status" and maintain the outer form. (...) Stations A and B whispered their small symptoms, took their sedatives and were afraid of loud smells, open anguish or lofty despair. Women's Ward D sometimes rocked like a boat, but their inmates felt free from the secret undercurrents of deceptive undercurrents of confused madness." (Hannah Green Ich habe dir nie einen Rosengarten versprochen. Bericht einer Heilung, Stuttgart2 (Radius) 1974, 65)
By destroying the feeling of self-esteem and conveying a completely new social identity, which in turn determines the direct identity, the doctor has the patient completely in his or her power, he or she decides on the dissocialization and thus on social death. Usually, the patients to whom this applies are involuntarily with the doctor. A relatively small proportion of pre-clinical patients voluntarily enter the sanatorium "(Goffman aaO 13l) and about one third are admitted back to the sanatorium (aaO 130). It is assumed that the patient is aware of this point-to-point of the admission when the diagnosis is made. It can also be assumed that for the majority of these patients the dissocializing function of the sanatoriums is known. They then know that their future depends on the impression the doctor gets from them. You are in an examination situation and feel stress. In this case, psychiatry does not have the necessary conditions for analysis and cognition, namely the protected communication "in which the' serious situation', i. e. the pressure of social sanctions, is suspended as credibly as possible for the duration of communication between doctor and patient" (Habermas aaO 306). It seems to me that repression, which must be able to do without brutal brute force, is no longer conceivable. This separation of knowledge and healing leads to the most perfidious form of mastery, which the physician has to do on behalf of society to his victims.
Since forced hospital admissions in sanatoriums are more frequent in the lower class, this is also shaded by such threats. Due to their restrictive language code, lower classes are less suitable for discourse on the psychocoach, who remains inefficient in the case of severe symptomatics and remains inferior to the sedative, not to mention the budget. The worker comes into the slap, the teacher is allowed to work as a private patient on the coach.
Psychoanalysis, however, has, as Freud also senses in this context, the title of fame "that research and treatment coincide with it" (Freud, WW VIII, 380). For this form of healing, the doctor's power as described above as dominance within the analysis applies. A depersonalistic diagnosis, however, is itself already based on the compulsion of the means it prescribes. For mutual depersonalisation is precisely the disease that both normal people and psychopaths suffer from. In the meantime, almost one in three of the pleasures of their job requirements has become depressed. Not meeting each other at the same height as others, but degrading each other into an object, is one of the causes that Schizophrenics create. Therefore, it is not suitable to change the condition of a schizophrenic. On the contrary: a fear scenario of the schizophrenics is intensified. This is also true of the sanatorium, where schizophrenics are seen as incurable cases under the influence of drugs on the siding of life. If they had previously suffered from hopelessness, this has now found a counterpart in the real situation and the subjective experience of the schizophrenics has their objective correlations - at least something. The paranoid man finally experiences his delusion as a reality of persecution.
Anyone who sees an object in another person does not see it. Because he doesn't see it, he destroys it. However, extermination is already Heidegger's analysis of anxiety (Sein und Zeit, Tübingen12 (Mohr) 1972,186,276, 265) infiltrated in all its ontologizing and thus false generalization. Heidegger reflects on the threat from not being, fear of uncannyness and the immorality of death without the ability to bring these fears into a social context. Jüngel's interpretation of death as disproportionate (Tod, Stuttgart 1971, 99f, 171) now makes the dialectical relationship in it clear: that social relations render disproportionate. Thus many schizophrenics feel that they are dead in life (Laing, Das geteilte Selbst, aaO 171,217,240,252; cf. Dorothee Sölle, Die Hinreise, Stuttgart 1975, 7-23) How paradoxical this statement is, should be clear: "Death is not an event of life, death is not experienced." (Wittgenstein, Tractatus logico-philosophicus, Frankfurt am Main9 (Suhrkamp) 1973, 113, Nr. 6.4311)). The life of the schizophrenic is not alive. Worse, this horror Heidegger even made to a positive, to the existential: "With death, existence is imminent in its very own ability to be" (Sein und Zeit, 250) Heidegger's recourse to the naked self resembles in it the strategy of schizophrenia condemned to shame. Death is the epitome of failure. (Adorno, Jargon der Eigentlichkeit, Frankfurt am Main (Suhrkamp) 1971, 114) Nonetheless, Heidegger has the ability to depict precisely for this reason the attitude to life of a decadent fascist society in full unconsciousness. He and the schizophrenics have their finger on the pulse of their time, not only do they smell the sweetish smell of the master from Germany (Paul Celan, Death's joint) but they also experience death, which radiates under the surface of all human relations in late capitalism and its historical precursors to the most intimate cell, on the whole body. Their living decomposition only reveals prophetically what is socially general; their abnormality is the unmasking of the normal. Of the characteristics of death in life, humane depersonalism also has its need for classification, qualification, section of the qualities of a human being according to the model of social division of labor, neutrality, causalization of historical recoveries. Diagnosis exponentiates all the sick, pathogenic, psychopaths who have absorbed psychopaths from particularly open areas of social damage, mostly families or stressful work teams. She has not been able to heal for a long time. Unbearable, however, the thought that even under the pitiful and merciless glances of their grapple/wardener they should take off their clothes in order to be able to be grasped more easily.
Marcuses of and even in the psychoanalysis after Freud's stamp this takes place exactly in the small one with 'repressive Entsublimierung' marked. (Adorno, Die revidierte Psychoanalyse, in: Soziologica II, 94 to the milder version of Karen Horney) No cell in society that is not their mimesis. In the analysis, the defended intentions are to be integrated into the ego by revealing and rescinding their causality. Its power about this Ego shall be broken with that. Its disturbing power. In the analysis, so the spiritualized defence leading to interaction disturbances of not licensed wants arrangements is fended off to become a the disturbance's caused by it gentleman. The annoying is eliminated by integration. And it is precisely in this integration of opposites that analysis repeats the totalitarianism of the society in which it serves. (Cf. H.Marcuse Der eindimensionale Mensch, Neuwied6 1974, 14) The direct,' spontaneous' satisfaction of needs with cheap derivatives of bourgeois luxury goods - from the swing of Hollywood to the plastic fireplace clock - lifts the proletariat into an outward resemblance to the bourgeoisie. This eliminates the externally visible antagonism of private property and wage labour, and the power of the proletariat is broken by the dissolution of its class consciousness.
Healing is necessary in psychiatry for this function The transcendent mode of being, which every abnormality must have for a totalitarian society, threatens its one-dimensional sound-and-not-to-be-different. Light cases are subjected to therapies in conversation according to deep psychological methods, severe cases are immediately dissociated as incurable, repressed like death itself. The psychopaths are - if one takes Freud's Intrapsychic - the “It” of society, the repressed intentions, are the text deprived of a public interpretation, are the unlicensed dispositions of needs, the unconscious, the shadow, everything that society does not want to admit from itself. The suppressed shoots fill the madhouses. (Foucault, Wahnsinn und Gesellschaft)
The social ego is still more powerful, and it will probably remain so. But the psycho-paths and all their abnormal brothers, with Jesus and Socrates and all the saints, disturb the I so enormously at least that the ego incarnation of Hitler did not allow itself to be taken away from all of them and gassed.
What does the abolition of the past mean? Past traumas are to be analytically rediscovered and their influence on the present is to be eliminated. This is how the Freudmodell with its childhood studies envisages it. But even if one admits that every behaviour of past experience is largely co-determined, this is at least relativized by the fact "that whatever person A communicates about his past person D is inseparably linked to the present relationship between the two and is influenced by their nature" (Watzlawick, aaO 46).
No one can ever know everything about himself, nor can he convey this to another. So what I become aware of in your presence, that is also determined by you. If you talk about your mother, I can think of similar and dissimilar things about my mother. If you just ask me how my mother is, I can't think of anything. You have no reason to accuse me of resisting something unconscious.
The causes of my genesis will you want to find? Do you think that if you postulate that they are not conscious of me, you could fathom them completely in me? You yourself are also one of the causes of my genesis. Maybe I don't know what you look like to me. Maybe you're making it impossible for me to think about it. If I only knew your genesis to explain your behaviour towards me and then to know how I can understand you and how you affect me. You mean, it's morbid if I take my clothes off in front of other people? Exhibionism? But you know, so uptight about how you react to it, I don't know, but you must have some kind of early childhood trauma...
Many analytical models are based on the notion of early childhood traumas, in which certain needs and the situation of their failure are suppressed into the unconscious. The black pedagogy of bourgeois and proletarian education provides ample illustrative material. Psychoanalysis is supposed to repair these early damages. If education were to be less damaging, psychotherapy would be less necessary to this extent.
In the It after Freud, the repressed aspirations and practical figures continue a life of their own that is not accessible to the consciousness of the Ego, but is nevertheless decisive for its behaviour. It leads to repetition constraints that the ego cannot explain itself. It forces unconscious reactions that are an answer to the traumatic scenario. Since the parents were often essential agents of the trauma scenes, it transfers the role of the hurting person to present persons. It obeys the boss as well as the father, defies him like the father, etc. No wonder, when it projects the internalized father functions onto the therapist in the analytical setting. If the analyst also shows himself as the one who knows through his questions, the transfer is inevitable. This is not a defect of the patient, but evoked by the setting. In the ideal communication of therapy, the analyst has the power of interpretation over the patient, who hopes to be helped by his knowledge. Ferenczi has placed mutual trust in each other and has also granted the client competence and authority. In this way, he has created completely new possibilities for therapy.
But where the doctor decides on compulsory admission, he is rarely the rescuer, but is perceived as a threatening father or judge.
"The patient's behavior is up to a certain level degree a function of the psychiatrist's behavior in the same behavioral field. The typical psychiatric patient is a function of the typical psychiatrist and the typical psychiatric hospital." (Laing, Das geteilte Selbst, aaO 33) By focusing blindly on the past of their victims and by postulating all their behavioural disorders as products of their past, psychiatry is able to distract possible criticism of their method of treating people as nothing, because their In the madhouse, this function has the case history. It exposes the patient's entire past: "No sector of his present or previous life is therefore deprived of the competence and mandate of psychiatric judgment. (...) This is done in such a way that the whole of his. If a list of incidents that have or could have' sympathetic' meaning is compiled in the course of your CV. (...) On the other hand, it is just as true that most of the information contained in these case histories is, by and large; on the other hand, it is just as true that the curriculum vitae of almost every human being would give sufficient honourable facts to provide the historical justification for hospitalisation."(E. Goffman, Asyle, aaO 154,157) What is still idealized in Habermas as freedom of repression in the doctor-patient-relationship (aaO 306) to comprehend the past in the Hegelian sense, looks in the madhouse in such a way that "the patient, if these pacts concerning him (his case history, M. L.) are true, is certainly not exempted from the usual cultural compulsion to conceal them, and that he or she is not free of the usual cultural compulsion to conceal them." (Goffman, aaO 157)
“During admission and diagnostic sessions he is asked questions to which he has to give false answers if he does not want to lose his self-esteem, to which the correct answer is held against him." (aaO 160) “By means of information about his past history, the patient's own image of himself is constantly devalued. The supposedly' false' awareness of idanthropy should be adapted to reality. These verbal revaluations and devaluations of the self-image take place against the background of an equally dangerously fluctuating institutional basis. Contrary to the general opinion, the' ward system' guarantees a considerable degree of internal social mobility within the institution, especially in the first year of residence." (aaO 160) "The criminal transfer of a patient to a worse ward is presented as referral to a ward whose conditions are appropriate for him." (aaO 362) "Through these measures, the patient can be made subject to a feedback of his own opinion about himself: the more he confronts her, the greater the threat of repression through penalisation and direct communicative humiliation. The more he identifies with the opinion of the clinic about him and learns to give up his' identity-for-itself', the more comfortable he experiences treatment. The patient is asked to' understand', and one expects that he adopts or at least pretends to adopt the opinion of the clinic about himself." (aaO 153) Through the constantly fluctuating identity that arises, the patient learns that" an acceptable self-image can be regarded as something outside of his own standing, which can be quickly and easily built up, lost and put up again. And he learns that it is possible to take a standpoint - and thus to develop a self - irrespective of what the clinic can give or withhold." (aaO 163) And so healing takes place on him very well - healing, however, in a slightly different way than it is good and wanted under the local social conditions. “The situation in the sanatorium thus apparently generates a kind of cosmopolitan wisdom, an apathy with regard to one's own bourgeois status. Under these frivolous and yet strangely exaggerated moral conditions, building and destroying the self becomes a shameless game, and if the patient learns to see the process as a game, then this gives a certain demoralization, because it is a very elementary game. (...)'; As soon as he (the patient) realizes what it means when society denies a viable self, this threatening definition - the threat that commits a person to the self dictated by society - loses its effect. The patient gains new ground under his feet, so-soon he experiences;; makes it possible to live well with a behavior which the society sees as self-destructive."(Goffman, aaO 163)
Reconditioning of the past thus wins in the madhouse the thoroughly liberating function that the patient learns not to care about it any more. He has been freed from moral definitions.
I don't want to play down the importance of the past for the present. Politically speaking, it is precisely the past that needs to be reappraised. Looking at post-war Germany to the present day, it can be seen that here, especially on a socio-psychological level, reflection on Auschwitz was omitted. That is why fascism in the FRG has remained what it was. The character structure of the fascist, fascist individuals is characterized by a "weak ego and therefore need to be replaced by the identification with large collectives and cover by them" (Adorno, Was bedeutet: Aufarbeitung der Vergangenheit, in: Erziehung zur Mündigkeit, Frankfurt am Main (Suhrkamp) 1970,17). This herd instinct, which reproduces itself with snot noses, which are only strong in the mob, was faced with a hard crisis at the end of the 3rd Reich. This collective narcissism has been severely damaged by the collapse of the Hitler regime. His damage occurred in the realm of mere reality, without the individuals having become aware of it and thus been able to cope with it. This is the social-psychological sense of the term "unresolved past". There was also no panic, either, which, according to Freud's theory from' mass psychology and ego analysis', occurs where collective identifications break up. If one does not ignore the instructions of the great psychologist, it leaves only one consequence open: that those identities and collective narcissism were not destroyed in secret, unconsciously smouldering and therefore especially powerful, but continued to exist. (...) Socio-psychological it would be to be followed by the expectation that the damaged collective narcissism lurks in wait to be repaired, and that it will reach for everything that first brings the past into line with narcissistic desires in consciousness, but then also models reality in such a way that this damage is undone." (Adorno, aaO 19f). While feudalism characterized the consciousness of tradition, it survives in the rationalism of the bourgeois society, in which one is even and the adherence to memory has something depressive about it. Remembrance, time, memory (are) liquidated by the progressive bourgeois society itself as a kind of irrational remainder." (Adorno, aaO 13). The psychologic mechanisms in the defence of embarrassing and unpleasant memories serve highly realistic purposes. (...) The eradication of memory is more a result of the all too wachen consciousness than its weakness against the superiority of unconscious processes. Forgetting the barely forgotten, the anger sounds with the fact that one has to talk oneself out of what everyone knows before one can talk it out to the others." (Adorno, aaO 14)
The collective narcissism of the fascist idols includes as constituent the hatred of everything that does not take part in the secret conspiracy of the ego-weaklings, which does not hand itself over to the collective blindly and unconsciously. This anger is omitted from all abnormalities. Most of the time they are still made scapegoats of economic failure, in the face of secret and openly rulers (who are to blame for it), but this excuse is not given to the sick of the collective. They represent only life that is not worth living, to whom the death of grace may be granted - and even if it is in our society, which after the gassing efforts of the six million, needs a historical breathing space for the first time, even only the social death of grace of the dissocialization. The collective storage in these burial houses of the still living is the cheapest solution to this problem; somatic maintenance with drugs and the most meagre physical maintenance avoids any obligation to talk therapeutically appropriate care and the mediation of what all so sick and what the lunatics are hungry for: "Every human being today, without any exception, feels too little loved because everyone can love too little."(Adorno, aaO 10)
For schizophrenics who have a completely different image from the usual mode of experience, a cure should lead to the destruction of this image. Your fantasized image must be adapted to our reality. This is also the psychiatric definition of a psychiatric illness based on a lack of adaptation to reality. "Our perception of' reality' is the perfect fulfillment of our civilisation. to perceive reality! When did people stop feeling that what they perceived was not real? (...) Dodge is a relationship in which one deceives oneself from the original self; then one deceives oneself, so that it looks like a return to the beginning.” (Laing, Das Selbst und die Anderen, 43f) Healing of schizophrenics leads to learning to play a charade. You'll learn to pretend. Maybe they are so skillful that they can even bluff themselves for a while and think that they are as if they were like them. They are then adapted to reality by entering into a fantasy - being the one to be. "This alienation effect is insidious. All of us can easily be drawn into social fantasy systems by losing our' own' identity and only realize it afterwards "(Laing, Das Selbst und die Anderen, aaO 36) "The loss of our own knowledge and evaluations, which is brought about by adopting a wrong position (a double wrong one, because you don't see that it is wrong), will only be' realized' in retrospect. (...) Man in a double wrong position feels' real'; without feeling numb, he is stunned by this' reality' feeling. To shake oneself up from the false sense of reality requires a de-realization of what is wrongly held for real and a re-realization of what is wrongly held for unreal." (aaO 37) Laing thus means by' healing' something other than the adaptation of the abnormal to our reality, because he considers our reality to be a fantasy. Probably there are people who now feel like healing Laing.
I described the situation of psychopaths as that of social oppression. Of course they share them with other groups. Is it perhaps their illness that these people have been and are being oppressed? Then healing would get the march rhythm of the "Wake up, damned one of this earth". The question of their healing is thus clarified with regard to the conditions of emancipation of the oppressed. One of the most serious is that the liberation of the oppressed also implies the liberation of the oppressors from their rule. So with Adorno: No emancipation without that of society. And by the way, Laing's criticism of Laing, which was later described in detail: "There is no' own identity' that is not the product of social identification. The true self is a fiction. It is defined "by the circumstances that are obligatory for its members in a social system" (E. Goffman, Asyle aaO 166) These circumstances, however, must be enlightened with the utopian light of salvation as removable circumstances. Laing also makes it clear that there is no identity of its own. “The identity of a human being cannot be completely abstracted from his identity-for-others." (Das Selbst und die Anderen, aaO 89)
Psychopaths are oppressed, among many others. The oppressed suffer from the discord that has spread in their innermost being. They discover that they cannot really exist without freedom. But by longing for real existence, they fear it. (Paulo Freire, Pädagogik der Unterdrückten, Reinbek (Rowohlt) 1973, 35) Our ideas of reality have internalized the psychopaths and believe that if they see the world differently, they must be crazy. To free them from their oppression means to make it clear to them that they are not crazy if they see the world differently, that they should learn to trust their own experience and not our non-experience.
A symptom is that one has to catch sight as an ego strength trust his own experience. The fascist stands out due to the inability for the experience of one's own. Watzlawick describes a test of Asch, the group influence on individuals, examined. Altogether, per the test per 8 students 7 were of secret without knowledge of the eighth, the real test subject, enlightened teammates of the experiment. Different panels were shown to parallels and Allen they had to say which showed panels equal long parallels. The 7 gave unanimously always the same wrong answer and the eighth experimentee who had always to answer as second to the last adapted to the wrong answers of the others opened. "Asch thought that under these circumstances only 25 per cent of the test subjects trusted its own perceptions while 75 per cent was submitting to the majority opinion in a smaller or larger degree reaches an agreement blindly, others with considerable Angstgefühlen., (Watzlawick, aaO 21), Adorno says it does not have much use fighting the fascist anti-Semitism with educational work and references to facts about Jews while the genuine anti-Semite is rather defined by it, that he cannot make experience at all, läßt. do not mention themselves that what means him, Adorno, (": The two above sources do not speak refurbishing of the past, aaO, 26) against each other, experiment well hardly was made in not fascistic surroundings since arse is?and the fascist trains of the authoritarian character structure also in till now still not directly fascist societies (England) represented without being less dangerous.
Trusting one's own experience is a symptom that one has to maintain as self-strength. The fascist is characterised by his inability to experience himself. Watzlawick describes an attempt by Asch to investigate group influence on individuals. Of the total of 8 students per experiment, 7 were secretly without knowledge of the eighth, the real test person, enlightened fellow players of the experiment. All of them were shown different tablets parallels, and they had to say which tablets showed parallels of equal length. The 7 initiates always unanimously gave the same wrong answer and the eighth respondent, who always had to answer as the penultimate, adapted to the wrong answers of the others. Asch found that under these circumstances, only 25 percent of the test subjects trusted their own perceptions, while 75 percent of them submitted to a smaller or larger degree of majority opinion, some blindly, others with considerable feelings of fear." (Watzlawick, aaO 21) Adorno says that there is not much point in combating fascist anti-Semitism with educational work and references to facts about Jews, "whereas the genuine anti-Semitism is rather defined by the fact that he cannot make any experience at all, that he cannot be approached" (Adorno, Was bedeutet: Aufarbeitung der Vergangenheit, aaO 26) The two sources above do not speak against each other, since Asch's experiment was hardly done in a non-Fascist environment and the fascist features of the authoritarian character structure are also not directly represented in fascist societies (England?) until now, without being less dangerous.
Psychopaths are courageous to make personal experience. This can lead into psychoses a lot deeper than any of the healing methods. Some people labeled as schizophrenic (not all, not necessarily) show in words, gestures and actions (linguistic, paralinguistic and kinetic) a behavior that is unusual. Sometimes this unusual behaviour (which manifests itself to us, the other, as already mentioned, optically and acoustically) intentionally or unintentionally, expresses unusual experiences of the affected person. Sometimes (not always, not necessarily) these unusual experiences, which express themselves through unusual behavior, seem to be parts of a potentially ordered, natural sequence of experiences. This sequence can only come out very rarely, because will be so busy with the' treatment' of the patient through chemotherapy, shock therapy, milieu therapy, group therapy, psychotherapy, family therapy - now sometimes best and most advanced even through everything together. (...) The' inner' world (the unusual experience of the schizophrenic; M. L.) does not need to be unconscious. Most of the time we don't realize their existence. But many people invade them - unfortunately without a leader and confusing outer with inner and inner with outer realities. (Laing, Phänomenologie der Erfahrung, aaO 1l2f) The psychotic process is now entering this inner world with the courage to travel to an unknown country. You can suppress it by frightening the lottery ticket traveller even more than he is already afraid of the forbidden garden.
You can also accompany him, encourage him on an adventurous journey and take the institutional measures to make this journey a success. This journey is experienced as a step into' in', as a step backwards through one's own life, in and back and through and into the experience of humanity, perhaps further into the essence of animals, plants and minerals." (Laing aaO 115)
Laing proposes an initiation etiquette instead of the usual degradation moniells of psychiatry, similar to those who smoke pot for the first time, fixes or those who in earlier times are at the height of time. In psychiatry, that would mean: EX patients help future patients go crazy. A journey is thereby achieved
I of the outside to inside,
II of the life in a kind of death
III of the procedure for going back,
IV of temporal movement to a temporal interruption,
V of earthly time in conical time,
VI of the ego to this itself,
VII from outside (postnatal) back into the lap of all things (prenatal.)
and after this a return journey
1. from inside to the outside
2. of the death in the life
3. of a reverse motion again to a forward movement,
4. of the immortality back to the mortality,
5. of the eternity back to the temporality,
6. of this himself to a new ego,
7. of cosmic fetalization to the existential rebirth." (Laing aaO 117)
This describes the natural healing process of a person who has been made ill by this society. It is also a liberation process of the oppressed, of their internalized consciousness of their oppressors. "So liberation is a birth process, and it's a painful one. The human being who comes into the world is a new man, who is only viable if the contradiction of oppressor-suppressor is overtaken by the humanization of all human beings" (P. Freire, aaO 36) Like all liberation of the oppressed, this birth process can only be the work of the oppressed themselves.
To regain their humanity, they have to stop being things and fight as men. That is a radical demand. You can't go into combat as objects to become human beings later. The fight begins with the knowledge of men that they have been destroyed." (Freire, aaO 54) Destroyed! From this point of view, the psychosis schizophrenic is the beginning of a process of cognitive knowledge of her situation in the most intense form possible for human beings. Still today, they still lack an understanding of the connection between their psychotic form of cognition and the cultural-social-economic situation of themselves and the closer living conditions (usually family), which is the direct reason for their leaving a manifestly intolerable situation.
The only justifiable relationship between the doctor and the patient is that of solidarity, trust and love. In addition, there is the category of hope to complete the Triassic Corinthians, chap. 13:13: "Without a future, a human being is going to be destroyed spiritually. He needs opportunities for self-realization, and constantly needs more than he can use directly. Arnold Gehlen calls this 'background fulfillment'. “The awareness that a fulfilment of a need is possible at any time (...) we call fulfilment of the background, whereby in the borderline case the presumed need does not change into actuality occupying action.” (Urmensch und Spätkultur. Philosophische Ergebnisse und Aussagen. Bonn (Athenäum) 1956, 50). Heidegger also makes it very finely clear as a worry: "Life itself is already in its own existence in advance" (Sein und Zeit aaO 19l) Solidarity and trust in the patient leads to hope in the category of the future. Instead of seeing the patient under the aspect of his or her ability (which is what retrospective analysis is about in order to cope with the past), he or she must be seen - like every person you love - under the aspect of his or her abilities. Brecht's Keuner story of love means just this. Whoever addresses a loved one in such a way that he is left open in his self-definition almost every possibility, gives him both suggestion and objective possibility to become what he still can become. Instead of definitions, the hopeful human being makes infinitions to say it with Moltmann. Love can be contagious. Only the beloved can love, which becomes clear to the child. "For understanding, you could say love. But no more words were prostrate. (...) If you can't understand it, you are barely able to begin to love it effectively in any way. We are commanded to love our neighbor. But one cannot love this particular neighbor for one's own sake without knowing who he is. You can only love your abstract humanity. You can't love a conglomerate of schizophrenic symptoms. Nobody has schizophrenia about how to catch a cold. The patient didn't get schizophrenia. He's schizophrenic. The schizophrenic must be known without being destroyed. He will have to discover that this is possible. The hatred of the therapist as well as his love are therefore in the highest degree important." (Laing, Das geteilte Selbst, aaO 41)
If one compares Laing's first book (Das geteilte Selbst) from those quoted here with his later works, it is noticeable that he was much more busy in the past to understand the difference between health and illness logically and psychologically and the so called. To explain sick people as something structurally different than the healthy. For his later works, Laing took it for granted that schizophrenia was no longer a disease and did not even cause more suffering than health, if it was not so damned socially, but he went much further than before, understanding schizophrenia as one of the most important forms of healing of social mutilation. From this point of view, the relatively mild Laings in early work are understandable from the point of view of society's insults. Nevertheless, he keeps the promise of an existential study on mental health and insanity. This level of knowledge is indispensable for every social insight, in order not to fall from the rain of bourgeois experience mutilation into the eaves of the leftistism, which is equally barred from any experience, that out of pure Marx-orthodoxism still really believes that there is a proletariat in the FRG and this is even still on the side of left-wing radical student intellectuals.
Health and illness are measured according to the extent of the discrepancy between the understanding of one person of himself and the other and the understanding of the other person of himself and of the other. “If the being-for-self and being-for-the-other in both of them come to the other's correspondent part, both will consider themselves to be healthy. If, however, particularly fundamental discrepancies remain after all attempts to remedy them have failed, then there is no alternative but that one of us must be mentally ill. (...) I therefore propose that mental health or psychosis be measured by the degree of convergence or divergence between two persons, one of whom, according to a general consensus, is considered to be mentally sound." (Laing, The Divided Self, aaO 43f). Less abstractly, this is made more precise by the existence or non-existence of love. “Some people are much more sensitive than others when it comes to not being recognized as human beings. If one is very sensitive in this respect, it can easily happen to him that he is diagnosed as schizophrenic. Freud said of hysterikers what Fromm-Reichmann later also said of schizophrenics: that their need to give and receive love is greater than that of most people. You could say the other way around: If your need to give and receive love is too great (whatever' love' may be), it can easily happen to you to be diagnosed as schizophrenic." (Laing, The Self and the Others, aaO 113) "Before the concepts of healthy and sick, yes, the brother and sister of the rational and unreasonable himself can dial. Once she has recognized the prevailing general and its proportions as sick - and in the literal sense, marked with paranoia, the 'pathic projection' - she becomes the only cell of recovery, which according to the measure of that order is itself ill, absurd, paranoid – even 'crazy', and it is considered today as in the Middle Ages that only the From this point of view, it would be the dialectic's duty to help such a truth of the fool to become conscious of his own reason, without which he would have to perish in the abyss of that disease which the common sense dictates to others without compassion." (Adorno, Minima Moralia aaO 89) Günther Rohrmoser (Das Elend der kritischen Theorie, Theodor W. Adorno, Herbert Marcuse, Jürgen Habermas, Freiburg im Breisgau (Rombach) 1970) He wants to disparage Adorno. He is confessing himself as a right-wing conservative. However, he is doing Adorno more credit than he suspected.
Laing describes the pathological nature of schizophrenia, i. e. what distinguishes it from the socially dominant pathological normal health, as ontological uncertainty. He compares: "The individual can thus experience his own being as real, living, completely; as being, under normal conditions, so very different from the rest of the world that his identity and autonomy are never questioned; (...) But this cannot be the case either. Under normal living conditions, the individuum may feel more unreal than real; literally dead than alive differentiated from the rest of the world, so that its identity and autonomy are always in question. Perhaps he lacks the experience of his own temporal continuity. Perhaps it does not have a feeling of personal consistency or cohesion that ignores everything. Perhaps it feels more bodiless than substantial and incapable of accepting that the stuff it is made of is true, good and valuable. (Laing, Das geteilte Selbst, aaO 50f) Whoever feels that he is so little alive, real, identical with himself, embodied and acceptable in time, must of course feel particularly threatened by external and internal influences (physical influences). Almost everything that is necessary for us ontologically safe and secure life situation is a threat for an ontologically insecure person. Against these threats, he must of course devise a protection strategy to be able to withstand them. But first, a series of threats that are vital to us all. They become evident above all in the constrictions before being devoured, the intrusion of reality and the existence of things.
Fear of being devoured by other people or confusing circumstances is fear of losing one's own identity. Whoever is eaten or sucked up, who falls into a hole, or drowns in the water - loses his identity. Because in the stomach, in the pussy, under water, in a mass one is no longer oneself. And the more insecure the identity is anyway, the more frightening is every smallest capture. The more he who is afraid of perishing tries to cling to anything that can save him from the devouring ravines, the more he tries to panic. Relationships can be so that you can no longer be what you think you are. Others necessarily always change their own experiences of themselves and thus their identity to a certain extent. So other people are a danger to selfishness. Strategy? You avoid them. You isolate yourself. You hide behind behavior masks. You flee into an area that is not accessible to other people. It can be your own body. But he can still be touched and hurt. So you flee one step deeper into yourself. Shift the I-Border to the non-I deeper and deeper into oneself. Will be self and excludes from itself all that others have been in one. One considers all behaviors that one has assumed from others (and these are all) as false self, as foreign persons in one's own being, and distances oneself from them. The self thus becomes an ever smaller refuge and becomes impoverished up to the vacuum. But at least this vacuum is me. I'm a vacuum. I'm nothing. I am not.
Neurosis is the method of evading non-existence by evading before being. In the neurotic state, self-affirmation is not lacking, it can even be very strong and overemphasized, but the self that is affirmed is a reduced self "(Paul Tillich, Der Mut zum Sein, Stuttgart 68,70)" A strong feeling of one's own autonomous identity is necessary so that one can be related to the other as a human being. Otherwise, any relationship threatens the individual with loss of identity. (...) In this context, the individual fears that he or she is related to everything and everyone or even himself, because the uncertainty about the stability of his or her autonomy makes him or her constantly fear the loss of his or her identity and autonomy in every respect. (...) One assumes the risk of being devoured to be understood (and thus to be understood (and thus to be understood and affirmed), to be loved or simply seen "(Laing," Das geteilte Selbst, aaO 53) The tragedy of the strategy lies in the fact that such a person assumes a false understanding of identity by thinking that his ego is constituted by all that His identity becomes striking by the striking contrast to everything else. This is an ontological error. The fear is based on the experience that one cannot assert oneself against others as one would think to be. The basic desire is not fulfilled in any relation to something non-existent: that I should be allowed to be. An action has something that is essentially an emancipating element. Every action open-beard the self. It cancels out being. That's why the action is a form of loss of self. Whoever is seen is vulnerable. This is documented in the hardest form by the camouflage colors of the military and its night and fog activities. The night is the girlfriend of the warriors, ie robbery-mort-the. The sunglasses fashion of the young girls and the addiction to partying without light, not to tolerate light even when cuddling and screwing, to be seen not even by the beloved, are contemporary concretions of a lighter form of this fear. It's easier because fewer people are bothering you. Understanding is transparent. Whoever is transparent can be controlled. Whoever is controllable is controllable, available. Autonomy, however, lends itself to unavailability. Therefore, in order to be autonomous and unavailable, one must avoid any comprehension. To see through people and to keep them under control is an inhuman behaviour. It is, however, today driven under the heading of science. All experimental human experiments attempt to establish laws of interaction. But a law is something standing outside the autonomy and identity of the person in question. Functional laws as general provisions may become necessary to see. But identity is constituted on the basis of peculiarity, not the general public. That every human being is a special being up to indefensibility seems to have become a social illusion. That is why theology has included him in its world of thought, so that at least he does not get lost as a thought. Man in the industrial society has become replaceable like machines. In the most subtle way, this principle has crept into life through the family as well, right into love. But the more replaceable people have become, the more strongly their irreplaceability is played up in obituaries of death and individualism as addiction and ideology. Control is a fundamental social principle. It takes place from the fascist denunciation of unwelcome neighbours in the Hitler Empire of the Germans to the talk in the villages, to the speeches and espionage affairs against left-wing radicals and the Russians. One of their motives is curiosity, which comes from suppressed personal experiences, and the fear of each other's otherness, because one does not want to be overreached, where one experiences one's objective disadvantage situation. Or control is simply a means of keeping the rulers in check to keep the dominated at bay. Any wrong move will be punished with sentences from terror to death. If you have discovered someone else's sore spot, you can drill into it and use it as a blackmailing threat to make it compliant. What a miracle when, under such social conditions, understanding becomes a danger. It almost seems to me that this fear is more realistic than we would like to admit. Fearing to be loved, however, may be surprising; it is the most eager desire in a world where everyone loves too little because they receive too little love. But love has with us absolutely everything conceivable lovelessly in itself, as their saleability proves. I believe that our marriage experiences consistently show us how run-down love is. Often their pretensions are used as a means of pressure to get counter-love. Love is swallowed up in exchange. I love you so that you love me, you love me so that I love you. Often this spiral of finality leads to nasty twists. You want to be loved. One believes the same of the other, and not infrequently rightly so. You can't blame him. The other person has a right to be loved. Thus, love has become an obligation through the recourse to the law of exchange law. Each of them feels obligated to love and therefore pretends to do so even if they don't feel like loving. As a result, scenes like the one that both admit after the orgasm failed, they didn't want to have had it. He doesn't even have to fail. It is almost unnecessary to say that love cannot reconcile law or obligations with its nature. The right to love expires just as it is being redeemed. But since all the blackmailing barter is associated with love, it is realistic to fear being loved.
Now to the fear of the intrusion of reality into the ego. "The individual feels that it is empty like the vacuum. But it is this emptiness itself. Although it, on the other hand, yearns for this emptiness to be filled, it fears the possibility that this could happen, because it has begun to feel that everything it can ever be is this terrible nothing, even this vacuum. (...) Reality as such, threatening to become engulfed or to implode, is the persecutor "(Laing, aaO 55) Imploding reality into the ego is nothing but the accelerated process of socialization. What has been brought to the ego by blows from outside, penetrates into the ego - something that can no longer be felt immediately - and is impressively nested there as a palpable experience. Benjamin has described torture as an accelerated process of socialization. To be overwhelmed by reality is always painful. So it's no wonder then that fear of rape. According to Freud, the principle of reality was that the individual should not be harmed. But that is abstract thought. Whoever adapts to reality today takes damage in abundance through and through. For he often does not even notice what he is saying: that he is no longer he, but the victim of a brutal superego. Part of the reality to which one is forced to adapt oneself is precisely this argument that Freud's boiled up argument that it is better to obey, and reality devours in oneself until one is no longer me. In return, you are a realist and an unprecedented blackmailer. Reality today can only be endured under the fantastic light of its annulment. Hope of all-but it does make it easier for the ego, because reality will not always remain so horrible; but also harder, because where freedom is near, the chains begin to hurt. The stra-tegy against reality is not about the validity of hope in the ontologically uncertain. As with being swallowed, the insecure person grabs isolation. He retreats back into the world of fantasy. In the imagination, the self can be everyone, be everywhere, do everything, have everything. It is so omnipotent and completely free - in the imagination. (...) The more this phantasmagorical omnipotence and freedom is indulged, the weaker, more helpless and tied up it becomes in reality."(Laing, aaO 103) But the fantasies leach out. Fantasy, without being embodied in reality to a certain extent or enriched by injections of' reality', becomes more and more empty and ethereal."(aaO 104) By its very nature, fantasy is not a world separated from reality, but a basic human attitude towards reality, namely its creative transformation into home. Creativity without material becomes their own grave digger. The man who emigrated to the monad also. Imagination is just another form of isolation from the menacing. Due to the fantastic nature of existence, a human being naturally does not behave in accordance with the demands of reality. He's out of line. It's called paranoid. Fear of the thing is a third variant in the cha-rakteristik of schizoid fear conceptions. It is closely associated with the other fears. Human relationships have as their main characteristic that one is the subject of the other, like the subject of this one. But the relationship to things is that to objects. When one person turns another into an object, it is a materialized relationship, inhuman and alienating. The ordinary relationships in our society are reified. On the other hand, he sees an object for the realization of his own goals and purposes. The most direct relationships, such as flirtation and concubinate, are also and especially the most direct ones, so mediated that they have already been completely conquered by thinking and feeling in purposes. You' invest' in a relationship like a business. Instead of Habermasz's symbolically mediated interaction, which transcends all causality and finality, relationships are only approached from the purely business interest. Those who go in the forest in such a way for themselves will be on their way today to a traffic lane; at least not without intentions. You're almost guilty of not having any intentions somewhere. In other words: Habermas' symbolically mediated interaction no longer loses its continuous mediatedness of purpose. The lack of purpose is suspect; it has a tremendously important purpose in itself. For hours you get out of the stress to get fit for everyday life as quickly and efficiently as possible.
Ultimately, the division of society into individuals who are competitively committed to represent their material self-interests and who have learned to circumvent every true individual situation in this way, has also dramatically transferred to Freud's intraphysical monad. Everyone needs the other as a libinidous possessive shoot object. This ideology comes from the sellout of love through its decline to salability. The hooker is certainly the model for Freud's sexual theory. In such universally purposefully conveyed conditions and when the individual decays into a conglomerate of role-play positions, every human being is truly the other communication object. To be afraid of the dissolution of recognition as a subject by being treated as an object seems to me only appropriate to reality; here too, the greater realism of schizoid fears towards normal perception is noticeable. These fears are revelations of reality. In a linguistic mediation process, it is always necessary to exaggerate somewhat in order to compensate for the loss of experience that arises when converting analog to digital communication. Exaggeration is an element of truth in this function. We would probably call the fear of depersonalization in schizophrenia an exaggerated one. But: in their exaggeration, however, they have the revelatory character for the life of a society under their general awareness. They represent all that is hidden from the public text about the life of a society. Their truth is so outrageous that one has to explain it for untrue in order to elude it.
Depersonalisation is a technique that is used everywhere as a means of treating someone else when they become boring or annoying. (...) When one recognizes the other as a free actor, one is exposed to the possibility of experiencing the experience of this experience as an object and thus to the feeling of being deprived of one's own subjectivity."(Laing," The Shared Self, aaO 56f) Strategically, the ontologically uncertain behaves to it by anticipating the reificationary behaviour of the other, his killing gaze and by coming to the fore. One thing has a material relationship to other existences; in the realm of things there is nothing that is not in rem anymore, therefore the other men are also nothing but material instead of personal. But if the other one has become a degeneration in my eyes, I no longer have to fear being reified by him. If I consider him to be unreal, a fiction, a fantasy, he can no longer harm me. Against his own depersonalization by others, the ontologically insecure one tries to depersonalize them preventively and himself as well, because it was he who staged the depersonalization. He kills himself rather than letting others kill him. Some military suicide in Prussia was also staged to avoid safe public execution, as honour death in heroic-hybrid pathetisms long before, almost from the cradle on, dreamt of by A - Z, so that in an emergency nothing would go wrong, which instead of pathos would lead to embarrassment. Those who depersonalize cannot imagine relations with a mutual subject and equal autonomy. Yeah, where would he get a performance like that? If not from the literary fantasies of the last representatives of huma-nism or the relationship between farmer and farmer, who are already in extinction.
The fears of being devoured, crushed and petrified lead to a vicious circle. It also seems that the preferred attacking method over the other is based on the same principle as the attack you feel implicit in the other's relationship with yourself. (...) The process involves a circulus vitiosus. The more one tries to preserve one's own autonomy and identity by abolishing the specific human individuality of the other, the more one feels compelled to continue doing so, because with every denial of the ontological status of the other person, one's own ontological security is reduced. The threat to the self which is the other one is potentized and must therefore be negated all the more desperately."(Laing, aaO 63)
It's getting even more complex. Because the intention to isolate relationships with people, the realism and every autonomous expression of life of another person at the same time triggers the fear of it again. How often the paranoidly feared represents the unconsciously longed for. Every being needs confirmation if it wants to be conscious of it. But consciousness is to be the human form. It implies the ability to return to oneself, reflection. But the Cartesian conclusion of thinking on being is a fallacy; nothing is more mediated than thinking and reflection-on, which in the "cogito ergo sum" seems to be a direct relationship to being. Adam saw that he was naked. Eva must have told him.
The recognition of one's own autonomous existence, one's own body and identity is never direct. There is no identity and self-awareness that has not already been imparted through the experience of others. If the mother does not already feel, touch and caress her embryo in the body; if the father does not make it clear to him with his tail that there is a difference between this and the embryo itself, then a child who is so far unnoticed cannot even come up with the idea that it is. To be considered is thus the primordial experience, on the basis of which only identity consciousness can develop. If hitchhikers relied on their logic, they would soon have to conclude that they were not because they were not perceived on motorways in Germany. But this is due to the unwillingness of motorists to see other people they may have seen. by being in her car. Those who have not been given too little attention by others cannot develop an identity consciousness, which emerges from respect. We greet those who meet us by wishing him good or assuring him of our devotion, or recommending him to God. But how indirect are these abominable formulas (what else do you suspect in' Heil!' from the original power conferral!) against the eternally young, bodily greeting of the kaffir: “I see you!” or its American version, the ridiculous and sublime “smell me!”.” (Martin Buber, Ich und Du, in: Das dialogische Prinzip, Heidelberg 1965, 22) In order to believe in one's own existence, every human being needs other people who confirm to the self that one's own being. Alone being alone in these conditions, which are very much needed by ontologically insecure people, means the threat of not being alive. Laing writes of a woman: "Her longing has always been to be important and meaningful to someone else. There always had to be someone else there. She wanted to be loved and admired, but if that was not possible, she preferred to be hated rather than not noticed."(aaO 66) This led her to fear any crowd in public. Because in a mass, there are no relationships. The more mass there is, the more lonely you are. This situation then becomes absolutely untenable: out of fear of others, they flee; the more you flee, the more insecure you become about your being and the more you have reason to fear, the others can swallow you up, penetrate you, petrify you. The fear increases and culminates in the awareness of being nothing, a dead man, a vacuum.
Then you act like you're lifeless, you get catatonic. The human element adheres to imitation: a human being becomes a human being in the first place by imitating other human beings. In such behavior, the primordial form of love, the priests of authenticity sense traces of that utopia which was capable of shattering the fabric of domination."(Adorno, Minima Moralia, aaO 204) Whoever loves imitates the beloved. Couples often show the same speech and gestures, the Dachshund walks like his master, Anna-Magdalena Bach wrote a notation that was indistinguishable from Johann Sebastian's hand. But this phenomenon is widening into an existential threat for those who cling to their little bit autonomy like a straw. "The individual can be afraid to like someone because he or she finds that he or she is forced to become like everyone who likes him or her."
Loving means danger; the beloved one penetrates into the self and suffocates autonomy. At the same time, when you have found love, being loved can trigger fear of being devoured, also the fear of being understood, because love without understanding is impossible. What to do: Isolation, prevention of being loved by loving oneself, by trying to understand oneself completely and to see through oneself. Understanding oneself completely (else oneself) is a protection against the risk of being sucked into the whirlpool of understanding that another person has for one. To consume oneself through one's own love is to avoid the possibility of being consumed by others "(Laing aaO 63) So self-confidence protects against being understood. An oversized self-confidence is developed to control one's own being. With one's own control over oneself, one gets ahead of the others. But the extent of control by others is usually overestimated by the paranoid. Self-consciousness implies two things: to be conscious of oneself and to be aware of one another's observational object (Laing, Das geteilte Selbst, aaO 131) I have my effect on myself and on others through self-consciousness. But the crux is that it is impossible to correctly assess the effect on others, you are absolutely wrong. For the experience of the other one of me is inexperienceable to me, unless he communicates it to me through his behaviour. But every insecure person is elementar interested in his effect on others. Social identity is interesting because we are educated at an early age in such a way that we have to adapt our' own' identity to our social identity. This is a fatal mechanism. The schizoid individual is often tormented by this compulsive awareness of his own processes... The exaggerated feeling of being seen all the time, or at least always being potentially visible, can basically be related to the body, but the preoccupation with the thought of being visible can be condensed by the thought that the spiritual self is permeable and vulnerable, as if the individual believes that it is possible to look straight through it into his' mind' or' soul'.
Usually, children are brought up under the greatest possible control and are almost always exposed to the visibility of others, even where their most secret area is. Even her sleep is under surveillance. Pressed housing conditions favour the increase of control. Like all social experiences, control is internalised. Children begin to control themselves and to exaggerate their self-confidence, they don't dare to commit any more crimes out of fear of the possibility of controlling their parents. They control their behaviour according to the criteria of their parents, supported by the urge to imitate, the loveur-form. Even objectively speaking, one's own visibility in the family is often a danger; any sexual and anal activity can be affected by the consciousness of being seen with neurotic fears, because parents in our repressive society rarely tolerate such experiences when they catch their children. Visibility makes controllability and repressibility possible. Admittedly, visibility is necessary in order to experience confirmation from others and to be certain of one's own being. But in our repressive families, however, we are dealing with an excessive addiction to make a person visible, even into his intimacy. Children rarely have the opportunity to be alone with us, unobserved. This control addiction is legitimized - especially in the spring years - by the fact that one has to be careful that the child does not' do anything'. It is said that it is only in the best interests of the child to be controlled. The result is the inability to be alone, to be truly intimate and thus, of course, to be with others in any form whatsoever. Only those who can be for themselves can be with others. The mutilation of intimacy eventually leads to an addiction to explore every mystery, to want to penetrate behind every human being. We all know the sniffing addictions of our mothers, hostesses and aunts, especially in Swabia. I suspect that the relatively greater curiosity of the woman - if at all - is only caused by the relatively greater control of all the girls. Girls are to be protected from rape by their friends, this is their most sacred parental duty; while they often forgive their sons for every bang. Control is inveterate for everyone. In fact, once children have learned to feel perfect and total control, they must learn that not everything is controllable. That one is not always and everywhere controlled, that there are experiences in the self which no one can experience, if one does not intentionally communicate them through his behaviour. Lying is learned, denying messages that are supposed to be used for control. The intimacy is slowly and laboriously defied by the violence of the parents. But these late childhood experiences do not counterbalance the traumas of initial intimacy mutilation. In the age of bugs and eavesdropping devices, secretly built came-ras, it becomes more and more an illusion anyway, there are still secrets - intimacy is constantly more and more destroyed. From the aggressive potency of the mutilated, the power grows that calls for further and complete control. This potency of unnatural curiosity in man also gives science its functionaries. In the reproduction of social control, nature and everything else must be stripped of the last secret - only to find out that there are several others behind it.
Self-confidence in the ontologically uncertain person plays a double role: 1. to become conscious of oneself and to know that one becomes aware of other people is a means of assuring oneself of one's existence and also of theirs. (...) 2. in a world full of dangers, it is a constant exposure to danger to be a potentially visible object. (...)"The obvious defence against such a danger is to make oneself invisible in one way or another" (Laing, aaO 134f) Excessive self-confidence inhibits spontaneity. From the experience that being seen brings control, but this usually means being seen in a repressive way, being seen thus means repressive experience - the gaze of others can hardly be affectionately imagined -, madigming is internalized by others to the point of making oneself self-made-made of the not in a hurry more critical consciousness of oneself. You discard the stuff you're made of, you discard your own intentions and feelings, not even suspecting that they are just mimesis of the general public.
Critical self-examination thus easily legitimises nothing more of actions and experiences. The schizoid individual exists under the black sun, the evil gaze of his critical self-examination. The glaring light of his consciousness kills his spontaneity, his freshness; it destroys all joy, and under this light everything dries up. (...) That is, it transforms its vital spontaneity into something dead and lifeless by inspecting it. (...) To be aware of oneself is still a guarantee, a guarantee for the continuation of one's existence, even though this life can mean a death in life "(Laing, aaO 139) Reflection turns the reflective into one's own object and petrifies it and thus ultimately oneself. And penetration of an object is given to it at the same time. Reflection leads to a feeling of self-eating and this is extremely unhealthy. It continues in spirals on constantly rising levels and leads in ever tighter turns to complete inability to act and possibly even to a complete inability to act. until self-dismissal into nothingness. Normal self-awareness includes experiencing oneself as an embodied individuum with space-time continuity. The Self feels one with its body. Schizoid self-awareness can't show any of this. The evaluation of such completely different ways of being human and experiencing oneself would be absurd, as would the evaluation of a person according to the colour of his smoking socks. There are two ways to be. You can live through them both if you want to and can. The "person embodied" has the feeling of being flesh, blood and bones, of being biologically alive and real: she knows herself as sub-essential. (...) The person embodied, fully implicit in the desires, needs and actions of his or her body, is subject to guilt and fear, the consequences of these desires, needs and actions are. It is the subject of frustrations of the body and its gratification. (...) Being embodied as such is no guarantee against feelings of hopelessness or futility. (...) the body-self is not an indestructible fortress against the destruction by ontological doubts and insecurities; it is not in itself a bulwark against the psychose."(Laing, aaO 81,83)
The problems of being embodied are only different from those of being unembodied. Stronger or weaker? The unembodied self, as an observer of all that the body does, is not directly involved in anything. Its functions are observation, control and criticism of what the body experiences and does, and those operations that are usually defined as purely' spiritual'. The unembodied self becomes hyperconscious. He tries to postulate his own imago. (Laing, aaO 84) To what the body and its behaviour are, such a person cannot say' I'. It's an it for him. If at all, the body forms the "core of a false self" (ebd). This can go as far as insensitivity to physical pain. In Auschwitz, a lot of people wished for this. What the individual, depending on what he calls his' own',' inner',' true' or' real' self, is experienced separately from any activity that can be observed by another (Laing, aaO 89) So the self enjoys absolute secrecy, thus fulfilling one of the most eager desires of an insecure man. With its secrecy it is safe from all possible attacks, it seems. From within, the self now looks out at the wrong things that are said and done, and loathes the speaker and perpetrator as if he were someone else. (...) The individuum develops an inner microcosm, but this autistic, private, intraindividual' world' is of course not a possible substitute for the only world that is really there, the world divided with others."(Laing, aaO 91)
The body is not only the concentration of a false self, but also the carrier of different subsystems of a whole and often quite complex system of false self. Without wanting to, the body then plays different behavioural roles, which the schizophrenic has taken over completely from especially loved and hated people. These loved or hated persons penetrate into him and take their place in the body. Thus, the True Self then confronts foreign powers, persons and processes of behavior in its own body. It can be in bitter hostility to them. The hated table manners of the hated father can only be copied at first, for instance, in order to hold a mirror of his behaviour before him by his own behaviour, in order to dissuade him from the hated table manners, which are perhaps objectively hateful and objectively hateful; but this fails, however, and the copied table manners take on exaggerated proportions out of desperation and potentiated hatred against the ignorant father and begin The True Self then feels tormented, tortured and oppressed by the persons in it. Basically, this feeling is only a very clear demonstration of the internalization of norms, which, however, occur here in a personalized form. A schizophrenic can have several people in him, just as an actor can embody several characters. But the actor is usually in charge of what he plays. And he plays his roles. The schizophrenic's licensing-per is what he plays. The True Self suffers from this. His suppression of the persons of his body reveals prophetically the repression of society in all places. The self is not perceived as jointly responsible for the actions of the false self or the self, and its actions are perceived as wrong or empty (Laing, aaO 90).
There is a split between action and passion - as little as there is, of course, as little as there is both in pure, unmixed form with the counterpart. The person, the True Self, experiences itself in the schizoi-den state completely inappropriately to every form of action of the body. Experience as the Appa-rat of the True Self, the person, is not to be applied to any self-communication by means of behavior. Behavior has its own life and, of course, its own field of experience. But it does not reveal the True Self. The normal relation of self, body and world
(Self / Body) - Others, World
has become to.
Self (Body / Other, World)
That is why the Self can never have a direct relationship with others and the world, even if it desires this. Sinn is constituted by related behavioural processes.
Sinn himself is essentially a relational phenomenon. A meaningful action is characterized by a connection of intentions, by their relationship in a context of shares. This relationship can be characterized by mutual confirmation of the individual actions. They partly presuppose each other, partly they follow each other. Sense is a series of actions that can point to causal, final, implicative, paradoxical, antinomistic and other relationships. In short: sense is constituted through and through as a relationality.
For interaction, this definition also applies to interaction. Meaning becomes here experiencable, if two intentions and activists (people, eggs, blades of grass) act in such a way that an action by means of their experience through the other activist forms the basis of another action, which this other activist carries out, and then a further experience and action comes about from the first activator, etc. etc. As soon as two subjects enter into the relationship of communication with each other, meaning comes into being. Since the schizoid self can never directly relate to anything other than itself, it also no longer makes sense. That's where the feeling of senselessness, aimlessness, emptiness comes from. Death is pointless, for it is the end of all circumstances. (A possible relationship between humans, eggs and stalks of grass is the collection of Easter eggs in the garden. The schizoid self can only relate to the objects of his or her phanta-sie and the naturalized persons in the body. A sense of purpose is also built up here. But only as a system of imagination. While an embodied individual experiences and realizes from interactions with others sense and realizes that it is confirmed by actions and reactions from outside of his own being, for the schizoid self there is no confirmation of his fantasy system from outside. It is on its own in the construction of meaning. Worse still: the outside world brings completely different constitutions of meaning to the self, which stand in stark contrast to one's own inner life and thus destroy rather than confirm it. In this situation, maintaining sense is exceptionally difficult. At the same time, this sense-divergence leads even deeper into the fantasy world, which can only be maintained before the threat of foreign constellations of meaning by a complete separation from reality. The isolation from reality grows with increasing divergence of meaning. One catapults oneself into eternal solitary isolation.
"The being truly man is rather his deed; showing stone with his behaviour the individuality is actual and it is it, which ones it the thought in its two sides aufhebt. " (Hegel, WW III, 242), learns himself so this one embodied man when he behaves. Only from his behaviour he can recognize himself, he never learns immediately himself but always by his behaviour. He is, what he does. The person is the work. Every deed is the revelation of the person. Who is afraid of visibility will not want to reveal himself. He will do nothing or make every deed out to be improper possibility to be. "An endless possibility, ability, is intention 'him', be 'itself'. The act is always the product of one wrong himself. All this one the act or the deed is never its real reality, he would like 'the objective element' permanently has uncommitted left in which trouble what they do, everything which they do but to declare null and void' the deed always is therefore (or he at least thinks it is) a feigned, a putative performance and he this 'inner' negation grows perhaps as far as they can." (Laing, aaO l09). "But its liberty and its omnipotence are drilled in a vacuum and its creativity consists merely of the ability to produce phantoms. As its ideals the true being of man is rather his deed; in it individuality is real, and it is it that cancels out what is meant in both sides "(Hegel, WW III, 242) Thus the person embodied experiences himself as being with his behaviour, he behaves. Only through his behaviour can he recognize himself, he never experiences himself directly, but always through his behaviour. He's what he does. The person is the work. Every act is the revelation of the person. Whoever fears visibility will not want to reveal himself. He will not do anything or make every act into an improper possibility of being. "' He', his' self', is infinite possibility, ability, intention. The act is always the product of a false self. The act or the deed is never its true reality, it wants to remain' unobligated to the objective element' at all times - that is why the deed is always (or at least he believes it is) a feigned, an alleged accomplishment, and he may cultivate as far as he can declare this' inner' negation of all that he does, in an effort to declare everything that he does as' null and void'. But his freedom and omnipotence are exercised in a vacuum, and his creativity consists only of the ability to create phantoms. The inner sincerity, freedom, omnipotency and creativity to which the' inner' self pays homage as its ideals are thus caught up by a coexisting, tormenting feeling of selfduplication of the lack of real freedom, extreme impotence and sterility."(ibid.) This inner sincerity is, however, quickly again a total determination from social conditions. In her absentia, inherent in every absolute sincerity, it is she, a never-and never-real-selfish one, who becomes the true self's downfall. The alleged omnipotence of the faint possibilities of the self then turns out to be impotence. In the beginning, if distancing oneself from one's own behaviour was only a means to protect oneself from the danger of recognizing oneself and making oneself definite, it will not be possible for the true self to reveal oneself through actions later on, even if it wanted to. The initial illusion has become the truth. The Self lives in a different world and every contact is torn off.subscribes which ebd, itself the inner sincerity, liberty, omnipotence, creativity, is lifted by a coexisting, tormenting feeling of the self duplication of the lack of actual liberty, the utmost impotence and sterility, therefore " (.) This inner sincerity is without delay a total Determination again from social conditions, though. It just becomes, one never-and-never actual selfish, the true himself for the disaster in its abstractness which is inherent in every absolute sincerity. The alleged omnipotence of the true possibilities then turns out in plain language to be impotence the itself. This was initially a means only dissociates himself from the behaviour of his own, later, to protect oneself from the danger of the revealing oneself and making definitively gets the true that way it no longer possibly to reveal oneself by deeds itself even if it wanted. The initial illusion has become a truth. This itself lives in another world and every contact has broken off.
"The self, of course, only feels safe in hiding, in isolation. Such a self can naturally be isolated at any time, whether other people are present or not. But that doesn't work. No one feels more' vulnerable', no one feels more exposed by the gaze of another person than the schizoid individual."(Laing, aaO 93) The demarcation against the external threat causes the dissolution and crumbling from within. Paralysis is progressing. The situation is paradoxical. The feared one is conjured up by his defences. But whoever becomes obdurate in his mere being, because everything has been cut off to him, fetishes him thereby. Detached, fixed selfishness. becomes even more like an exterior, the subject becomes its own object, which it cultivates and maintains. This is the ideological answer to the fact that the present state visibly produces all places where there is a weakness of the ego that eradicates the notion of subject as individuality "(Adorno, Jargon der Eigentlichkeit, Frankfurt am Main (Suhrkamp) 1971,102)
Schizophrenics are not too stupid to notice how they impoverish, not only in affects. Their void vacuum existence at the same time makes them yearning for the apparent richness of the colourful world. But their strategy is also paradoxical in every respect. In contrast to emptiness, one demands for the richness there; nevertheless, participation is perceived as impossible without loss of the self and is not enough, and that is why the individual must hold on to his isolation... because in this way he or she holds on to his or her identity. It longs for complete unification. But it is precisely this longing that frightens it, because it will mean the end of its self. It does not want a relation of mutual enrichment and alternating exchange, of giving and receiving between two' congenial' beings. (Laing, aaO 113) Therefore the poor self is jealous of the rich world and begins to hate it longingly. The hatred, however, drives it further away from the longed-for. Tearing the soul apart in pain. Everything leads to the tragic perfection of failure.
The question of identity stands in the house. The theologies have partly declared them to be the basic question of our modern times, partly as a hobby. As long as the endangered identity itself is still a problem for the endangered, the life-experienced description of identity as a hobby topic is utopian in nature; the less advanced must remain with it until it is no longer necessary. Since the identity problem is complex, we simply have to start.
No man is for himself. He's with others. Therefore, his identity is not a strictly logistical identity. It is a concept of proportionality in interaction and experience. Hardly any human relationship is the same as the other, even if the administrated world allows uniform relations to flourish. That's why a person is not the same for everyone. “These alterations of my identity, by becoming someone else for you, another for him, another for her (singing.), another for her (pl.), become in me too many faceted meta-identities or multiple images of the other person whom I consider myself to be with others - the other person, whom I consider to be the others in my eyes. We have an ego and an old one. We find that I have my own image of myself (direct perspective) in the sense of which I determine my self-identity. However, self-identity is an abstract-one." (Laing, Phillipson, Lee, Interpersonelle Wahrnehmung, Frankfurt/Main 1973,15)
Eva sees Marcel. Marcel sees Eva. Eva sees Marcel looking at Eva. Marcel sees that Eva is ashamed of him. Marcel finds Eva attractive and tells her with his gaze: "You are dressing for me. Eva learns she's attractive. In doing so, she has been offered an identity that she can reject - if she thinks she is the opposite - or accept - if she understands that she is attractive. It has received an identification offer in a non repressive form, which in any case has an effect on its self-identity: it has the meta-identity of a beautiful girl. "The others tell you who you are. Later on, the way in which others have defined you will be reaffirmed or disproved. (...) But however their particular later changes may look like, the first social identity is assigned to one. We learn to be the ones we already are according to the judgement of others." (Laing, Das Selbst und die Anderen, 99) A mother will treat her child as a child. That's why this means it's a child. It won't be a child one day. Then it must start to defend itself against being treated as a child by the European mother. European mothers should take part in a course on how to release children.
By treating a person as if he were stupid, you can make him believe that he is stupid - for he does not suspect that you only pretend to be stupid. But if he thinks he is stupid, this alone is the first act of stupidity; so we have him where we want him to be. Now we tell him that too and he realizes that he has no choice but to be stupid. Max Frisch said in "Andorra" against the portrait makers that they made the people into the likeness of their portrait. That's the problem with identity.
Eva learns Jürgen about his behaviour. (Jürgen is identical with his behaviour, cf. He-gel, WW III, 242) She behaves according to her experience with Jürgen. Jürgen learns Eva through her behaviour. He then reacts again to Eve, etc.
This system forms a closed circuit of communication. It's uninterruptible except by separation. You can't not behave. Catatonia is also a behavior. It communicates the will not to communicate. The only way to stop the experience is to sleep, anaesthesia or separation.
Our experience as a product of socialization consists of
1. the person of the other person per se
2. the unstructured perception
3. the interpretation, according to social values,
Programs and criteria selected
4. our own expectations
5. your own fantasies.
The criteria for interpretation on the basis of which one selects from the behaviour of the other are derived from the internations of social forms mediated by early childhood experiences and cultural-moral socialisation. These criteria are mostly unconscious.
It is estimated that the human being absorbs 10,000 exteroceptive and proprioceptive sensory per second. This requires a drastic selection of those perceptions that are transmitted to the higher brain centers, otherwise they would be inundated with insignificant information and would be blocked by it. However, the decision as to what is essential and what is insignificant is obviously very different from person to person and seems to depend on criteria that are largely unconscious. In all likelihood, what we subjectively perceive as reality is the result of our interpunctures." (Watzlawick, aaO 92). Experience is already a product of social dimension, in that it becomes knowledge and structures, unravels, selects, and becomes a product of social dimension. While experience may be the only evidence, it is no less mediated. Only the baby's first stupid look into the sterile delivery room air is the most immediate experience.
Eva Marcel's identity can be influenced by confirmations, attributions and instructions. If one understands identity as the dialectic of Marcel's self-image of himself and Marcel's image of what Eva has of him, i. e. the dialectic of direct identity and metaidentiality (s), then the influence of Marcel's metaidentity by Eva Marcel's direct identity can be changed by influencing it. Eva influences Marcel's meta-identity by ascribing him to be conceited. Marcel now has the possibility of confirmation before Eva. Confirmation can be in different shades.
1. confirmation: Right, I'm cocky.
2. partial rejection: Well, sometimes maybe.
3. wandering reactions: You are arrogant to call me conceited.
4. total rejection: No, I'm not conceited.
5. total non-confirmation: What a beautiful day!
In secret Marcel believes, even if he denies, that Eve is not completely wrong. At least he seems conceited to her. That worries him. If he loves Eve, he will try to behave in such a way that Eve will no longer find him imaginary. He's getting used to monkish humility. He'll be her dachshund. In this way, Eva succeeds in getting Marcel to change his identity towards the self-conception of a dachshund. (Recommendation to Marcel: ‘Better no loving’.) Why did Eva Marcel say he was conceited? Because she needs a dachshund. Without a dachshund, she doesn't really feel like a full person Without a lover, no lovergirl will come to her identity, she is dependent on a human being, who fills the complementary identity, who may or may not be the one who fills the complementary identity, of the person who may be shaking.
There is usually a discrepancy between the presumed metaidentity (my image of your image of me) and the actual metaidentity, since the messages about the images that each of us has of the other usually run on an analogous level and are therefore less clear than digitally conveyed relational aspects. The more the definition of the other person is shifted to the digital level, the more the presumed and actual identities will coincide. This is a goal of therapies. For people with pronounced phantasies systems, disagreement will reach to the point of total incomparability of actual and imagined metaidentity. In such circumstances, communication is extremely difficult, if not impossible.
The same and equal likes to join in how opposites attract each other. In such banality lies the wisdom that everyone tries to have relationships with people who see in him exactly what he wants to be or want to be. "This presupposes that I find someone else whose criteria are consistent with mine. (...) My centre of attraction could become the other one I am for the other." (Laing, Phillipson, Lee, Interpersonelle Wahrnehmung, aaO 27) Thus, a shift of the dialectical identity context from self-identity to almost exclusively the meta-identity takes place. Thus, every being-for-self is only possible as a function of being-for-the-other; true intimacy and autonomy disintegrates. If she ever was.
The change of the identity of the other person can take on a very complex form for the self. Otto wants to change Ina. He first of all influences his experience with Ina. He projects on Ina his expectations, his fantasies and the text of his criteria for interpreting and meaning of behavior (redundancy). So he starts to see someone in Ina who is not Ina at all, if you ask her how she would be mine. After this projected experience of Ina Otto also acts. He reacts to her like a mother, and Ina believes that she wants to be her mistress, that she is allowed, able and able to be. Every lion takes offense when treated like a mouse. He gets the feeling that you misunderstand him, you don't understand him. Because he thinks he doesn't understand himself, he feels offended. This can have bad consequences. "Each projection is associated with the simultaneous negation of what replaces the projection. Projection refers to a mode of experiencing another person's experience by experiencing his or her outer world from the point of view of his or her inner world. In other words, one experiences the world of perception by means of one's fantasy world without realizing that one does so "(Laing, Phillipson, Lee aaO 29) Now that Ina experiences Otto's behaviour, Otto's image of her as a mother is conveyed in an analogue or digital way and she realizes that Otto considers her to be his mother. If she wants to believe her own self-conception, she will consider Otto's image of her to be false and will tell him this by e. g. playing with his cock. Because that's what mistresses, not mothers, do. Or she can tell him verbally that he is wrong, that she does not want to mother him, but wants to be his mistress. Now Otto can either maintain his projection and continue to treat Ina like a mother until Ina either adapts to his projection or separates from it. Or he gives up his projection and treats Ina as a lover, i. e. begins to play with her.
It becomes even more complex in the metametric levels of mutual identifications and projects. My picture of your picture of my picture of you. It can be based on the agreement of the primary identifications. Otto and Ina can be identified as lovers. At the meta level of this equivalence (or non-conformity) they can now understand (or not understand) that they agree. Otto knows that Ina knows that he is her lover. He knows that Ina knows that he knows that she knows it too. On a third level, both of them can still realize that they understand that they agree. That's wonderful, they have no problems with their relationship and can now begin to prepare themselves in bed for the revolution of social conditions, because it starts in bed. There are the widest nuances of mutual identity decisions and projections between agreement, understanding of concordance and attainment of the understanding of concord - or all this with the most diverse variations with a' not' in front of it -. If one sees the inaction latitude of a relationship as a circle of (experience Otto) (behavior Otto) (experience Ina) (experience Ina) and so on, the reflection of a relationship on the three (and more) levels of congruence of both experiences or divergences forms a spiral. However, the circle also runs around at the same time, because from the first second of a relationship, everyone sees everyone, each one of them makes a picture of each other, everyone acts to each one. Thus one can say that these spirals of identity run reciprocally intertwined and in each act of communication - albeit unconsciously - resonate with all three levels of mutual assessment (synchrocity, understanding of agreement, realization of the understanding of agreement). Of course, all experiences are conditioned by their imagination, programs and value components by past experience, which is transferred to the future through the development of a certain expectation horizon.
The crucial problem in these spiral formations of mutual projections and identifications lies where one of the other's proposals for identity, which can be regarded as any behavioural mediation of projection and identification, is accepted or not. Whether he derives his self-identity from his metaidentity and allows himself to be identified completely passively - or whether he has such a strong self-identity that he is able to reject the metaidentities, which are in absolute discordance with his own understanding of himself. But without being completely isolated from the metaidentities like the schizophrenic.
A consolidated self-position in this sense is not an a priori, but must be defied by the metaidentities. From the foreign determination of one's identity, everyone must find the way to self-determination. This leads to reflection and remorse. The ego, to which some of the others have turned into one, recognizes itself in its own ingenuity and transgresses itself by eliminating certain structures of its own self in the concept, negating it, using it on a new ebb as a means of its self-definition and definition. The Self uses its old self to rebuild the temple from this material in three days or more, often and gladly in a psycho-se, perhaps with the help of hash, LSD or other sweet things, perhaps also with unheard-of effort of the concept (Hegel). He becomes his own obstetrician and works with clay, soaked in the failed pot made by his parents, before it becomes hard by burning. The liberation of the self from old identities is a beginning of its autonomy. In the good psychosis they fall off like eggshells and the ego emerges and builds new vessels out of the shells, which it uses for life. It's reborn.
But from such an exodized departure into the new possibilities with their hopes and the strong, strengthening ego that also fascism is instable to resist, now back into the deepest hopelessness in interpersonal relations - the tragic substance unparalleled. For the weak self, all the metaidentities it receives from the various relationships pose a threat. By confirming a false self, it can actually cling to its metaidentity so wrongly made by the other that it falls for this phantom, which it is not, and becomes as it has been confirmed. The child whose mother says it is an angel and should not touch his penis will later want to be sexless and condemn him instead of enjoying him.
False self-systems of schizophrenics are often the result of projections of others and affirmation of false self-systems to which the schizophrenic then becomes. Collusion is the mutual pretending of false roles that force each other to play complementary roles, unless he refuses to communicate and exits by going away or - which is the same thing - by going away and not coming back. The game is a mutual self-control, and it is part of this, not to admit that. The collusion of the other is necessary as a' complement' of identity, which the self must keep right out of an inner compulsion. You can experience a strange form of guilt, which I think is characteristic of this disjunction. If you refuse collusion, you feel guilty because you are not or will not be the embodiment of the complement needed by others for their identity. But if you actually give in, you are really tempted to be alienated from your own self and therefore guilty of self treason "(Laing, Das Selbst und die Anderen, aaO 117) This statement also applies in every role. The patient who does not communicate with the psychiatrist, if he does not want to, has to feel the guilt alone out of it, and he reveals himself. The same applies to all socially prefabricated castors that do not do justice to the individuals who occupy them. So for all roles. Except the role to play, to play a role.
A person has the most subtle means of exercising domination over another person and giving him or her instructions of conduct and being. Confirmation of that in the other, what he feels is foreign to me, but one can use it himself, the projection, digression reactions to particles of the other, which one rejects, refusal to clarify an existing conflict, accentuation of secondary aspects of the other, confusion of the ego-you relationship, instead of clarifying an existing conflict - these are some basic patterns of power influence.
The basic structure for confusing relationships is the double bond. One brings another or himself or both of them - or both bring each other into a situation that is unsustainable for one or both of them. She's making the others - with Sartre - a living hell. Schizophrenia arises from such double bonds as an attempt, where one does not physically come out, at least psychologically to escape by withdrawing into oneself into the incognito and wiping away all traces of recognizability behind oneself.
The Schizophrenic families have been analyzed and recognized that whole families used such double-binding structures as a continuous medium of communication and draw in everyone who cannot save themselves by extreme refusal or the ability to move them towards metacommunication through their behavioral structures. In such family contexts, the schizophrenic being acts as a completely appropriate reaction. It's not abnormal in any way.
One in five inmates in a mental institution is admitted for schizophrenia. This disease is spreading. They're not known in Vietnam. It seems to be culturally conditioned. The paradoxical communication was first formulated in 1956 by Gregory Bateson's research group. (Gregory Bateson/ Don D. Jackson/ Jay Haley/ John Weakland, Toward a theory of schizophrenia, in: Behavioral Science, Palo Alto (Wiley) 1956; Gregory Bateson/ Don D. Jackson/ Jay Haley/ John Weakland, Schizophrenie und Familie, Frankfurt/Main (Suhrkamp) 1969)
The following components belong to the classic double bind:
"1. Two or more people. (...)
2. a repetitive experience. (...)
3. a primary negative ban. (...)
4) A secondary prohibition that conflicts with the first on an abstract level and, like the first, is enforced by punishments or signals threatening survival. (...)
5) A tertiary ban that prevents the victim from clearing the field. (...)
6) Finally, this whole complex of elements is no longer necessary when the victim has learned to perceive his whole universe in a structure of double bonds. Almost every part of a double-binding sequence can then be enough to cause panic or anger. The structure of prohibitions in conflict can even be adopted by hallucinated voices "(op. cit. in: Behavioral Science, 1956,25l)
One tells the other to do something, and at the same time he informs him on another level that he should not do it, or that he should do something else that is incompatible with it. The situation is sealed for the' victim' by an additional victim, which prohibits him/her from getting out of the situation or dissolving it by expressing his/her opinion. The' victim' is in an' untenable' position. (Laing, Das Selbst und die Anderen, aaO 157) The meaning of the two paradoxical instructions is undecidable. Double bonds do not necessarily lead to schizophrenia, but they are extremely beneficial.
There is not only a contradiction, but also the impossibility of recognising the contradiction. It's confusing. In the event of a conflicting provision for action, the choice remains logically possible. The paradoxical rule of action, on the other hand, makes the choice itself impossible: Neither one alternative nor the other is actually open, and a self-eternalizing, oscillating process is set in motion. (Watzlawick aaO 201) So double bonds are hopeless ways of communication, they devour everything that comes into their realm, they are the swirl in which one is only torn deeper and deeper down to the end. They are perfect decades of human being - marked by freedom. They let human existence fail.
Sociological aspects cannot see the emergence of neuroses and psychoses as isolated contingent individual deformations. For despite all the admitted contingency, a whole bundle of determinism is striking, which seems to arouse Pauline sadness (2 Cor 7:10) in solidarity following Jesus and his incarnation in the suffering bodies and souls of the madmen who bear the death of Jesus on their bodies, given in the middle of life to death (2 Cor 4:9-11). The most comprehensive study to date on the relationship between "social class" and pychopathic frequency is the "New Haven Study" (August B Hollingshead/ Fredrick C. Redlich, Social Class and Mental Illness, New York (Wiley) 1958) The following stratification was carried out:
l Owners and managers of large companies or institutes with university degrees
II The middle management, a very status and promotion-conscious group
III Employees, small businessmen, technicians
IV Skilled workers, consolidated immigrants
V Unskilled workers, immigrants, run-down Yankees, essentially slum population
The group is compared as a percentage with a sample this one been in treatment within a half-year psychiatry patients (1891 people) this one altogether approx. . "normal" population counting 250.000 people from 5%. The following relation came out:
Sample of the normal
The frequency of diseases increases with the decline of the social class. The poorer and more rotten, the more sick. An additional differentiation between neuroses and psychoses (whose psychiatric difference is only the severity of the disease in general over-unanimate judgement - otherwise the distinctions vary from theory to theory) results in the following picture
Here it becomes quite blatantly clear that the patients of the lower strata - insofar as they have undergone treatment at all - almost exclusively suffer from much more serious illnesses than the patients of the upper strata who are being treated. In the lower class (V) one meets eight times as many psychotics as in the upper classes. Thus, both the frequency and severity of suffering increases with the decreasing social class. However, it is to be assumed that the neurotics of the lower class in the above table are considerably underrepresented at only 9%, since the ability to provide psychiatric treatment in the lower class is minimal and people in minor illnesses are as far away from the psychiatric apparatus as possible. This can be deduced from the admission statistics of the New Haven Study:
(psychotic first illnesses)
Police and court
Family and friends
(The listed data are taken out from: Gleiss, Seidel, Abholz, Soziale Psychiatrie, Zur Ungleichheit in der psychiatrischen Versorgung, Fischer Tb, Frankfurt/Main 1973, 116)
Even in severe cases, patients in the lower classes do not assume that they are self-reliant and seldom persuaded by their friends and family to treat them. More than half of them are forcibly committed. This is probably due to the lack of internalisation of oversight in subclass education, which mostly directs conflicts. Since severe illnesses take a long time to heal anyway, and since every cure presupposes the patient's help, the chances of cure for the lower class patients are considerably higher than for patients in the upper class who are already undergoing treatment with lighter neurosis at an early stage. This behaviour is based on the fact that the different notions of illness or normality in the lower and upper social stratum are used to introduce the patient.
In the lower class - also in somatic sufferings - a much wider spectrum of self-healing than in the upper class is considered "normal" than in the upper class, which is very strongly adapted to the definitions of the illness of the ruling psychiatry, because it also produces and holds the ruling norms and their executive institutions (schools, courts, media, cultural publications, etc.).
These results can be traced back to the different production conditions and the type of stress conditions that can be derived from them for the upper and lower layers. The increase in psychiatric cases in times of economic crisis (Gleiss, Seidel, Abholz, Soziale Psychiatrie aaO 53) is due to the psychological burden of threatened unemployment and the associated material misery. If the impending onset of unemployment is psychologically depressing, how much more so is their entry. Neuroses and psychoses are unresolved and overpowered states of anxiety, as explained in detail above. In the case of unemployment, fear has its economic and extremely real substance. It is the immediate concern for the preservation of naked existence. In capitalism, this fear of jobs and earnings is part of the basic state of mind, which Heidegger has made into a form of vestibularization. This fear hinders today any liberation of the workers from their alien determination in the productive process. For it isolates the individual and directs his interest only towards his own economic security, each sheep seeks its own way and is mistaken (Is 53:6). The absence of the workplace and thus the deprivation of material living conditions is used as a means of political discipline outside of any economic crisis. Examples are to be found in the compulsory dismissals of striking workers (e. g. Mannesmann Oktober 1973) and the prohibitions on the occupation of so-called "radicals" in the civil service (Prime Minister Decree of Jan. 1972; VELKD Pastor's Act of Nov. 1972) and other institutions. This fear is shared by all emancipative people. She is the fear of many pastors and Christians. Even though most people who identify themselves as Christians do not share them. For the Christian Union is strikingly identical with the owners of means of production and their materially well-positioned ones, who have so easily nothing to fear from unemployment and misery; one can say that most "Christians" in the FRG do not know of any economically conditioned fears of existence.
A further stress condition in the lower class professions is monotony and boredom with simultaneous overuse of visual concentration and acoustic overload. Monotony makes you tired, while the maintenance of validity depends on your ability to concentrate during assembly line work with dangerous machines. Every assembly line worker can then also statistically hope for his accident every five years, because then he can celebrate ill if he does not die. The worker's relationship to this kind of work is usually called dissatisfaction.
Arthur Kornhauser has investigated the relationship between dissatisfaction with work and poor mental health through interviews with Ford workers in Detroit. If the examined workers are classified according to their knowledge of the diversity of work processes, responsibilities and pay, the scale of mental health shows a consistent and significant correlation to the level of employment "The higher the employment, the higher the degree of mental health in general" (Kornhauser, Mental health of the industrial worker, A Detroit study, New York/Oxford (Wiley) 196 Through practice such as the MTM (Methods Time Measurement) a standard time is determined for each movement of the worker, which he is not allowed to overdraw in order to keep the chord, which is enforced by the social pressure of the group, especially in the case of group chord on the tape. In addition to occupational diseases, the industry also produces physical wear and tear on the worker's body and a large army of pensioners, nervous overload and the atrophy of intellectual potencies. One out of four workers has psychic problems, which can result in alcoholism, illness, lack of work, etc. (see also Ralph T. Collins, in: Albert Q. Maisel (ed.), The health of people who work, New York (The National Health Council) 1960)
The external determination of the work through standardized regulations and often direct supervision by superiors is a further area of conflict. Here again, the fear of repressions up to dismissal is quite pronounced. The hierarchization of the production relations into several levels is also suitable for concealing direct conflicts between the entrepreneur and the employee, since in the eyes of the simple worker, only the foreman or foreman stands there as a representative of repression and the main part of the conflict can compensate in aggressions in this field. The master, in turn, receives repressions from the next higher superior and feels entitled to dismiss the aggressions accumulated here by his own repressions of the subordinate workers. Thus, at the same time as the hierarchical pyramid in factory work, the idea of a repressive distribution pyramid is presented in the form of a relatively low initial potential as aggression in the factory's executive wing, leading to a descent ladder from person to person and up to the strip. There, a well nourished power of repression comes to every worker. It is converted into aggression statements against equals, especially black sheep on the belt, far less against superiors. The fear of repression from above forms an inhibition mechanism against the removal of aggression upwards, against superiors. At the same time, however, this fear and anger about one's own powerlessness intensifies the amount of aggression. In contrast to the weaker, aggression is expressed that one does not dare to show to the stronger. The children are hollered at because the boss has yelled at you and because you didn't dare to shout back. The stored, repressed aggression is often stored for a long time and accumulates until it can be unloaded to permitted enemy groups "(Friedrich Haaker, Aggression. Die Brutalisierung der modernen Welt, Reinbek2 (Rowohlt) 1973, 155)
Only a small part of this can be lived out on the machines and objects of the production process. The vast majority of them accumulate and form psychological deformations. Parts of this unresolved aggression are released from the demands of the death penalty, brutal films, football matches, boxing matches and in individual cases of so-called criminal offences. Child abuse is one of them. But child abuse is only the tip of the iceberg of rigid educational methods. The aggressive potential of the lower class can be used relatively well in fascism. If you do a layer analysis of the SS-recruitment, the astonishing overrepresentation of underclasses becomes apparent (cf. Kogon aaO).
Often the double-bind structure is suitable for the tape situation. Tell the worker to move fast. But he should also work cleanly and this often overtaxes his abilities and strength and is in contradiction to the required haste. (What lasts for a long time is finally good.) But he cannot recognize this contradiction, because some workers on the production line achieve the required performance due to their still vital skills. The guilt seems to lie in the laziness of the worker, at least according to the master. This situation is unsustainable for the worker, possibly. he draws the anger of all his colleagues when he stands in the group chord and can't keep up with the master's, anyway. He has only the choice left to overstrain his powers and to work himself physically to the bottom, which adds another difficulty to him: if he is exhausted after the shift, he is described by colleagues as a limp dick and discriminated against, which may incite him to other, even criminal actions as proof of his strength. But that makes him either ridiculous, even more brutal or a prisoner. Further consequences of his physical exhaustion can then be foreseen in the evening with the intimacy with his wife, which will frustrate everyone. (During my time on assembly of factory shells a worker told us that despite all the efforts - up to the building of a love swing - his wife never gets wet.
The weak in capitalism is unacceptably lost, its situation is hopeless. And he doesn't see through them. For their explanation presupposes the ability to abstract, i. e. the mastery of a finished code, while he has only one restricted one (B. Bernstein 1959).
The contradiction of the above double bond is that of efficiency and performance. Luther glorifies him as usus divinis legis: the sharper the law, the greater the sin, the greater the divine grace of the gospel. (cf. Rm 5,20ff) The demands on the worker are higher than his abilities can give without deformation. Why do the performance requirements have to be so high? Because it will bring more products onto the market in the same time. So more can be sold. So more can be earned. Provided that there is enough demand from a group of customers with a good social standing and thus purchasing power. More earnings, more profit. Of these, a relatively large proportion goes into the living expenses of the Flick family, Bohlen-Halbach etc., the rest is ready for new investments, new projects, larger assembly lines, more automation, which will save more and more manpower, so that you can make more and more profit and save even more and make even more profit. However, demand then becomes problematic. We must not dismiss too many people and make them unemployed in precisely planned economic crises (known as the times when the most imperceptible profits are made). Because with that, the purchasing power of the masses will diminish. And then you can't make any more profits.
In essence, then, the double bind on the band is nothing more than one of the basic contradictions of wage labour and capitalism. In doing so, the authorities of capital have learned from history that they must not overstretch the bow of exploitation too much, so that it is not shattered by economic crises, mass unemployment and impoverishment and finally a revolution of the desperate masses. The exploitation on the belt must therefore be dosed out, and if the demands are too high, it is more likely that the chord will be lowered rather than an army of early retirement pensions, which no longer have purchasing power and consume health insurance contributions. However, strikes are being ordered today against dismissals. And the aggressions are to be partly suffocated with excess consumer goods, the consumption of which must first be awakened by advertising the wrong need. The culture apparatus also provides further mechanisms and valves of the aggression effluent (Marcuse, The One-Dimensional Man).
But still the dissatisfaction, alcoholism and the increasing disability sufferers in the hospitals remain for lunatics.
Psychiatry itself is also a product of capitalism. In feudalism, however, there were isolated cases of the storage of lunatics and attempts at treatment. The mercantile production, however, was able to integrate the moderately disturbed lunatics into light work without difficulty, just like the rural ones. With the early industrialization, the masses came from the countryside into the city and completely impoverished there, after the machines destroyed their craft possibilities by the competition in speed, quality and production costs. “As a result, a large number of people - 10 to 30 percent of the population - were forcibly kept in large detention centres, depending on the situation of the labour market. In this mass of interned persons, the lunatics were initially indiscriminately included, unless they came from the ruling classes, the old aristocracy and large estates or the new bourgeoisie. The capitalist production method then required that the interned, as potential labour force on the labour market, also had to be available quickly and available. They also had to be able to sell their labour freely. The introduction of all the unemployed and antisocial groups to the production process, together with the abolition of forced imprisonment, required - as Dörner shows - a scholarly and social differentiation of these masses of people: the able labourers had to be sorted out, and the other people were still to be distinguished, so that for example the criminals were brought to the prisoners' houses and the lunatics to mental homes. This differentiation prevailed during and after the bourgeois revolution. With the differentiation of the lunatics, psychiatry as a science became only possible and meaningful."(Gleiss, Seidel, Abholz, Soziale Psychiatrie aaO 76) Psychiatry has two historical tasks: the care of the invalids - similar to old people's home - and then the restoration of the ability to work of the sick person. This is the industrial profitability of psychiatry. But it doesn't work well. The current psychiatric apparatus is incapable of dealing with the psychological misery of capitalist production. If he is so enlarged that he can swallow all the mental rubbish produced by the tape, then the revolution in psychiatry has succeeded: the psychological integration of the individuum, which is not one, has been totally successful. Thus the last traces of suffering of a crushed human mass are eliminated, whose spiritual chains in their hearts and bodies would have kept alive the pain, which is the flip side of eschatological hope for God's peace.
The aggressive worker comes from the shift. Where's he going? Home or to the garden. Who's there? His family. It consists of a wife and/or children. In a highly complex nexus like the family, one cannot view a relationship isolated from the other, but the methodical provisional arrangement first requires this. The worker is not alone with his wife, so that little time is left for clarification between them. Through the exhausting work and daily worries and annoyances with the children, which represent an additional burden of great magnitude due to their vitality, also due to the frequent acts of repression at work, the man is tired and can no longer be open enough for his wife. If she is not herself one of the 19% of women employed in the FRG, or even one of the 70% of all workers' women who have to do the most stupid things on the assembly line in "light wage groups", she has enough of her own worries, at least with the role of education and housekeeping left to her. Under such mental conditions the night begins for both of them. Working on the machine inevitably also influences sensibility; it is therefore no wonder that on such a night, tenderness in sexual encounters is not possible. Since the role of a man is even characterised by aggressiveness as a constituent, the act of love between the lower class and married couples usually takes place in the form of rape, in which the woman only offers very little resistance. Of course, this is not enough, even if statistically, there is much more raving in the lower class beds than in the middle class beds. No man, however, is really sexually satisfied when he notices that he cannot satisfy his wife. So he's finally frustrated by his own fucking style. His wife is slowly becoming "frigid", he may become impotent with enough sensitivity. All this is not surprising given the strain of his work. His wife may find him brutal. He may be deaf and his wife's a nut, as they say. These mutual interpretations as a result of the miscarried fortune of two can now be heightened in the reciprocal spirals of the metaidentities and suddenly the marriage crisis is there. It becomes the centre of the conflict caused by conveyor belt aggression. Since a elaborate code for recognizing the structures of this conflict as a result of the professional situation is only inadequately trained, if it exists at all, a solution of the sexual frustrations is not possible and psychically the marriage bed becomes almost a bed of prostration. But each partner flees from the bed in his circle of friends - a phenomenon that is very strongly developed in the lower classes - and rinses everything down with alcohol. Sometimes he looks for pressure equalization in the brothel or with green widows. If the esteemed wife should get the latter to the point, then either the postman or milkman is no longer sure of his innocence or it comes to the blow with the frying pan or the divorce. In any case, the conflict is intensifying and creating immense mental burdens and many, many new possibilities for double binds. It is obvious that psychic deformations here have the juiciest foundation. For me it is not surprising that so many workers are mentally broken, but so little.
The sex role separation is much more rigid in the lower class than in the upper and middle class. That strengthens any marriage conflict. A certain amount of aggression in men is aided by the efforts he has suppressed as feminine, which avenge oppression through counter-pressure, while in women the oppressed male aspirations contribute to a certain extent. In contrast to the middle class, where the development of all individual abilities and talents is valued, in the working class a human being is not seen and claimed as an individual, but as a group member in family and circle of friends. The identity of the individual is determined by his or her group affiliation and conformity with the norms of the group "(Gottschalch et al., Sozialisationsforschung, Fischer Tb, Frankfurt am Main 1975,85)
In spite of the poor material situation in working class families, many children are born as a result of inadequate use of contraceptives. Is the state's retention of a slightly amended § 218 motivated by fear of a decline in birth rates and the resulting fears of a decline in purchasing power, labour shortages and loss of profit in the ruling class? Behind the pathetic plea for unborn life in the face of the daily toleration of mass murder in wars and the starvation of millions of children born in the South of the world, there is also a great deal of fear for reducing the proletariat, which then delivers less added value and transforms the excess of manpower into a surplus of jobs and thus into pleading requests from the entrepreneur not to leave the company in the embroidery However. In any case, the children of the workers are not carried out in vain sunshine and are dragged into it in sorrow, material misery or at least restrictions. The domestic environment can be characterised excessively by overcrowded and often hygienically inadequate housing; the lack of privacy for each individual, but especially also the lack of spatial separation of adults and children; the lack of' stimulating' objects in the home: monotonous furnishings; little adequate toys; limited opportunity to learn at an early age, with a later important' cultural tool
Parents must inevitably see the reason for material limitations and other frustrations associated with care in children. Therefore, their relationship is at least subliminal aggressively charged against the children as "useless eaters". The educational practices are quite rigid; the parental will is enforced by physical force. There is no correlation between the child's crime and the level of punishment. In middle class beating, on the other hand, the amount of blows, if any, and not love deprivation at all, is appropriate to the presumed intention of the child and thus a sanction system that is understandable to the child, through which a small excess can be built up in the child. The end result is a complete heaven of standards and values like that of the beating father. The punishment in the lower class is only the rage of the culprit. The child cannot therefore see any connection between his or her act and the torture (for children, the pain threshold is considerably higher). It experiences them as unpredictable outbursts of his parents, often the mother, who in the lower class, because of her full-time responsibility for education, takes the actual position of power in the family, and cannot associate this aggression with a horizon of norms. The father is usually with friends or at work anyway, but the mother doesn't play like middle-class mothers with the children, which is necessary for building up and learning human relationships. It has enough to do with care and often still work in its own profession. The children are therefore dependent on their children's groups in the street to learn roles and communicate. These replace a certain amount of identification with the parents by the fascist collective narcissism, which is learned here and does not diminish the ego weakness; only in groups do they feel strong. Sometimes these groups play, get older, plunder vending machines, car cracking and shoplifting. They don't know they need anything else than to get themselves. Love.
One can structurally distinguish three education ways.
We are at the starting point again: The double bind. The love oriented method works with double binds.
A) The mother loves her daughter if she works a little good.
B) However, it is not love because she puts conditions.
C) If the daughter brought this up, love would be withdrawn from her because the mother herself does not want to believe this.
A.) If the daughter wants to open, she becomes zB intellectual abilities " develop. Your mother always wants only the best for her daughter because she loves her allegedly.
B.) The mother feels uncertain of the intellectuality of the daughter, becomes afraid of her and retires. She also reduces the care. The daughter becomes afraid now because the mother does not love it any more. She recognizes that the reason is her intellect. To win the love of the mother back, so it must do without its intellect. But if intellect gained once does not go away any more, then she sits in the dilemma. She does not manage to do without the love of the mother and in turn this has to be accepted, she then only has the introjection of the intellect left if. She will pretend to the outside to her mother to be stupid to let live with all strength of her intellect too stupidly even and to inside but never penetrate from this inner world to the outside under the condition a little. She gets schizophrenic.
C.) Every metacommunication about this problem with her mother would be impossible since in turn the mother would see this only as a test to defeat her with her intellectual strengths.
D.) This situation has similarities to my relations to my mother. Similarities.
The main socially set main contradiction in the relationship between the lower class parents and their children, which experiences its specific variation, is that the children are a threat to their existence, but that they demand love. The undesirable need to be desired. Nobody can live up to this demand of the roaring babies in the slum. Unless he's playing. He can play to love them, but in reality they are annoying to him. The underclasses often just can't love their children. But they will at least try to do so because they know that children need love to pretend this love. So you have two relationships with the child at the same time. The children notice it somehow, but they can't see what's going on. They are only completely ontologically uncertain and do not know anymore whether a middle class is to be taken literally or the opposite is meant. Since existence depends on messages, there are only three possibilities of behavior:
1. One always suspects the opposite of the literal, senses hidden meanings. One gets paranoid.
2. One takes everything most literal, without context and ignores all co-floating meanings and atmospheres. This is Hebephrenie.
3. Or one ignores at all every communication. One becomes cataton.
The problem is that one needs love, but the other does not have it and only plays it. If a lot of love is needed, he can easily become schizophrenic, because we can all love too little, because we are all not loved enough. The problem is one of the remarks of the capitalist fundamental contradiction, which is about escalating violence, repression, desolation, illness and hopelessness. We need escalations of love.
Death is the path to this escalation of love. On the death of precisely these expropriatory economic conditions, because they effectively deny love. The suffering of the schizophrenics, criminals, etc. is an exaggeration of disproportion. It's an exaggeration of disproportionate relationships. It is a caricature of death that constitutes our life and that we have already died. "The less the subjects live more, the more frightened and terrifying death. The fact that he literally transforms them into things, they become part of their permanent death, the objectification, the form of their relationships for which they are jointly responsible "(Th. W. Adorno, Negative Dialektik, aaO 361)
Originally, I wanted to investigate whether Christianity in its present form of popular church in the FRG favoured the development of mental illnesses. No empirical studies have been published to date on this context and it seems that this connection is not of interest in socio-psychological research. It may be related to the fact that Christianity is not a real problem for most of the researchers. A doctoral thesis is currently being written in Zurich on this connection. This is probably the first time that empirical surveys on this issue will be presented. I can only speculatively argue here because I lack such data.
The question is whether speculation is irrelevant in any case. The rejection of speculation and reflection (where reflection is usually accused of being speculative and therefore untrue) comes from the positivist camp. On the one hand, any research relies on speculative working hypotheses; the most powerful empirical advances have come about through the boldest hypotheses. On the other hand, every historical science moves in the field of probability and speculation, since no exact statements can ever be made about past events and historical contexts; verifiability is tied to traditions, the accuracy of which is only ever highly probable, if at all.
I suppose possible readers of this work love Christianity. They will feel attacked in their most important identity. That is what the reactions of the people I have tried to make familiar with my thoughts so far show. It is very difficult to take up reflections, which one assumes are directed against one's own existence, still with the normal of-fence. The fears that my thesis triggers in Christians (whatever Christians are) make it almost impossible to argue objectively about the question of whether Christianity is a mental illness. For Christianity is an infinitely positive value for Christians, a spiritual disease a negative one.(Adorno, Bemerkungen über Politik und Neurose, in: Kritik. Kleine Schriften zur Gesellschaft, Frankfurt/Main 1971,87-92) I am not concerned with the destruction of Christianity, but with the reflection and correction of those statements within the Christian faith that can mentally destroy receptive and sensitive people, in particular the Christian hostility and flight from the world, taken up by Plato. It is also about the injustice inflicted on many lunatics for centuries by treating them like animals of a zoo, while at the same time members of the church community, whose appearance is quite similar to that of the outside world, are often respected to a considerable extent. But what is foolishness before the world, God has chosen, that he may shame the wise; and what is weak before the world, God has chosen to shame it, what is strong."(1 Cor 1:27) This is precisely the resistance of the paranoiacs to the" reason "of the guardians of the madhouse. There's an explosive force in it. This reminds us of Jesus in the debates on the earrings and the Torah. The Pentecostal church was laughed at as "full of sweet wine". The original church was still the madhouse, where it went haywire like in a Baptist congregation. The Lutheran worship service has become a compulsive act in which former forms of psychotic experience have been redirected into predominantly neurotic rituals, but which offer schizophrenogenic double-bind structures for sensitive souls.
There is a bundle of methodological difficulties: On the one hand, schizophrenia is classically divided into three forms, i. e. hebrephrenia, catatonia and paranoia. Accordingly, the forms of Christianity that could be diagnosed underneath it are equally diverse. Kraepelin's "nega-tivism" is most likely to emerge, i. e. all forms of individual protest, while the literal seriousness of biblical sentences often takes on lifting-up forms, such as the refusing to eat, for example, who wants to crucify his flesh.
On the other hand, Christianity should be systematically examined at the following levels:
1 New Testament: Letters of Paul and the johannean circle with gnostic dualism
2. dichotomous dogmatics: doctrine of sin, ecclesiology, ethics, especially 2-Reiche doctrine
3. theoretical teaching as catechism, confirmation courses, Bible lessons
4. practical mediation as a worship service with liturgy, songs, sacraments and pre-digt
5. communication within the community in group work, festivals, church congresses, etc.
This comprehensive research work goes beyond the scope of a seminar paper. In the near future, this is all about eye-catching convergence and not a comprehensive piety analysis. It will be recognized that many syndromes and symptoms of schizophrenia can be diagnosed in the opus paulinum et iohanneum, the Protestant exegesis, dogmatics, ethics and community work. Catholicism and free churches remain unnoticed, although there is still room for much more discovery. One hardship case is Jehovah's Witnesses and similar free-churches with a small, firm and manageable social structure.
When I speak here of Christianity, I am referring above all to the German Lutheran core congregation thinking, as it is learned by heart in Luther's Small Catechism during the confirmation classes and is therefore known in wide circles of the people's church and in Bible circles, which SMD and evangelical groups is a communist communion that guides action.
Faith as a dogmatic system in the Bible, teaching, preaching and rituals can be schizoidal, while schizophrenic is only the concrete believing individual. Thus, one can speak more cautiously of a schizoid faith structure, while the schizophrenic stage of the loss of reality can only reach individual, especially religious individuals.
Laing distinguishes schizophrenic from schizoid. He says that a schizoid structure of experience (i. e. of the inner and outer world) is not yet schizophrenic. Certainly it is something else, if someone under stress overload or in the experimental psychosis with LSD experiences a split in consciousness, a detachment from reality only for a short time and afterwards is again able to perceive reality in the prescribed form. Or whether you have lost forever the ability to combine different experiences into one single being. The difference is that the schizoid is able to participate in "our" reality. It is therefore only a question of which normative structures and which modes of experience are united as "reality". According to Laing, the schizophrenic characterizes the schizophrenic, in contrast to the schizoid, that he does not participate in our reality. Under this condition, one cannot say that Christianity is schizophrenic. After all, the church Christians manage to cope with others in living together and to integrate themselves into the "reality", into the satanic "kingdom of the world". But this reality, however, has been marked by the influence of Christianity for more than 2000 years. Therefore, the difference between Christianity and what is now considered to be real under general consensus is not entirely dissonant. This difference becomes greater in the confrontation of Christianity with other cultures. In the Soviet Union, the acceptance of Christian behavior was lower. For this reason, many Christians of the inner church circle could be forcibly interned there as soon as they began to thwart public appearances against the regime. Whether Christianity is schizophrenic will depend on what we labelled "reality". By reality, I mean the most advanced state of the art in science, humanity and culture. In a liberal society with a pronounced freedom of religion, one will leave each little animal its placeholder and a da-me, which makes the pedestrian zone insecure with a poster "Jesus lives", its joy. They won't lock the weirdoes up right away.
The Iranian dualism of good light and bad darkness, heavenly revelation and a deluded world permeates the writings of Paul and John everywhere. This structure is schizoid and divides the entire cosmos into a sinned unclean realm and a sacred pure realm. The fear of the area of sin and the escape from this sphere inevitably leads to a paranoid perception of the world. The devil could be behind all this. The schizoid dogmatics, it is literally perceived as a lift, thus leads to paranoia on the level of lived piety. The catatonia often consists of compulsively repeating a certain gesture or scene. These can be attributed to worship rituals - in a less life-threatening form than with the Stupor. The liturgy and the sacrament want to achieve the same thing as the cathedral through its constant repetition: they recall a past experience, adhere to it, however convulsively.
It might be appropriate to speak of a schizoid structure of the Christian faith, which finds its way both in the kingdom of God and in the kingdom of this world.
The first building block of the religious double bind is: God sees and hears everything. "Lord, you are the one who demands me and knows me. I sit or stand up, you know; you understand my thoughts from afar. I go or lie down, you are around me and see all my ways. For behold, there is not a word on my tongue that the LORD knoweth not. You surround me from all sides and hold your hand over me. This insight is too wonderful and too high for me, I cannot understand it. Where shall I go before your spirit, and where shall I flee from your face? If I lead to heaven, thou art there; if I begged with the dead, behold, thou art there. If I took wings of the dawn and stayed at the outermost sea, your hand would lead me there and your right hand would hold me. If I were to say: "May darkness cover me and may there be night instead of light around me - then darkness would not be dark with you, and the night shone like day. Darkness is like light. 23 Explore me, O God, and know my heart; test me, and see what I mean. And see if I am on the evil way, and guide me in eternal ways."(Ps 139)
The second building block is the teaching that mankind is all too often a sinner. He can't help but be a singer and has always eaten something that God's esteemed watchdog attention doesn't miss. Even the slightest aggressive impulse, anger, insult is sin. All fundamental instincts of self-preservation are sinful. "For I know that in me, that is to say in my flesh, there is no good in me. I have good will, but I cannot do good."(Rm 7,18) Man is fundamentally evil. He's mortal.
The third building block, the prohibition of naming and communicating the contradiction between man as an image of God (Gen 1:27) and a damnable sinner, is to ascribe such questions and doubts as a challenge to the devil, who tries to dissuade one from reason and faith with the whore. Then the contested person must be prayed for and he himself must also pray that these evil thoughts, a clear sign of his sinfulness and confirmation of building block 2, will leave his brain. Many psalms also ask God's protection against the doubters and mockers who make fun of the believer when his God has given him illness or bankruptcy, punishment for love.
There is no possibility within the theological discourse to step out of this trap and say: something is completely wrong here. I am not a sinner when I am angry at a God who is allegedly omnipotent and who sends the people for whom he murdered his Jesus to the gas chambers without helping them. Is that still within the framework of "Whom God loves, whom he chastises" to answer for? Either God is omnipotent, but then he is also a terrible manslaughter, or he can do nothing against it, then he is powerful in the weak ones, thus powerless against the lords of the world. Then he doesn't look into my heart in a controlling way. Then I don't have to confess and always feel guilty. He who asks such questions blasphemes at God. He can't be a pastor. He belongs excommunicated, so that the power of defence will not be destroyed in the fight of faith against the enemy world which Satan has forced through.
Among the members of the core congregation there are almost always depressive characters such as Luther, in se curvatus, who at the same time produce an oversized narcissism in the knowledge that they are chosen by God. From a psychiatric point of view, this depression is a precursor to habitualized schizophrenia. The formula for practicing this induced depression is the confession before the Lutheran Lord's Supper, which according to the Small Catechism every confirmant of my time has memorized: "Almighty God, merciful Father, I, poor, miserable, sinful man, confess all my sins and iniquity to you, with which I am ever angry with you and your punishment temporally and But they are all very sorry and repent me deeply, and I ask you, through your unfounded mercy and the innocent, bitter suffering and death of your beloved Son Jesus Christ, to be merciful and merciful to me, to forgive me all my sins and to give me strength for the betterment of your Holy Spirit. Amen." What does it do with a 13-year-old adolescent who, apart from a few pranks, has committed no crime other than his father, who was allowed to witness mass executions? In the Catholic confessional, sex is the only sin that one is aware of, and it is the only sin that is preferentially spoken of. The wonderful onanic experiences or petting actions become sources of guilt, which otherwise has only one lonely contradiction against the father to show. The increasing sex drive of the young person does not allow for any of these sins to be inflicted, and incites God's anger temporally and eternally, and it is also terrible that Jesus died for this eternal resurgence of lust. Thus, the overpowering sex drive in youth becomes a welcome source of an overpowering sense of sin - in the encouragement of real and serious sins. You don't blaspheme God, go to church on Sundays to get your stamp in the confirmation booklet, obediently honor the parents who get really rough, don't kill anything until one day accidentally a snail, don't break a marriage, just steal a cream candy from the kitchen cabinet, lie because you later say that you weren't, don't desire the woman either There is practically nothing sinful about tapping the Ten Commandments. At least you still have sex, which is always forbidden and the only tangible sin that comes to mind. So one is glad to have finally found a suitable sin for confession and has something to be ashamed of. Then it finally works with confession and with the necessary feeling of self-deception, with shame, embarrassment, with suffering under the hot flesh, which persistently hinders the inner man (Rm 7,22) in his devotion. This is an ideal-typical religious pedagogical reference to the contrite readiness to receive divine forgiving grace. Ruffles or sluts who have been guilty of worse offences are only allowed to stay for a short time in church groups and quickly leave behind the ragged church groups in search of bigger adventures. You have the chance to develop a healthy ego. In confession and Kyrie, the others learn every Sunday to define and feel themselves as poor wretched sinners. This is an important precursor on the way to isolating the body with its constantly new germinating lust as something alien, animal, disgusting and to experience it truly as It, which the I is hostile to, desperately, abandoned, full of shame, not to be able to resist more strongly and again and again and again to be forced to sexual acts. I don't want to, but my hand is rubbing. How embarrassing, humiliating, the shame of awakening from powerlessness after orgasm and understanding what has happened. Once again, they have not managed to resist. This is the tertius usus legis in action: the prohibition creates the recognition of sin as repentance, which the Gospel can gratefully accept from grace on the basis of Christ's death on the cross. Three days later, three days later, the next sin will come again. The adolescent young Christian finds himself more and more disgusting, embarrassing, disgusting.
The authors of the Bible use mythical world interpretation. This contradicts today's scientific knowledge and is therefore to be understood as a historically conditioned level of knowledge, but is no longer acceptable for the interpretation of our world experience. Bultmann therefore wanted to demythologize the texts. He did this by replacing it with Martin Heidegger's mythology while maintaining the statements made in terms of content. We will try to translate them into our myths. Every theology is such an attempt to translate into the modern myths. Our reality essentially consists of the modern myths that force everyone in the social organization to make their "real-world experiences". The diversity of myths determines whether something is insane. Mostly this is called mentally ill, which finds less powerful representatives. The myth of the weaker group is considered to be the sick one. If illness is defined by me through suffering, this does not come from within - in any case in the psychic field of sensation, which is certainly not detachable from somatic experience - but is first and foremost the result of social discrimination and oppression, which affects all myths and worlds of experience that are less well represented. Christianity therefore had little reason to suffer in the times when it was in concubinage with the state leadership: as a state religion and state church. In this "heyday" the alleged pagans and witches suffered more. Christianity as a myth of the ruling class has thus always been dominant against mental illnesses, as it has always been dominant in all other cultures. Just remember the extermination of the Incas, Aztecs and Mayan cultures by Christians like Cortez. Or inquisitors in the Middle Ages, whose cheap imitation is practiced today in the fight against the "Politgangster" (Dregger) of the Baader-Meinhoff Group. I claim that this power of Christianity is over today. The parish in the middle class is no longer the medieval clergy, who came immediately after the nobility. Today, a people's church is the desperate attempt to suppress the decay of the church and its so-called "core communities". It's m. E. no downsizing. I believe that the church has slowly lost its role as a role model in society.
1. Fears of reality implosion, devouring, depersonalization, real auto-nomie. Sexuality and rebellion against parents, teachers, pastors are excluded as devils rock powers and lust and anger are feared as hostile impulses.
2. The self is dissociated from the body and/or other behavioural systems perceived as "wrong". Lust and rage are flesh that can be overcome. I don't want to have these impulses, they are Satan who has come into me. I'm not that.
3. The isolating retreat from the feared (world and other people) impoverishes identity and leads to longing, envy and hatred of the outside world. I fight with all my strength against my lust and anger, while the others are unrestrainedly making out and boasting about their sexual experiences.
4. Fourth guilt will experience paradox. On the one hand, I'm ashamed of myself, on the other hand, I could kill him with rage.
5. It can come to identity diffusion with music, the universe and God (whatever "he" is) (Laing, Das geteilte Selbst aaO 112). When we sing together in the divine service, we merge with the angels in heaven and a wonderful community has developed.
6. The Self seeks security in controlling reflection. Why can't I let the finger of my pussy/tail? I only lasted three days without it. What does God think about me now? Tomorrow I'm not going to spend the whole day trying to figure it out.
7. The whole world is a prison, and pursues the self (Laing aaO 98). The others will let me out of it when I tell them how great it's been in the church again. They think I'm a hillbilly man, and they don't want to get involved with me. They don't invite me anymore and whisper to each other about me. Of course they're whispering about me, who else? They're embarrassed to be seen with me. They hate me because I became a Christian. You're breaking contact with me because I'm a Christian. This is just like that, as a Christian the worldly people don't want to know anything about you anymore. They despise and mock me, but I am not alone; Jesus is the same, and he is with me and helps me against the others. The more they think I'm stupid, the clearer I've fulfilled my mission.
8. Actions cannot say anything about the self. God looks into my heart and knows how I feel. He knows that I am too weak against this disgusting masturbating animal in this repulsive body. And he forgives me every time I show any regret. Lord, you know how helpless I am, how much I would like to serve you with amicability and how little I can do it, please stand by me against this loathsome animal with its lust and anger.
9. The cataton does not perceive the outside world, the hebePhrene selects only direct communication, the paranoid assumes hidden meanings behind everything. The Self is weak.
In the Old Testament history reports and the narratives of creation, God was experienced as the guide and mover of the world. Nature and history were direct witnesses to God's being. Their being was inseparable from God's being, conceived and experienced. God's experience was also cosmic. God and the world were no contradiction. But already in some psalms the singers complain against the ungodly and sinners. Through the Torah a distinction between righteous and sinners is made possible. The Torah is seen as God's most clear message to his people. A divorce of the people is carried out on it. The primary demarcation has therefore been made in human relationships. The pious divorced themselves from those who did not rigidly participate in the morals of the Torah. The ungodly were the first enemy area of the world experience of the pious. However, there were many of them. What a flood made necessary. However, the natural disasters were accepted as God-given; especially the protest against the natural disasters was regarded as godless and had to provoke further punishments, Exodus 16f. God came in fire pillars, bush fires, shared the sea, thundered out of the clouds, was a gentle whispering. He fought in the wars, sent fog and droughts. Later on, God's aggressions were also directed against his own people. That's why it must have done something against God, the prophets said. They called for conversion. In short: apart from the godless, the world was interpreted as God's medium. Since God was respected and loved by the pious, the world was also loved and respected. She was divine herself.
The New Testament cosmos feeling is quite different. Nearly all writers, especially John, see the world as a hostile force into which God enters as Jesus. His kingdom is not of this world (18,35), but God loves the world (3,16) and judges it in the cross (9,39). Discipleship was a small group, unlike Israel. They had the whole world, even the Jews, against them. That is why this sharp demarcation from the world was necessary. It had to compensate for the weakness of this small group. Thus the disciples were the light of the world (Mt 5:14), as was Jesus (Jn 8:12). The disciples were given missions for the world (Mt 28). God is set against the world (Rm 3,19). His wisdom is foolishness for the world (1 Cor 1:20) or vice versa. Christians no longer feel at home in the world (4,11). Influenced by gnosis and apocalypticism, the idea of two worlds is conceived. This world and that world are now opposites (Mt 12:32). This world is provisional, fleeting, evil and in need of salvation through Christ. The early churches should not be put on an equal footing with it (Rm 12,2). One can speak of a hostility to the world on the part of Christians. The world receives all the predictions of evil, false and dangerous. The non-Christians were also counted among the world, so that a confrontation of
(World, Gentiles, Devils, Sin) and (God, Christians, reconciliation in the cross for believers). The relationship with the world is - psychiatrically judged - paranoid. In the world, Christians are afraid (Jn 16:33), it is the basic feeling of being able to be devoured, the devil looking for whom he can devour (1 Pt 5:8). The fear of the invasion of reality is on an equal footing with the world view of the first Christians. Fear of depersonalization is scarcer in NT. The feeling of being an object, however, is expressed, for example, in Luther's statement that man is ridden either by the devil or by Christ. Man is subject to foreign powers (Rm 8:35-38). But God is a personal God and is characterized by overcoming these powers. Sin is regarded as such a power that drives the I into proportionlessness.
Sin as an urge into the disproportionality (Jüngel, Tod 99) to God is always mediated in the AT always personal. Sin is mine or your sin. I am the subject of my sin, I am the sinner who walks away from God. I do this by refusing to obey the law of God, the Torah is acting. Therefore, in the AT it is possible to speak of sin (pl.); this refers to the individual transgressions of the Torah. The sins are transcendence to the law. Of course Jesus passed the Torah too. The Sermon on the Mount antitheses radicalize the Torah and call for an internalization of these norms. For the Jew, the Torah could be something alien to himself; on the other hand, Jesus polemicizes and wants the behavioral patterns in human relationships, conceived as forms of the relationship with God, to emanate from the ego and not from an alien morality. I do not know if this is achieved by adapting the ego to Torah and prophets, i. e. internalization of a primarily alien and possibly unfamiliar. Enemy of the egoistic superego, which leads to the suppression of It-aspirations (Mt 5:29). Or whether the antitheses should say that it is pointless to follow external norms if they contradict the ego and its intentions. (Mt 5:21-26.28.37).
Jesus' most radical abolition (in the Hegelian sense) of Torah and prophets, that is, of all tradition, lies in the double commandment (Mt 22:34-40). The commandment of the love of God of whole hearts, whole souls and whole minds supports the assumption that Jesus does not demand a total internalization of thoracic normation, but uses apparently radical legal images only to form a parable for a relationship with God that comes from the core of the I. Neighborly love, like self-love, i. e. the re-connection of social love to the ego, also seems to indicate to me that Jesus wants to put the ego of every human being in the foreground of relationships with God and other people. Metaidentities (as I act before others, as I act before myself and as before God) Jesus does not want to (Mt 6 :1ff, 5.7.16ff). Schlatter's interpretation of these passages as "selflessness" is misleading. Bonhoeffer's "follow-up" hit it off with the term "oblivion". (Dietrich Bonhoeffer, Nachfolge, München10 (Kaiser) 1971,136) Jesus asks us to forget metaidentity and - even more than Laing - to forget self-identity. Bonhoeffer already suspected that there is a God-relationship in which the question of identity becomes a minor matter in the face of God's all-embracing love. Under the condition of the double command of God's love as love for men Mk 12:33 parr. that it is the self that is in relation to man and God. The so-called double-command is not a double rule at all. Firstly, it is precisely the union of love for God and love for humanity that says that this love is not twofold. But then God and men cannot be two different things. The best example of this is the two-natured God-man Jesus Christ himself and his incarnation in all his smallest brothers (Mt 25). Secondly, the Greek a)gaph=seij will always translated saying : 'you shall love! It can also be a future tense in grammatical terms without hesitation, that is to say it can be understood as a promise or the theologically popular "promise": you will love. This would also expose the repressive translation system of the old church, which wants to command love. "To love is a double bond." One should do something which, by its very nature, can only be created without compulsion. A double bond does not belong to the' double commandment' either. For the double commandment is precisely the abolition of all legal provisions. The Pharisees ask Jesus for a law. He uses their question as a pendant and brings a paradox: the supreme commandment is to do something that cancels out all the commandments. Jesus transcends every legality. For the laws are mediators of God's will. However, one means refuses to be direct.
Jesus' revolution of the relationship between man and God and other people is the introduction of immediacy. He goes into a world full of mediation - he talks directly to everyone, to the Pharisees without great diplomacy and tactics, with the sinners, i. e. those who do not have a relationship with God and the people of Israel according to Jewish opinion, Jesus has the most direct contact. Whether Jesus cuddled with women or men is not handed down to us except for Lk 7,36ff, 8,1-3, John 8,3-11, the secret Gospel of Mark, Gospel of Thomas 114 and Gospel of Philip 32 (Magdalena of Jesus "Companion" teFkoinwnos). Maybe the early communities didn't care. Maybe it was too natural to be mentioned. (Shalom Ben-Chorin, brother Jesus. The Narazener from a Jewish point of view, Munich (List) 1972,127ff assumes that every rabbi was married, so also Jesus.
As Jesus fights sin: He sets up relationships with the excluded. In the eyes of the law-abiding people, he had to appear as a sinner and was executed as a blasphemer. His death is the result of an unswerving urge to change conditions. So Jesus overcame sin. So he bore sin as the Lamb of God of the world (Jn 1:29). A particularly impressive picture of this is the resurrection of the dead. Death as a result of the sinful urge to become disproportionate (Rm 6,23) is the ultimate in disproportion; Jesus overcomes him and creates new relationships between the young man and Nain and his mother or with Lazarus.
However, this idea of sin, which is fixed on the person, is increasingly diminishing in letters. Expressions such as' our sin' are rarely still used; the singular' my sin' is no longer present in the active vocabulary. The idea of sin is depersonalized. Sin is now an alien power that overwhelms the I and puts it under its control and under its law. There is a "law of sin" (Rm 8:2), i. e. an irreversible causality in the decay of relationships. She is subject to the ego passively. It's only a rescue to put yourself under a different causality. The "law of the Spirit" (Rm 8:2) or faith is this saving power. The experience of sin and faith as "laws" is a sign of feedback circles that are perceived as a causality. It can also be explained as a hermeneutic circle, as a vitiosi. For the psychoticist, all experiences are only confirmations of his preconceived opinion and experience, e. g. that all looks are deadly rays and all people want to torture him. But the more he fears and isolates himself, the more he experiences himself as powerless towards other people and powers, the more he increases in isolation and/or his fantasy systems and is only confirmed by reality - if he does not ignore them. There is an identical structure of sin as an urge into proportionlessness and the paranoid isolation effort. That is why, at first glance, it seems that overcoming sin in faith is an act of recovery from this paranoid tendency.
Faith can permeate anything, enlarge like grains of mustard to the mustard tree. He is a shield and saves, even from illness. Your faith has helped you' says Jesus (Mt 9:22) to the Blood-Rin. He who believes will be well. Illness has always been a punishment for sins. Since the sick were avoided - with the exception of exceptions - illness itself was a state of sin: the sick person was almost disproportionate. This does not apply to all diseases, but to infectious diseases such as leprosy. With the healing of the disease, the lack of proportionality was lifted. Faith could thus create conditions. For Jesus, faith in Jesus means having the most direct relationship with him. Faith and trust are Greek one (pi/stij).
In Dyads we saw that a fundamental paranoid suspicion can lead to reciprocal suspicious spirals of mistrust (eg I love you; I fear you don't love me; but you show me through your behavior that you love me, presumably you play this before me to make me not sad or angry, you don't want me to notice it, so you mistrust me.
When Jesus says that one is saved, when one trusts him, then trust means, as an absence of mistrust, that all the thoughts which one person makes about another, thoughts which therefore stand between the two and prevent directness, come to rest and the distrustful and anxious doubter gains a direct relationship with Jesus. Faith is an immediate relationship. Faith as a subject has the believer. And yet there is also a certain way of attacking positive feelings, of joy, tenderness, warmth, admiration and sympathy that evokes the grace of others in me. My faith is inflamed by your trustworthiness. Because I see how you have helped others, I can imagine that you are helping me too. This makes me open for the inner changes that are necessary to get well again. That's how my faith in you will help me to get better. I believe. Jesus talks about my faith and your faith.
Jesus died, he was tortured to death. The relationships of love were broken. Not only the relationship with Jesus was broken by his death; Jesus' relationship with God was broken off, even if Jesus does not want to break the relationship from his side, and from the endless loneliness of a suffocating man he cries out his despair against God: "Why did you leave me? Today it is said that he only piously recited Ps 22, not complaining.
Even Job's curses against God reveal more relationship activity and trust than the disbelief called obedience. They will insist that Jesus, out of obedience, went to the cross. This is how the Gospels portrayed it. There will meanwhile be enough people who have proven that Jesus did not die intentionally, not even to ignite the Kingdom of God (as Albert Schweitzer said, cf Reich Gottes und Christentum [I] (1967), Gesammelte Werke IV, 511-731, Berlin 1971). To portray Jesus' death as an act of obedience is historically untenable. It's probably community building. Jesus' cries on the cross express the despair of his failure. As its last proclamation, it calls out from the solitude of God's abandonment.
After Jesus' death, the circumstances of the disciples broke down. They scattered for fear of being persecuted. They reacted so realistically paranoid. Through Jesus' death, three levels of relationship broke. The faith in him as the Messiah was disproved. It wasn't him.
Grief is the most intense preoccupation with the lost lover. Sadness fails because of reality. The mourner must give to the beloved. But it's not that fast. It's a process. The deceased lover often appears to the mourner as a vision. This shows how intense the relationship with the beloved was. Freud now distinguishes between two ways of dealing with the loss of loved ones: sadness and melancholy ('Trauer und Melancholie', WW X, 428ff). Mourning is the libidinous recasting of objects. The libido, which was previously directed at the lost object, is slowly transferred to another object, so that it can be replaced by the lost object and the loss can be overcome by a profit. But a prerequisite for this are suitable objects of love, Freud did not seem to have thought of that. Melancholy internalizes the lost object so that it can always be with you. Some of Laing's patients internalized this after the death of a parent. The mother, her manners, her language, her breathing, her make-up and her clothes, everything is then imitated perfectly and the schizophrenic can finally play the role so perfectly that he is her. The mother then became a self system in the body of the schizophrenic, separated from the true self of the schizophrenic, but a false self system. It may be that the schizophrene, if he had no dislikes against the mother, gives up his old self entirely in favour of the mother incarnation. He will only perceive the nested mother as false self if he hated her. Then he will separate himself from the hated being in him and free up more and more space for him through more and more retreats of the true self into the vacuum. When a loved one nests, on the other hand, the identity of both can merge. Freud calls this act melancholy. He describes it as unrealistic behavior.
Jesus was seen - according to the earliest confession 1 Cor 15:3ff - first by Kephas, then by the twelve and finally by more than 500 brothers at once. The teachings about the interpretation of this w)=fqh are very controversial. I think it is a melancholic internalization of Jesus, which has led to the loss of Jesus in the context of mourning and the task of dealing with the loss of Jesus, first of all to a vision of an individual.(Yorick Spiegel, Der Prozeß des Trauerns. Analyse und Beratung, München (Kaiser) 1973 differentiates shock, control, regression and adaptation as the 4 phases of mourning and reports 171ff on visions of mourning in the 3rd phase, the regression. Kephas will have certainly shared this experience with others and thus evoked a first collective vision among the disciples equally affected by the death of Jesus, which eventually led to mass hysteria in a kind of mass hysteria. Visions are perceived as real. This is shown by hallucinations in the experimental psychoses with LSD. There are also collective visions, for example, of Indian tribes such as the Yaqui in northern Mexico and the Native American Church with their Peyote mescaline trips to Easter. In this respect, it is historically probable that the talk of Jesus' resurrection was based on collective Easter visions. (Ernst Benz, The Vision. Forms of experience and imagery, Stuttgart (Klett) 1969; Manfred Josuttis/ Hanscarl Leuner, Religion und die Droge. Ein Symposion über religiöse Erfahrungen unter Einfluß von Halluzinogenen, Stuttgart (Kohl-hammer) 1972, including: Wilhelm Keilbach, techniques of religious ecstasy, 9-22)
To present Jesus' resurrection as an "objective act of salvation" and to establish and prove it empirically with our categories of real existence verifiable fact is not only a document of the decline of theology to positivism. It is also a sign of inability to believe. For we walk in faith, not in seeing (2 Cor 5:7). It is a blatant lie to use words such as "objective fact" in connection with biblical tradition.
The story of Mothman from Point Pleasant in West Virginia may serve as an illustration of the emergence of mass hysteria. He is described as a 1.90 m tall, dark winged creature, wingspan 3 m, with shining red eyes 5 cm in size, a black angel. He was seen on 14.11.1966 at 23.30 o' clock on the coal dump of a shut down power plant near the "TNT-area" by two couples. He climbed up out of a dust cloud, flapping his wings, flying over the car of the Scarberrys and Mallettes several times and disappeared. The following day, the local cheese leaflet Point Pleasant Register titled: "Couples See Man-Sized Bird... Creature... Something". This triggered a series of other sightings in the vicinity. Linda Scarberry saw him several times in the following days, even sitting on the roof of her house. Others saw his sharp claws, others appreciated him to 4m size. Exactly 13 months later, a bridge collapsed there. An ancient Iroquois legend predicted that when such a creature appeared, an accident would happen. It was obvious to combine the large Virginia eagle owl with the collapse of the Silver Bridge. Many readers who had already seen the Mothman in the past and had also experienced accidents as a result of it came forward. There were even UFO sightings nearby, which probably made him an alien. They hunted this harbinger of the harbingers of the beast and one of them shot a Virginia eagle owl. First doubts arose. When the reporter Mary Hyre, who had been committed to the sensation of the moth man, died, the sightings also ebbed away. Here a striking analogy to the Easter visions of the disciples can be seen: First the announcement of a first vision triggers the series: "and that he has been seen by Kephas, then by the twelve. After that he was seen by more than five hundred brothers at once, most of whom are still alive today, but some of them fell asleep. After that he was seen by James, then by all the apostles. At last of all he was also seen by me as an untimely birth "(1 Cor 15:5-8 cf Lk 24:34.50; John 20:19;20,26)
Paul himself also had a vision (Acta 9:3ff) with a subsequent 3-day catatonic stupor at the gates of Damascus:"See nothing, refuse to eat. His individual vision of Christ, which was not shared by companions, was unlike the visions of the disciples, not a vision of form, but a vision of light, a passing psychotic decompensation episode with spontaneous remission. It had the same structure as the St. Stephen's stone (Acta 7:54-60) or also Jesus' baptism: Heaven on and voice from above. Kraepelin regards such things as "acute confusion". “In individual cases, ideas of greatness predominate: Many sick people are high persons, have been in heaven, have seen the Savior, travel to America." (Kraepelin aaO 39) Paul, as a pious Pharisee, had taken on the fight against the new sect of Christians. He must have been extremely intensely concerned with this phenomenon, because he hated the Christians and devoted his full time to the fight against them and was pleased about the St. Stephen's Apostleship (Acta 8:1). When Jesus asks Saul in the Damascus experience why he hates him so much, the feeling of guilt towards the 5th commandment has manifested itself here in the heavenly voice. The GESTAPO work (Acta 8:3) and the fun of executions were no longer internally compatible with the ban on killing. The torture man is emotionally affected by the victim.
Laing reports of several patients who are taken in by hated persons, i. e. the hated person's self-inclusion. However, most of them remained divided within themselves. Hitchcock's "Psycho" dissects this resurgence of the murdered mother in her murderous son, who turns into a werewolf-like creature into his dead mother's clothing and then kills what the son loves.
It is possible that Paul has partially lost his old self in this conversion. He then set up a completely new identity system, only in some places do fragments of the old brutal self still appear (e. g. 2 Cor 11:22; Phil 3:4ff). The extremely pale vision of the Paul corresponds to the fact that he had never experienced Jesus himself, but only had secondary information. From the internalization of Jesus' experience of interrogating victims, from the very first oral tradition as a precursor of the Gospels, his meagre knowledge of the historical Jesus feeds on. Therefore, instead of a design vision, only a light vision has been made. Nevertheless, he joins the line-up of true Jesus visionaries who have seen Jesus as a man in dialogue, like Lk 24, thus claiming the authority of the apostles for himself and competing with them.
The argumentation of Paul against the denial of the resurrection has three steps: 1. if there is no resurrection of the dead, then Christ has not risen either. If Christ is not risen, our sermon is in vain; 3. your faith is also in vain (1 Cor 15:13f) Paul presupposes the phenomenon of resurrection before accepting Christ as risen. If it is true that the resurrection is about visions of the bereaved, this logic suggests from Paul that such visions of resurrection were not so rare. Christ is not preached as the only risen one. Paul confesses that the visions present Jesus in another medium than flesh and blood, namely in a spiritual body (1 Cor 15:2ff). All he saw was light, not a man. Spiritual is a perception under the influence of spirit. The abandonment of these visions was for Paul the pneu=ma, a power that the early church called the holy, divine spirit. Only under the influence of this force could Easter visions be experienced, he says. The disciples who were initially scattered had reunited and experienced 40 days of Jesus' visions (Acta 1:3). The 40 stands for a religious incubation period before the eruption of the religious volcano of divine revelation, as in Jesus' temptation. They lived together. Pentecost they once again had a collective vision of tremendous intensity. Outsiders thought they were drunk (Acta 2:13). Even back then, many people were sceptical about the visions. It can be said that the terrible experiences of Jesus' death in the disciples after the shock phase set in motion overwhelming melancholic potencies and mass psychotic escape attempts from the reality that Jesus was dead. Probably the disciples were too weak to cope with death as a fact through mourning by diverting their libidinous occupation of Jesus - which is no doubt - to another human being. For the disciples, Jesus had been the deciding relationship person for the disciples during their lifetime and had determined their meta-identity, the disciples were incapable of developing their own autonomy and had their identity determined by their relationship with Jesus. With the death of Jesus, their identity was destroyed. There was no other man similar to Jesus to whom they could have transferred the libidinous occupations of Jesus, so that the basic condition of a non-melancholic mourning work was dispensed with. Freud's concept of marriage work, however, is inhuman in that he considers it healthy to replace one with the next. Humanity is irreplaceability and human beings are not objects of the libidinal occupation. They are not toilets that fall under the category of being occupied. They are also not psychohydraulic steam engines.
Jesus was for the disciples at the same time a vital mediator of their own identity and an unavoidably beloved Lord. That is why they were not able to do any mourning work objectively, but had to fall into melancholy in order to survive. They've done it, but on the condition that they become me-lancholic. Or expressed in terms of the double bond theory: Jesus was the disciples' elementary identity and thus the guarantor of the disciples' own identity. Besides, they liked him. His death robbed them of their identity and a loved one. In addition, all hopes of the promised kingdom of God, which had already begun in the experiences with Jesus, were shattered. The disciples were therefore in an untenable position; their social death was sealed by Jesus' death, their wandering radical movement was crushed. The only way for them not to give up was to flee into the world of fantasies and visions, which at that time received a much more positive assessment than today, namely as a sign of divine spirit, as divine revelations. Her disciple identity, social cohesion and spiritual life of the world with all his hopes was restored. By the fact that Peter was the first visionary, he had been able to automatically assume the role of the religious revelator and thus successor of Jesus in the movement. It was like a prophetic vision of his vocation that he was the legacy of his leadership role. The broken hopes were now eschatologized, i. e. directed to the future, Jesus lived with them in his new spiritual body and saved them from libidinous changes. I would use the language of mass schizophrenia here for the first time. In prayer they had hallucinated the person of Jesus and his healing powers penetrated into their bodies, so that they too could perform healing miracles. The comforter was the substitute Jesus, who showed possession of the holy spirit in its multiple forms from glossolalia to miracle healings, the person of Jesus worked directly in and through the disciples/apostles.
The visionary vocations empower the visionary to speak directly in the name of God. This had a high degree of credibility in late antiquity. Today, however, someone who is similar to a divine mission becomes an inmate of a mental institution. In the overwhelming majority of cases, more or less pronounced size ideas are added to the impairment ideas. The sick person has suffered "admirably", will still accomplish great things, is called to higher things, has to expect a better lottery ticket in the future. Sometimes it is vivid dreams that lift him up and compensate for all adversity. In these "nocturnal spiritual wastes", the violence of God leads him to foreign countries, brings him into circulation, including those of the sexes, with high persons and gives him promising promises for the future by means of manifold depictions. More often still, there are individual visionary experiences understood with clear consciousness. The sick man awakens in the night with indescribable feelings of delight, feels as if he is flowing through and illuminated by the holy spirit. His eyes are dazzled by the light that fills his bedroom; a wonderful scent flows in. He sees God in the form of a star, a meaningful figure of points of light, a glorious figure in exquisite robes, the Mother of God, angels with golden wings carrying a royal crown, the Christ Child holding him by the hand, the globe, the emperor with a shining sun. He hears a voice in more or less clear terms, announcing his high mission to him: "This is my dear son, in whom I am well pleased", "You are forgiven for your sins" and the like. Sometimes such experiences are repeated several times in longer spaces. The illusions of the senses also often gain pleasant content. God Himself speaks to the sick, appoints him as Emperor Rothbart, gives him huge sums of money, marries him to a princess "(Kraepelin aaO Vol. II, 194f) The conviction that he is filled with the divine Spirit in a miraculous way often develops gradually, even without Damascus or hardcore conversion experience of evangelical sin When he prays, fertile rain comes down, or the cloudy sky suddenly clears up as soon as he enters the street. Falsified memories awaken the ill person's imagination that God preaches to him everything that happens. During the development of these delusions, which are carried out in a few months or years, the cranes remain prudent, oriented and orderly. They are, especially in the beginning, quite willing to explain their ideas coherently, to justify, to fight objections; it is "method" in madness."(Kraepelin aaO Vol. II, 195)
The grandiosity of the chosen one is sung for the simple user of divine services in german “Protestant hymn book” songs: Evangelisches Kirchengesangbuch (=EKG) 28,2:"Since I was not yet born, you were born to me. And you chose me as your own before I knew you. EKG 441,2:"Peacekeeper, I was chosen on the first day when I was born to be your blessed child of grace; you gave me gifts from heaven because we have nothing good of our own and are lost without you. O Jesus, my rest, I joyfully reach for the gifts which you have given me again this day through your mercy for my blessedness." The EKG is permeated by this thought of choice: I am chosen, God's love-ling child.
The song "El Condor pasa" sings of a Tupac Amaru chieftain who attempted a rebellion against the Spaniards in the Inca Empire in 1780 but was captured and killed. In the Indian legends, he evaded capture by flying away as a condor. A similar behaviour has been chosen here in order to overcome political resignation. The hero didn't die, he's still alive. And he lives in every voice that sings the song. He lives on as the archetype of liberation. Only when the liberation has been achieved can this song be forgotten and the grandmothers sing it to their grandchildren only as a youth. Unfortunately, Incas are exterminated. The song was too weak against the Spanish. And Jesus was too weak in the visions of his followers to have stopped the Spaniards from the bestial final solution program. Jesus' failure continues in this.
The more distant the impressions of Jesus are, the more abstract becomes what the apostles and the early churches of Jesus imagine. Paul can therefore no longer speak of Jesus from Nazareth, but only of his spiritual - i. e. schizophrenic-psychotic - experiences of Christ. Christ is in him: "I live; but not I, but Christ lives in me; (Gal 2:20) Christ has now taken the place of the former self of Saul with Paul. Paul is the home of another man whom he has not even seen in the flesh. However, Paul can still realize that he is Paul, the apostle. Clearly, however, his statements do not reveal the intrapsychic relationship of being Christ and being Paul at the same time. He can also say that he is in Christ, as he says he is in faith. For Paul, there seems to be no big difference at all between who is in whom. Schizophrenics often lose the ability to distinguish between outside and inside; therefore, this confusion may also be conditional on Paul.
It is not unusual for several people to occupy their own bodies with different, even several people. The physical delusion of persecution is given a very peculiar education in that morally significant clinical picture, which is called "obsession mania". Here, the enemies who torment the sick are transferred into their own bodies. The persecutors now sit in their ears and numb the sick person by their greyish crying and cursing, but more often in the abdomen, ascend up to the head, close the sick person's throat, thicken his blood, open his skull, force him to the strangest actions, and talk to him out of his belly of blasphemous things. Here it can happen that the enemy in his own body is joined by another, friendly minded power, which pushes him into one half of his body and leads long, fierce battles and discussions with him. While the persecutors in the formerly described forms were generally thought of as a mysterious mob of nihilists, freemasons, and social democrats, in the latter cases more religious beliefs tend to be used as explanations. It is a secluded soul, the devil, an evil spirit who has taken possession of the body of the sick person, and to whom, under certain circumstances, the dear God or one of the archangels may confront victoriously. This self-doubling of the personality reminds us of those dreams in which we have extended conversations and are often surprised by the striking reasons for our opponent's proof."(Kraepelin aaO Vol. II, 193f)
I tried to characterize the faith in Jesus before his assassination as the urge in proportionality and I did not doubt the mental health of this relationship. The situation is different after Jesus' death with faith. The use of the language of faith is changing to the non-personal state of being, which is no longer able to show a direct relationship with Jesus, except for the psychotic experience. The glossolalia was considered a prophetic charism. Just as Delphis Pythia babbles in front of her trance-steam column, which their priests vaporize to sense, so also Asia Minor and Greek congregations played oracle hour in the service. Paul does everything in his power to enable the churches to participate in this partial psychotic decompensation. But it doesn't work for many of them (2 Th 3,2) Apparently not all psychotic experiences could be experienced even then. The ghost blows where it wants.
Now the problem of proclamation arises. The Pschotic experiences of the Easter visions were acquired in an untenable situation after Jesus' death. However, this untenable situation has only been experienced by a few. They cannot comprehend the new addresses of the Gospel. Nor can it be assumed from the outset that they are schizophrenic. The Gospel sermon must therefore contain elements that put the addressee in an unsustainable situation, and faith then offers itself to the matt-chess-set. That's my guess.
Main elements of pauline sermon are the Dualismen of
1 chose 15. Adam Christ (Rm5, 11 first-class)
Death new life
Good works Gods justice/ grace
Thinking means thinking: differentiate, but Paul is something other than mere distinctions to help us think. He divides the whole universe into affectively positive and negative antipolarities. This black-and-white painting of the world may be due to the history of relics (e. g. in the Old Testament, in Persia's light eclipse) as well as to the persecution situation of the community: For such a relatively small group in the existential threat, it is vital to divide the environment into blatant poles. Ingroup norms, beliefs and behaviours must clearly cut themselves off from those of the majority of outsiders, which promotes the social cohesion of the group and denies its members the possibility of returning to the outside world all too easily, because its norms have been affectively negatively occupied. The smaller a group is, the more threatened, the more important it is for them to establish a group identity that portrays the group as[precious, good, just] and the environment as [bad, evil, unjust and hostile]. (Luise Schottroff, Der Glaubende und die feindliche Welt. Beobachtungen zum gnostischen Dualismus und seiner Bedeutung für Paulus und das Johannesevangelium, WMANT 37, Neukirchen-Vluyn (Neukirchener) 1970) It is althought possible that this paranoid identity of the group of real people affects human being more than the norms of its environment.
The double bind consists of two opposing statements plus a third statement that refuses to clear the field, preventing it from leaving the unsustainable position. We find this third instruction to be bad in the attribution of the world outside the Christian community. The two kingdom doctrine fulfils this function of holding Christians in the kingdom of Christ at the stake. The untenable situation in itself is created by an immediate contradiction, such as experiencing sin in one's own body and flesh, but still loving God inwardly, Rm 7: The person is divided into flesh and spirit, and that is an unbearable suffering against himself. I'm in evil strong flesh, I'm good weak mind. I can't do what I want. A prime example of a hebephrenic from Kraepelin's Heidelberg madhouse: "Delusions are also emerging, which at times even come to the fore in the clinical picture. First of all, the same ones use to be more sad content. The sick man is to blame for everything, a great sinner, murderer and patriotic apostate, has made false statements in court, has stained himself, does not come to heaven; he is lost, damned, doomed to evil, is judged for time and eternity, deserves death by fire; he is "as if the devil wanted to go on for a long time after him". He is fixed, observed, gossiped, bewitched, is to be killed, declared a spy, shot, be made to be an angel. They give him poison in his food, musk water, "shoe nail juice and potash", take his blood, bring him dirt under his hair, disgrace his face, make his thoughts, artificially influence his actions, feed him the words. The seed is aborted, nature thrown into his face. Women see themselves persecuted by gentlemen, are chloroformed and dishonoured at night, "made" without nature. The body melts; the joints crack; the feet break; the blood does not melt; everything inside is burned and rot away; everything dries up."(Kraepelin aaO Vol. II, 150)
Paul benefits practically from sin. He assumes that all men have the law. Here again we notice the completely undifferentiated abstract use of the grasping power of Paul. The theological framework is made up of de-personalized, collectivized and generalized thought patterns. It is repeated through all texts with a small variation width. Not only the Jews are given the law by the Torah, but also the Gentiles have it in their hearts (Rm 2,14f). Paul is right: in every social structure, redundancies of behavior and speech are manifested in norms, in morality and in a stabilizing law. A common moral ethic thus creates the conditions for coexistence par excellence, but at the same time proves to be one of the most important instruments for asserting and stabilizing power and rule. (...) Conscience - called' superego' in the language of psychoanalysis - is to be understood as the psychic instance that enables the individual and forces him/her to live in harmony with the collective and his/her expectations of behaviour. (...) A' bad conscience' is at first nothing more than the feeling of being in conflict with the social environment and its expectations. This explains the fact that people who behave differently from the social norm tend to be part of a group which in the same way enables members of the group who deviate from the norm to endure their outsider status. Because the general deviation in society is the norm in the group. (Gunther Soukup, in: W. Gottschalch et al., Sozialisationsforschung, Frankfurt am Main8 1973, pp. 154-157) Whether gymnastics club, fixer, rocker, panderer or esoteric youth sects, each subculture generates specific norms that link inwards, splitting them off from the outside. They form an inner world within the group, which promotes functional communication there, but is hardly capable of being conveyed to the outside world and is in part in considerable contradiction to the general social norm (BGB, StGB).
The behavioural norms of former societies were usually extremely rigid; the Torah can only be respected with the utmost effort and restrictions of the individual. It was therefore almost impossible for the individual to comply with the rigid legal requirements. In addition, the Torah was repressive against the individual intentions, which in turn has a high aggression potential. The aggressions will presumably have been expressed not by better observance of the commandments, but by increasing the deviations against the Torah. This gave the individual the impression that it was maliciously against the law, if it had come to an internalisation at all. Deviation from the law as a divine regulation of human relationships was sin - the impulse to be disproportionate to God and the whole of the people. Sin is something negatively affected, caused by the rigid sanctions which the people gave to the dissenters, such as Jesus of Nazareth. The almost inevitable deviation from the law had to cause a penalty in the individual. It is in conflict: if it follows its own intentions, against the Torah, etc., it exposes itself to the sanctions of the people and even to the appropriated disapproval of its superego. It thus becomes self-contradictory. But if it follows the law, it becomes frustrated, develops aggressions until it is no longer able to control itself and the aggressions unrestrained break out into illegal behavior. Sin is therefore a dilemma produced by inadequate moral codes. Laws that were once enacted as promotion can, under other circumstances, become a brake on and an inhibition of loving coexistence, as Jesus shows again and again, whether ear-cracking or emergency aid on the Sabbath, whether purity laws that served to avoid epidemics and currently demand that no help be provided. Thus, aporetic, unsustainable situations arose: those who kept one of the 618 commandments violated the other. One could not sin. The way of life of a Thora devoted took on the traits of the bizarre, even inhuman.
Paul was a Pharisees, and knew the Torah's double bond very well. "But the law has come to pass, that sin may become more powerful. But where sin has become more powerful, grace has become much more powerful..." (Rm 5:20) Law and sin are in a circulus vitiosus. So in order to stimulate the sinful dilemma, one needs the law. According to Paul, it is to serve to recognize sin (Rm 3:20), whereby Paul is probably silent that sin is only the product of the law. He calls the law the power of sin, and so it is said something similar (1 Cor 15:56). The righteous one was the one who kept to the law. Justice was founded on the law and the lawfulness thus had a share in justice. To have a fair share of justice was nothing more than social affirmation within the village community or synagogue.
Paul builds on the feeling of failure in the sin-double bond. The only escape or overcoming of this dilemma was a reduction of divine reality from the law to faith in the redemption by Jesus' death. The confirmation of social integrity has been replaced by God's righteousness, which now comes from faith. The recognition of the Self by God and others is no longer achieved by law enforcement, but only faith makes righteous (Rm 4,5). The faith in Jesus as the Lord and Savior after Jesus' death is based on the melancholic internalization of the lost real Lord. In exactly the same structure of psychotic internalization, God's righteousness is now taking place. What was previously expressed in it through social intercourse and behavior - the identity of the individual as a sinner or righteous person - is now apparently released from social control into the psychotic relationship with Christ. Paul forms a new double bond, which contributes to the confirmation of the state of psychosis Faith. Paul argues that God had taken his son Jesus as our substitute for us sinners and that is why our sins were forgiven because of Jesus' death. Sin is already completely abstract. The principle of balance righteousness is subordinated to God if one believes that God has once and for all forgiven our sins through Jesus' death. Jesus was only a bestial sacrifice of God to himself, according to all our sins. A loving God would have to be insane to practise such a legal formal masochism: God as his own executioner, his own beast. Whoever thinks of God that way has probably been disturbed in his Oedipal phase. The son is murdered by the father. This motif of moloch sacrifice in Gen 22 is a fantasy of strong expression about castration anxiety. Jesus was castrated symbolically and representatively for us or deprived of his potency and had to suffocate on the cross after extensive torture.
Sinfulness is a metaidentity, sinners become sinners through their uncompliant behaviour. Paul pushes it to the top: every man is a sinner. He no longer accepts the Jewish divorce of the righteous and sinners by law, because it was a feint of the pious, and no one could ever fully live according to the law. He had apparently tried this in his youth as an impeccable Pharisee. (Phil 3:3-9) Moreover, one could even sin with the law, i. e. the law and its minimal literal observance could be used as a presentation to be seen as just before the public. The upper class of the Sadducees seemed to have the hybrid self-confidence of many rich people that they were committed to law-abiding as a cultural asset to enhance their reputation. Therefore Paul says that there is no difference here: "they are all sinners, and lack the glory which they should have with God, and are justified without any service from his grace by the redemption which has happened through Christ Jesus" (Rm 3,23f). Thus he is close to Jesus' double commandment of God's love for neighbor. It is also a criticism of the Torah: it did not lead Israel into the kingdom of God, in which neither slave nor suitor is any more, but all class differences are abolished Pentecostally. Since Paul cannot, however, break up Jewish feudalism, he tries to instaurize the idea of a free fraternal conviction of equals before God. Before God, everyone is equal, and equally bad. This disassembly of the upper class arrogance, which was characteristic of the Jesus Movement, however, underwent a transformation in the course of church history into an insult to the public of the church people in general. The melancholy people in Kraepelin's psychiatry are the product of this mediation of a German consciousness of sin from the pulpit: "Frequently, the suits of self-accusations play over into the religious realm. The sick person can no longer pray as he used to, has lost faith, God's blessing, lost eternal bliss, has committed sin against the Holy Spirit, has not visited the Church diligently, sold the divine, has not sacrificed enough lights, has fallen away from the Lord God, has not possessed the devil; the Spirit of God has left him; the evil enemy has wanted to take him away. He is as if he was not allowed to enter the church; he must go into eternity with the blame of the sinful guilt, redeeming poor souls " (Kraepelin aaO Vol. II, 319)" The common origin of the ideas of sinfulness and the disgruntlement from a pathological change of the overall condition speaks also for the frequent observation that the self-acknowledgement of the church is not possible. He notices that he always makes new mistakes, so stupidly thereforeredet, insulting everyone. "The church-trained investigation of one's own sins can increase so much that a person becomes completely incapable of acting and visits the shelter of the clinic.
The glory (kau/xhsij), ie a "sustainable social position" (Bateson), is missing to all before God. Sinners are in an unsustainable position before God, analogous to their unsustainable position before men. Paul thus ascribes to all people a metaidentity that makes it impossible for them to stand autonomously in dignity before others and God. Thus prepared, he now assigns redemption to those who have been squeezed into a corner. He means whoever believes in Jesus is righteous. Jesus objectively brought the identity of all people before God into a different light, reconciled them, made them children instead of servants. Thus, any action dedicated to the development of one's own identity has become superfluous, and even ingratitude to Jesus.
Jesus has provided for a sustainable position of all before God. Anyone who wants to define his or her own identity falls back into the category of metaidentity as a sinner. This new identity can therefore not be influenced from any side, perfectly protected against any access from outside (other people) and inside (Ego) and God (the Jesus' healing act 'obliges' to love). It transcends every experience, is transcendental. The self cannot prevent itself from being loved by a God who lets his sun rise above good and evil. The lawfulness as a tool of religious self-representation is thus completely nullified.
Works do not do justice to God's good will. The dilemma: I am justified by the cross, whether I like it or not. Nothing else justifies. The second condition of justification is my faith: only if I believe that I am justified by the cross, I am justified. To see through this contradiction is, just like faith, not everyone's thing. The believer must be passive towards God, let the justification action be joyfully received through him, only then will he be right to God. In this way, Paul deprives the listeners of the power of disposition over their own identity. Only those who surrender without protest under God's compulsion will have a relationship with him. Under the condition of renouncing every self-mood, the underage Christian gets a share in the boundless love of the Father. Those who do not participate remain in sin, which was demonized by Paul before. The story Lk 18:9-13 of the Pharisaean and customs officer, told in the children's worship service, illustrates the self condemnation as praeparatio evangelii. The work of self-destruction is morally superior to the pride in one's own achievements to improve social conditions.
The sin situation - once taken up in the self - is so full of moral depressive substance that from here the leap into the psychotic existence of faith with the lure of the unassailable identity as child of God and participant of the part easily falls to the contrite repentant (the true church and congregation of the saints). As with any classical schizophrenia, identity is protected against any social attack. The lack of autonomy is compensated in the transcendental identity of being loved by God. The congregation, with its super-great love for all those who belong to it, in the knowledge of the exuberant grace of God, becomes a new home for the contrite sinner. The new slogan is: "We are good, because we know that we are all bad and can only live by God's grace. But the others who do not want to know or believe this are even worse. They are so wicked that eternal damnation blossoms.
The Pauli thrust was originally revolutionary against the arrogance of the law-abiding legions and all the sick, who excommunicated them and at the same time united God's love with social integration. It was a battle formula against religious excommunication. It has turned into a damaging formula in the socialization of Christian children. They are ruined by the small successes of their personal development. They learn not to enjoy what they themselves produce. They are denied recognition and praise for their small achievements, thereby reducing the motivation for further initiative. Instead of receiving praise for their small progress, they get hammered into their heads that they are bad people and that God, whom they cannot see at all, has slaughtered his son for their malice. With this message: "You are to blame for the death of the Lord Jesus", a masssive negative self-image is instaurated. The free development of a life-affirming and self-determined ego is nipped in the bud. Instead, this poor sausage is to sing incessantly in the service: "Lord, have mercy! And after a word about the grace of God, praise him. This proselytizing proselytization is a development poison for young people. They learn that they are not worthy to stand before God, but he only speaks one word, and they can breathe again because they do not receive the death penalty, just as Jesus did then, whom they can see hanging on this torture device above the altar. I describe this dilemma of believing in the justification by Jesus' death from the cross so drastically, because I myself have lived through it as a priestly son. The accompanying measure was the frequent beatings on the naked ass, similar to Luther. It makes it clear that sinfulness and the threat of divine violence in the Last Judgement are probable. Such Christian socialization under the doctrine of justification is a straitjacket from which no child can escape. It learns to thank and love God out of fear of an even more terrible criminal court. It does not get to know God as a liberator from need, but as the most strict judge in the world, who now demands full thanks for his extraordinary clemency, but also full thanks, all the love, with all his heart and mind.
An essential difference to the clinical schizophrenic is that the isolation circles of Christians do not end in a vacuum, but in God and through God then in the church, which forms a social fabric. Catatonic Christian schizophrenia was rarely catatonic, apart from saints of the sows and hermits. Hebephrenia was also absent, apart from fundamentalist verbal inspiration teachings. The paranoid features were sharply defined. There was a strong fear of a relapse into sin. The world and death, the transient body and all things on this side were shunned. The highly developed self-reflection and control of schizophrenics is clearly evident in Paulus? texts.
According to Emil Kraepelin, however, the congregation of worshipers shows astonishing similarities to his catatonic inmates of his Heidelberg lunatic institution: "An individual contrast to these phenomena, in which the general resistance to any change in the current state is expressed, is formed by the often prominent signs of increased influence from outside. This is where catalepsia, which in such conditions is used to achieve its highest level of education, belongs above all to catalepsia, which without exception is shorter or longer lasting. Rarely and mostly only temporarily one encounters the echolalia or even the echopraxy. The patients simply repeat the speeches addressed to them mechanically, or at random, they repeat them, tune into a song of their neighbours and repeat it; they imitate more vivid gestures, which are presented to them in a vivid way (lifting their arms, clapping their hands), make a movement (beating beats, rolling their hands around each other) and make a movement that is stimulated from the outside (beating beats, rolling their hands around each other). Sometimes you can even see her doing everything for hours on end that a certain person does to her environment, telling her everything, walking behind her in the same pace, dressing and undressing with her and the like." (Kraepelin, Psychiatrie. Ein Lehrbuch für Studierende und Aerzte, Leipzig (Barth) 1899,166f) The liturgy habitualizes the echolalia and echo practice. The only difference is that the faithful become active in worship because of an addressed command, while the schizophrenics in Kraepelin's madhouse participate of their own accord.
The spiritual possession of the Glossola gifted is also to be found in the madhouse:"The refusal to eat changes abruptly with greediness; the perhaps for weeks motionlessly dumb sick man suddenly begins to loudly eject some completely incomprehensible cries, Kikeriki, calling Hurrah..." (Kraepelin aaO 167) Patients often register their environment meticulously and show that they are not at all stunned. The surprising change from one ego-state to the other, which Kraepelin so wonderfully unintelligently described, also takes place in the divine service: First the totally contrite confessor with his Kyrie, but then the full cheering and saluting manically overextended. A normal person does not turn from zero to one hundred within 10 seconds of the adage of grace. On the phenomenological exterior view, the behavior of the madman and the Christian in the service of God is strangely similar. Only the "negative", the total refusal to obey the orders of the chief physician, is not to be found in the divine service. This is also the central difference between church and madhouse: the Christian is obedient, the madman rebellious. A rebellious Christian, however, was - at least for a short time - Martin Luther. He was then also banished by Pope Leo. “Threats leave no impression at all on them; they may stretch out their tongues if desired, if they are told to cut them off and now approach them with knives or scissors." (Kraepelin aaO 175) What must these inmates have endured all the harassment? It is only understandable that they have practiced all possible forms of there protest with faeces and urine in this milieu.
According to Niklas Luhmann, religion is reduction of world complexity. Christian self-reflection has not lost its paranoid character. Up to Bonhoeffer's ethics, for example, the world has the character of the penultimate improper, provisional. (Dietrich Bonhoeffer, Ethik, München 1949,85) The real homeland of Christians is - in Pietism and conservative churchism - still in transcendence. After death, a resurrection of all the dead is to take place, and then one comes before the final judgment (Mt 24), threatened by the apocalypticism of the Old Testament, from there to the various divisions of heaven and hell.
Hell and purgatory as scenarios of paranoic vision may have been overheard of earlier punishments; but in any case, however, these visions were the ideological basic potential for the modern births of paranoid hell mania in the slaughterhouses of human beings such as Auschwitz. As an unconscious longing, the horror of the biblical apocalyptic apocalypse, which is deeply dormant in the soul of the people but officially feared, came to fulfilment hoped for by anti-Semitic German Christians. Those who have practiced the Lord's tale in the case of the church Jesus can do so more easily and quickly, even in the case of earthly authorities prescribed by God (Rm 13). The martyr loves every coup d' état on his hump because he sees in it God's loving rod. (Pr 3:12; Heb 12:6) Torturing is an immediate manifestation of God's fatherhood (Heb 12:7-10). This also allows strict church discipline with warning, warning, ex-communication and burning to protect the delinquent's self and to anticipate the inevitable purgatory. Precisely because everything here on earth is so unreal, more can be struck, exploited and tormented. Only the final court and the punishment that precedes it simultaneously reduce the paranoia that they generate; stop the pursuit of all their visions in concrete political action.
Someone escaped from the medieval church-breeding at the cost of his life. The Christian community as a terror system in the name of God's love suspects anyone who does not want to participate correctly, immediately of the diabolical obsession that must be exorcised. "You don't have the Holy Spirit, dear brother." In this church discipline, the world is breaking out. What was despised, avoided and abandoned as a hostile world with its deadly sins, returns to the kingdom of Christ, the Church. The community is a total institution like jail and the madhouse, but without barbed wire and walls. The walls are ideological in nature. Whoever wants to flee gets to feel the whole social discrimination of his former social network. You pray for him, you attribute him with offensive terms. You don't greet him anymore, cut him, ignore him. The former homeland becomes a devastating enemy. Church discipline may well be able to survive in the future in the age of pluralism, but in sects this harsh bandage finds undiminished attractiveness. Whosoever is familiar with chastisement from the devout father, feels at home in the hardcore troop of congregations and sects with a strong end-time emphasis. The strict rules of the monastery and evangelical sect are the same as the stanchions in prison provide security. The hard bandage hurts, but also gives support to weak souls.
The awareness of belonging to a collective of saints, a Salvation Army specially chosen by God and protected from eternal damnation, congratulates the individual members of this elite unit in an extraordinary way. The Christian is a holy messenger of God like an angel, he is loved by God more than those out there in the hostile world, who sooner or later fall victim to annihilation and who are seen inwardly already in the purgatory of eternal damnation, as seen in the history of Lazarus Lk 16:23-25. The boundary [world - self] is progressively replaced by the boundary [world - church]. Participation in the Body of Christ is identified with participation in the church. The congregation assumes the function of the great mother, in whose nave the divine security becomes sensually perceptible in the nave of the church, through the merging experiences of common singing and speaking of confessional formulas, prayers and psalms. These confluences allow the ego borders to swim and re-enact the uterine safety again and again. At the same time, the community practises precisely the solidarity that the hostile world, with its class rule and administered technical coldness, lacks.
One could also suspect Bloch's hopes of God's kingdom of God to be paranoid, since they too dua-lise into the alienated world of late capitalism and the new homeland on earth and in heaven at the same time. However, the dialectic in the Histomat (historical materialism) does away with primitive dualization in higher forms of complexity. The former paranoid element seems to me to be that the prevailing economic conditions are regarded as bad and inhuman. The reaction of this insight, however, is not the recourse of the individual within himself or God and into the total unassailability of a vacuum isolated from reality, but the extrapolation of the wishes and hopes and intentions of the individual, which by means of the resulting solidarity leads to the action of the change of political persecution situations. Criticism of paranoia is not directed at the perception of the world as a prison, but at the Christian impotence as a way out.
The well-rehearsed certainty of an omnipotence father spares his sons all real action and makes them impotent, incapable of procreating social changes in the sense of progressive justice. The Christian constitutive experience of impotence is even glorified and transformed into the actual strength of the Pauline weakness rulers (2 Cor 11,30). The Christian as a castrato of God can never learn autonomy. He nourishes and guards his ego weakness with all care. Selflessness as a virtue says it most honestly: A Christian has no self if he is a Christian. Tool of God, instrument, object - not least the love object of the God of Love - in it the emptiness of the cave is revealed, in which the self rests with healthy people. The fear of real autonomy in Christianity today reaches the point where the person who calls God a friend is questioned about his legitimacy for theological study. The prayers to whom God prescribes his doing - often even instructions against his own "will" are regarded as proof of the authenticity of the revealed word of God (over me) - can be described as compulsively controlled. This time the engine is not the repressed drive, but the masterly superego, whose archetype is copied by the father. Among the reasons for medieval rape, it is clear that Luther calls Christ the Bridegroom and the Bridegroom the Bride. If we include the assumption that girls were educated in love-oriented technology in the Middle Ages as well, and thus trained for total social dependency, Luther says: "The Christian is dependent on God. Today, if someone is addicted to alcohol or hashish, he or she comes to the psychiatric clinic.
There he is caught in the strangest case by Jesus today and his addiction is redirected to Jesus. The Jesuspeople Movement helps the frailty of a post-war generation brought up too weak of self to reach its peak of weakness. Today they are already integrated again in the middle of the core business, which has to be great with the superpious imported from the USA - just like everything else in the USA. Together with the old Christian brothers they proclaim the emergency of confession and with a hatred copied from the student movement they demand on all worldly and diabolically anti-Christian vanity in the church: "No other gospel!
Christian paranoia is once again culminating in the church divisions and dogmatic repression of evangelicals. The devil powers have become worse than ever, they say. (Kurt Koch, Leben auf Abruf. Skizze der Endzeit nach Matthäus 24, Berghausen (Evangelisationsverlag) 1969) The devil tries to split. You wonder who's divided? And. who calls it a ghost divorce? And who presides over the judgeship of Mt 7:6?
Luther was manic-depressive. An extremely rigid upbringing and the mining superstition of his parents that the devil dwells in the pits and pit clogs led him to be terrified of the toilet and to constipation. Throughout his life, Luther was only able to drain his bowels with difficulty. The famous "Revelation in the Tower" took place while droppings were delivered in the supposed face of the devil. By leaving the evil behind and leaving the devil, Luther's spirit of enlightenment came upon him. (Erik Homburger Erikson, Der junge Mann Luther, Frankfurt/Main (Suhrkamp) 1975,225) Schlaginhaufen notes 1532 in a table memo: "lustus ex fide vivit, iustitia Dei revelatur sine lege. Mox cogitabam: Si vivere debemus ex fide, et si iustitia Dei debet esse ad salutem omni credenti, mox erigebatur mihi animus: Ergo iustitia Dei est, quo nos instificat et salvat. Et facta sunt mihi haec verba iucundiora: This art has given me the spiritus sanctus on this Cl. (WATR 2,177 No. 1681 see WATR 3, No. 3232: Rörer reproduces the statement WATR 2, No. 1682 as follows: "This art has the Spirit of God to give me on this cloaca in horto") That means: “The righteous man lives by faith, the righteousness of God is revealed without the law. So I thought: "If we have to live by faith, and if the righteousness of God must be for the salvation of every believer, then my soul was raised up for me." So this is the righteousness of God, by which he makes us righteous and redeems us. And so these words have become more pleasant to me. The Holy Spirit gave me this insight on the shithouse." Letting go of the Defecate intertwines with the experience of salvation. Psychiatrically, one could say that the revelation in the tower was a manic phase. Luther later often fell back into depression and denials; the new identity after his monasticism does not seem to have been so strong that his self became invulnerable. As Paul calls his life Phil 3:8 as sku/bala, Luther can express his depressive self-criticism in front of students: „Ich habe der welt sat, so hat sie meiner wider sath, das bin ich auch wol zufrieden. Sie meinet, wenn sie nur mein los were, so wer es gut; des wirt sie wol innen werden. Es ist doch wie ich offt gesagt: Ich bin der reiffe dreck, so ist die welt das weite arschloch, drumb sein wir wol zu scheiden.“ "I'm sick and tired of the world, she's fed up with me again, so I guess I'm satisfied. She thinks that if she were only rid of me, it would be good; she will probably become one of them. It's like I've often said, "I'm the stinking shit, and it's the world that's the big asshole, so I guess we're to be separated." (WATR 5,222 No. 5537 according Heydenreich)
In the Mansfeld Latin school, the lupus, a pupil's spy, noted offences such as cursing, witticisms, speaking German, etc. on his "wolf note". On Saturday this was evaluated. One prank per offence. (Erikson aaO 57;68f; 84f)"The Lupi-ceddel, item die Examina legor, legeis, legere, legitur, cuius partis orationis, these are the children of Carnificinae gewesen. I've been crossed out once for lunchtime at school fifteen times in a row. Ouodlibet regimen debet observare discrimen ingeniorum, you have to harass and punish children, but you also have to love them."(WATR 3,417 Nr. 3566B) "You should not steal the children too hard, my father thrashed me once very much so that I fled and that was in the bang, until he tried me against me to in the used I didn't want to beat my Hansen seher nitt gladly, sunst he became stupid and me enemy "(WATR 2,134 Nr. 1559)" My mother blows me for the sake of a nut usque ad effusionem sanguinis. And it's stricta disciplina me tandem ad monasterium farewell, as they have meant well, since ego pusillanimus tantum. Ipsi non potuerunt discernere inter ingenia et correctiones, quomodo temperandae essential. So you have to tighten that the apffel at the rod "(WATR 3,415f Nr. 3566A) "My elders have kept me hard, that I was shy about it too. The mother once for a small nut's sake, the mother gave me a nudge of blood, and the seriousness and strictness of their life that they had with me made me run into a monastery and become a monk; but they were very kind. Sed non poterant discernere ingenia, secundum quae essent temperandae correctiones. Quia one must therefore punish that the apple is at the Ru-then sey. It is a nasty thing when, for the harsh punishment of children, the elders are angry or pupils are hostile to their praeceptor bus. For many clumsy schoolmasters spoil his ingenia with their rumbling, storms, strokes and beatings, if they deal with children other than like an executioner or stickmaster with a thief."(WATR 3,416 No. 3566B)" Where father and mother can no longer do it, Master Hans, the executioner, must align and pull.” .“(M. Johann Mathesius, Leben Luthers 1565, Predigt Nr. 1 – WATR 1,167 Nr. 387)
Already existing neuroses are cleverly exploited by aggressive pietism in order to drive to God. Kurt Koch, like Franz Joseph Strauss, is an example among many others, who, like Franz Joseph Strauss, specializes in black vision and uses the fear of persecution that he arouses for the capture of human beings. In one of his 40 or so published tracts on anxiety, he says: "I know the meaning of neurosis. Pastoral care shows that neurotics and depressionists often have a more direct path to God than the mentally healthy and self-confident person. We have even among the great and most famous men of God those who have sometimes been afflicted by depressive phases. Neuroses and depression can not only be a burden for a person, but can also impart to him or her the depth of religious life. (...) Few people know that there is often a connection between spiritualistic activity and neuroses. About half of all the neurotics I received in pastoral care had spiritual ancestors or their own spiritual burdens. (...) The increase in mental and mental illnesses, the prevalence of special serious illnesses such as cancer, the frequent flight into suicide, lie in the contours of the final historical event "(Kurt Koch, Leben auf Abruf, Skizze der Endzeit nach Mt. 24, Evangelisationsverlag Berghausen, 40-42)
The paulinic sa/rc concept in its juxtaposition with the du/namij of the pneu=ma gives the most information about the embodiment of the self in the Christian. For the man of the OT, meat was the term for the material from which humans and animals are made, exactly as our language was used, in later times meat was called: man, living beings. Meat was a synonym for the identity of man or animal. With Isaiah, for example, we find sentences such as: "Break your bread to the hungry, and those who are without shelter in misery lead into the house. If you see a man naked, clothe him, and do not deprive yourself of flesh and blood "(Is. 58:7) But under gnostic influence we find the opposite of this call in the embodiment. Paul moans: "Nothing good dwells in my flesh" (Rm 7:18). Rm 7 is a classical schizophrenia-study: "For as long as we were in flesh, the sinful lusts which aroused themselves by the law were strong in our limbs (especially the one, M. L.) to bring fruit to death. But now we are dead to the one who held us captive, and we are rid of the law, so that we serve in the new being of the Spirit and not in the old being of the letter. What are we going to say? Is the law a sin? That's far away! But I did not recognize sin, except by the law. For I knew nothing of the lust, if the law had not said,' Let not thou be longed! But it took the sin of the commandment as an occasion and aroused every desire in me; for without the law sin is dead. But I had previously lived without law; but when the commandment came, sin came to life, and I died; and the commandment came to my death, which was given to me for life. For sin took occasion at the commandment and deceived me, and killed me by the same commandment. So the law is holy, and the commandment is holy, right and good. What's good is good, though, turned to death for me? That's distant! But sin, that sin may appear to be sinful, hath caused me death through goodness, so that sin may be exceedingly sinful through the commandment.
For we know that the law is spiritual; but I am carnal, sold under sin. Because I don't know what I'm doing. Because I don't do what I want, but what I hate, I do." This is the forced control by a false self system, sin. She'll do whatever she wants with the grading per.
“But when I do what I do not want, I admit that the law is good. So now I do not do it, but the sin that dwells in me. For I know that in me, which is in my flesh, there is nothing good in me. I've tried to do it, but I don't think I can do the good. For the good that I want, I do not do; but the evil that I do not want, I do. But when I do what I do not want, it is not I who do it, but the sin that dwells in me. So now I find a law that I, the one who in God's law according to the inner man (e)/sw a)/nqrwpoj - the true self of the schizophrenic). I see a different law in my members, which opposes the law in my mind and captures me (isolation of the true self) in the sin law, which is in my members. I'm a miserable man! Who will deliver me from the body of this death? I thank God through Jesus Christ, our Lord! So now I serve the law of God with the mind, but with the flesh I serve the law of sin." (Rm7:5-25) The Spirit is completely separated from the body and the instincts of Paul. This phenomenon of schizophrenia takes its name from this phenomenon of mental division. The body carries two hostile self-systems:
1. the true self, the inner man, the mind and spirit
2. sin with the lusts that arouse it. It is to be assumed that sexuality and other bodily emotions and needs are meant by this which Paul hates.
Paul's true self is capable of hating his body and the functions connected with it. The already mentioned basic conflict between the repressive law and the behaviors (' what I do') caused by basic functions and intentions of the human body is perceived as sinful and the true self stands opposite with its will powerlessly. Paul feels that the will of the inner man no longer has any influence on the self-regulating behavior of the body. The true self has no way of expressing itself in action, because all doing is already sin. The actions are attributed to Paul's foreign power, dominating him. In doing so, he skillfully shirkes any responsibility for his actions - at least his inner person and his true identity. Everything made sin in him.
The body will be well experienced platonically as a chain and prison, Paul's true ego is already dead to him, says Paul. By dying with Christ and rising up again in spiritual form (Rm 6:4-12) from the regularities to which every body is subject, e. g. mortality, like Jesus after his death, it stepped into the new existence of spirituality; but unfortunately this spiritual true ego of Paul is still bound to his body and is still dependent on him as a carrier and medium. That is why Paulus longs for the last step towards the total spiritualization of his true self, the redemption from the body of transience. The true ego of Paul, which is thought to be immortal, wants to cast off the ballast of transient corporeality in order to be completely free. That this is not possible without physical death (which would also deprive the true ego of any socially perceptible utterance, as Paul well knows!), poor Paul has to settle for the abandonment of his sinful body and finds as a way out the unpeaceful coexistence, or as Luther says: totus homo peccator simul iustus. The true ego of the Christian is just, the false sinful. Therefore, not much care and attention is used on the fur. If the heart-healthy Jesus was pleased with the anointing by a woman (Mk 14:3-9), the cripple Paul is full of hatred for his body, which torments him, and the world. He has skillfully shunned his social responsibility, at least in this way. His need for communication certainly drives him to mission; only if he creates or finds other people with the same division of spirit, communication is still possible in all his inconsistency with the body and the forms of communication based on corporeality. This requires the physical medium, but the body remains only a medium for spiritual communication. Language is the most essential form of communication, because only language is a true spiritual medium and immune to sinfulness - says Paul. The tension resulting from such hostility to the body has been preserved until today in bourgeois education and sexual enmity. The word became meat: Jesus. Success: The meat wants to become word: Paulus.
Jesus cried on the cross. The dying must have hurt him. Many martyrs did not cry out on their pyre and burning crosses. They sang church songs. Richard Wurmbrand is being celebrated today because he and some prison brothers in the imprisoned underground church in the east were not excessively unwell at torture. His physical insensitivity is praised as a divine miracle and sung about. It is a sure sign of schizophrenia, or more precisely: catatonic stupor as a form of detachment of the intelligent ego from senso-motor body functions. In Emil Kraepelin's textbook for psychiatry (he called schizophrenia still "dementia praecox" with sensory illusions, attention deficit, absentmindedness, delusions, emotional stupefaction, disturbances of the will such as neegativism, stereotypes, automatism. cf Psychiatrie. Ein Lehrbuch für Studierende und Aerzte, Bd. II, Leipzig (Barth) 1899,163f) mentions that patients needles can be pricked into the forehead without the patients pulling them out again. He writes: “The catatonic stupor is dominated mainly by the phenomena of negativism and command automation. The cranes become monosyllabic, taciturn, break off in the middle of the word or phrase, gradually cease to speak completely (Mutacism), or only here and there quietly have some incomprehensible words, even whispering self-talk, laugh. Sometimes they start to speak as soon as you make an effort to remove yourself, but immediately stop when you turn back to them. They are also usually no longer useful for writing, they break off after a few letters, playfully pass over the paper or only produce pointless scribblings. They don't look up when you talk to them, they don't turn their heads, maybe even turn away. In some cases, however, written answers are still received from time to time, or the otherwise silent sick sing a well-known song with a fine voice on command. Incidentally, they are completely inaccessible to any external influence, do not react to salutations, touches and even needle stitches; only a very lively stimulus leads to evasive movements even more rarely to an unexpectedly agile and powerful attack. Even an occasional soft blinking, increased reddening or sweating of the face, twitching around the corners of the mouth in such attempts, and flapping on joking occasions indicate that the perception of impressions is less disturbed than the initiation of an act of will to the same." With a doctor like Kraepelin, who saw patients no longer as human beings, but as objects of study, they have with their order to sing, as in the case of executions in a concentration camp.
Many people in Dachau have wished for physical insensitivity. They weren't schizophrenic. That's why it didn't work out and they kept suffering. To eliminate the sensation of pain, the flesh-body must be dissociated as part of the evil outside world. This presupposes the practice of a deep personal split long before torture.
Luther takes up Pauli's divorce of body and soul in the Freedom Letter. The Freedom Scripture also contains the essential characteristics of schizophrenia. The dualistic structure of' ‘free lord' and 'servant servant' alone, which is consistently explicit, is already significant. In Chapter 3 Luther writes: "Conversely, what harm is it to the soul if the body is trapped, sick and dull, hungry, thirsty and suffering, as he didn't want to? None of these things reaches to the soul to free it or to catch it, to make it righteous or evil." (Luther, SA 7,21) In a world in which bodies are maltreated, it is advisable to leave. In a broken far, the best way out is schizophrenia. Those who don't put any hope in transforming the world into a home of tender eroticism and love of life will be best advised to die off their bodies into spirituality. I'm not even thinking about it.
The unpeaceful coexistence of body and soul does not only leave it to the running of the body. (1 Cor 9:27)"All those who belong to Christ, the crucifixions of their flesh and their evil lusts (su\n toi=j paqh/masin kai\ tai=j e)piqumi/aij.)" (Gal 5,24) Passion and desire are the very own aspirations of the self, the most intimate thing about man, the motor of human action and human sociality. And Luther: "But these works must not be done with the intention that man should become righteous before God. Faith cannot tolerate this false intention, for faith alone is and must be righteousness before God. But only this can be the intention that the body should be obedient and cleansed of its evil lusts, and the attention should be directed only to the evil lusts, in order to drive them out."(WA 7,30f) What exactly these evil lusts are, one can only guess. It is probably mainly about sex, rather than about the neighbour's house or cattle, because the body or flesh is the source of irritation. This can become a real hobby: the more sex is forbidden, the higher the degree of excitement increases due to hormone secretions. The glancing of young girls becomes torture. The monastery can help. The energies that are deducted from a possible work to improve the world to fight against horniness are immense. Sublimation of the desire for sex in fieldwork or freedom fight along the frustrations>aggression-hydraulics is possibly an energy dissipation model. Drive suppression is always pathogenic. If the communion of suffering with the crucified God Jesus only consists in not wixing or fucking any more, then that is more than pitiful. Especially since Jesus loved women.
Luther achieves another double bind by means of the bi-enemy teaching. It forms a bridge between the sect and the political community and prevents the sect from coming into conflict with the political community. These conflicts could escalate and harm the sect because it has no means of power, such as the sword or the water cannon.
A. The Christian man is subject to the authority that has power over him.
B. The Christian's only master is God.
C. God has appointed the authorities.
Every ecclesiastical practice is affected by this problem. The state church has less difficulty because the crown and papal hat are in the same blanket. But it is in this respect that Luther, in particular, behaves rebelliously for a short time. Even if he later condemned the peasants who tried to take him seriously politically: Nulla crux, nulla corona. Where we now realize that states suppress their individuals and weaker states of the southern hemisphere, it is difficult to accept this matter as the rod of God (WA 19,629). If only God's rod in Treblinka had been made of German chemical industry, the IG Farben, had been made in Treblinka mainly in the state of gaseousity, precisely: in the lungs of man, woman and child of his chosen people. “I have a different conception of love, and I will refuse to love a creation in which children are martyred until death."(Dr. Rieux in Albert Camus, Die Pest, Reinbek, rororo No. 15,129) To a God who has appointed an authority to murder the children, the fight is necessary. I doom such a god. I no longer want to be the child of a God who is responsible for the injustice of the world. And this is God, if he is the Almighty Creator of the world. If he has not forgiven Adam for the apple bite, and has punished him so jealously-addictedly for the complicity of men. I refuse to love a God who loves the fascist Krupp boss Alfried von Bohlen und Halbach and his 25,000 Russian forced laborers in the same way, so that nothing changes in the relationship between powerful and weak, rich and poor, saturated and hungry.
The clever evangelicals generally say at this point: "Dear brother, you are confusing something. God is always good and almighty. It is the man who has refuted God's good will, who does wrong, not God. All suffering in the world comes from people and their sin. People are to blame for the slavery society, feudalism and capitalism, God did not want interest and exploitation. This logic is deeply unclean and cannot explain how natural disasters eradicate innocent people, how capitalism benefits us and how it bleeds out Africa, India and Latin America into our stock markets. But he can: "They are infidels, Muslims and communists, and God does not want to protect them as well as he wants to protect us here in Germany. In his prediction, he already knew this and is now drawing the consequences. You kind of deserved it, too. His thoughts are simply unsearchable, who wants to presume to scold him for it? You think you're better than God? You wanna stand up to his judge? A brief look at the social situation of those who argue in such a way shows that they are optimally cared for in the "country" and come from bourgeois circles without exception. They do not see their complicity in the world's hunger caused by their consumption. It is the droughts in the sunny south that can compensate for the aid packages from our overproduction. God can't help it. Neither do we. The network of arguments to defend God as the almighty keeper of one's own prosperity is perfectly woven. Those who do not follow these arguments are unreasonable and are prayed for, that they may also attain the appropriate depth of insight into God's mysteries.
I am ready to suffer with the God who cried in deepest agony when everything was lost. I have tears for the God who is compassionate with all the martyrs of this world, whose existence is, of course, suffering in a world of blood and tears.
The doctrine of the two empires made Christians stupid as salt of the earth. But what do they want to salt- with when they become stupid? When they withdraw from traditional paranoia and schizophrenia time and again into the inner emigration of their clergy and sin harmlessly in their flesh? The altar barking and the political arrogance are two sides of the same coin: that Christianity is sick. It would be time to thaw the frozen Christians out of their hibernation of the clergy and reintegrate them into a new worldliness.
Christian schizophrenia is not salvation. She is a kind of sighing within ourselves that unites all Christians with all creatures. (Rm 8) Redemption is before us, but not above us. We won't be healed by escaping into the disease. But by fighting together against what offends. As fellow combatants, we have God with us. He does not punish us sinners, but solidifies himself with the tortured creature. This change in the image of God must be proclaimed as an evangelism in the future.
But under proper guidance, schizophrenia is not only curable, but also the first and most powerful possibility to be reborn again after a deep regressive journey to death, the abysses of one's own abandonment, suffering mystically experienced death with Jesus. Mysticism of suffering is only dangerous if you can't get out of it. Love of God is dangerous only when it makes you dependent, submissive and underage. To return to the old world with God as a brother as a new man could turn the Church into a community of the laborious, the burdened and the mad. But then it is necessary to recover the carnal body and let the soul become a body with it. Only those who love themselves with their bodies can love others with their bodies. As a centre of warmth in therapeutic, social work and political organization and action, the Church can do something against the pathogen in society without the fear of being immediately put under the power of social death. Paradoxically apparent: the way to God leads through people; the way to people leads through God. But only apparently paradoxical; is God in Jesus man.
In the meantime a lot has changed in psychiatry, cf ICD 10: The harsh devaluations of psychoses have disappeared, the understanding for the patients has also grown through antipsychiatry. There is also a change in theology's assessment. Psychiatric pastor Ronald Mundhenk has worked with schizophrenics for 20 years at the Ameosklinik Heiligenhafen and described his experiences. (Sein wie Gott. Aspekte des Religiösen im schizophrenen Erleben und Denken, Neumünster3 (Paranus) 2007, 177-210) The only difference between the religious mystic and a normal psychic is that a mystic knows how to be embedded in his or her religious tradition, while a psychotic remains lonely and incomprehensible with the same experience, stigmatised and excluded from his or her surroundings The Christian tradition is thus a safety net for all kinds of decompensated persons. It can offer interpretative models of curious experiences and integrate people, and this is exactly what psychiatry has meanwhile become the goal of psychiatry: psycho-education in small self-help groups that assist and support each other, just as the residential groups of Laings and Coopers intended as pioneer attempts at that time.
In his training as a gestalt therapist, the author has had sufficient contacts to psychotic decompensation in order to understand this as a way of healing. The disease can become the route out of bad constraints. The Church can see the acceptance of eccentricities, depressive people, the crazy as an opportunity and celebrate the feast of the lost with the troubled and laden. All this is not glossy and presentable, but hard work in the inconspicuous area. Many things have changed a lot since 1974. The Church can no longer afford to rely on coercion and train young people to sin. The forms of the “context of delusion” (Th. W. Adorno) regarding the nature and effect of God have been loosened. Atonement sacrifice theology is no longer celebrated. The Lord's Supper has become a remembrance of the liberation and solidarity of the table fellowship of the oppressed throughout the world. Generally speaking, the schizophrenogenic musty smell of sinful double bind has disappeared from preaching and liturgy. The songs have changed. They no longer devalue the singers, but give their longings for a world without war and hunger a voice and melody.
Adorno, Theodor Wiesengrund, Negative Dialektik, Frankfurt am Main (Suhrkamp) 66
Adorno, Theodor Wiesengrund, Drei Studien zu Hegel, Frankfurt/Main4 (Suhrkamp) 1970
Adorno, Theodor Wiesengrund, Erziehung zur Mündigkeit, Frankfurt am Main (Suhrkamp) 1970
Adorno, Theodor Wiesengrund, Bemerkungen über Politik und Neurose, in: Kritik. Kleine Schriften zur Gesellschaft, Frankfurt/Main (Suhrkamp) 1971, 87-92
Adorno, Theodor Wiesengrund, Jargon der Eigentlichkeit, Frankfurt am Main (Suhrkamp)6 1971
Adorno, Theodor Wiesengrund, Minima moralia, Reflexionen aus einem beschädigten Leben, Frankfurt am Main (Suhrkamp) 1973
Barth, Karl, Der Römerbrief, München (Kaiser) 1922
Bateson, Gregory/ Jackson, Don D./ Haley, Jay / Weakland, John, Toward a theory of schizophrenia, in: Behavioral Science, Palo Alto (Wiley) 1956
Bateson, Gregory/ Jackson, Don D./ Haley, Jay / Weakland, John, Schizophrenie und Familie, Frankfurt/Main (Suhrkamp) 1969
Bauer, Richartz, Angepaßte Psychiatrie als Psychiatrie der Anpassung, in: Das Argument Nr. 60
Ben-Chorin, Shalom, Bruder Jesus. Der Narazener aus jüdischer Sicht, München (List) 1972
Benz, Ernst, Die Vision. Erfahrungsformen und Bilderwelt, Stuttgart (Klett) 1969
Berliner Studienkollektiv, Antiautoritäre Erziehung. Sozialisation und kompensatorische Erziehung, Ein soziologisches Seminar an der Freien Universität Berlin als hochschuldidaktisches Experiment im Sommer 1968 und Winter 1968/68, Berlin (Berliner Studienkollektiv) 1969
Bleuler, Manfred, Die schizophrenen Geistesstörungen im Lichte langjähriger Kranken- und Familiengeschichten, Stuttgart (Thieme) 1972
Bloch, Ernst, Das Prinzip Hoffung, Frankfurt am Main (Suhrkamp) 1973
Bonhoeffer, Dietrich, Ethik, München (Kaiser) 1949
Bonhoeffer, Dietrich, Wer ist und wer war Jesus Christus? Seine Geschichte und sein Geheimnis Stuttgart (Furche) 1963
Bonhoeffer, Dietrich, Nachfolge, München10 (Kaiser) 1971
Bonhoeffer, Dietrich, Wiederstand und Ergebung, Hamburg7 (Siebenstern) 1971
Buber, Martin, Ich und Du, in: Das Dialogische Prinzip, Heidelberg (Lambert Schneider) 1965
Collins, Ralph T., Affect in schizophrenic reaction types, in: Journal of mental science 89 (1943) No. 374, 21-41
Collins, Ralph T., in: Maisel, Albert Q. (Ed.), The health of people who work, based upon the reports to the 1959 National Health Forum of more than 200 Industrial Medical Directors, Physicians, Nurses and Management Officials, Public Health Officers, Voluntary Health Agency Officials and other experts in various areas of occupational health, New York (The National Health Council) 1960
Cooper, David, Der Tod der Familie, Reinbek (Rowohlt) 1972
Freud, Sigmund, Gesammelte Werke, Bd. X, XVI; XVII London (Imago Publ.) 1940-1952, Neuauflagen Frankfurt/Main (Fischer) 1952ff
Freire, Paulo, Pädagogik der Unterdrückten. Bildung als Praxis der Freiheit, Reinbek (rororo) 1973
Fromm, Erich, The Heart of Man, New York (Harper & Row) 1966
Fromm, Erich, Analytische Sozialpsychologie und Gesellschaftstheorie, Frankfurt am Main3 (Suhrkamp) 1972
Gehlen, Arnold, Urmensch und Spätkultur. Philosophische Ergebnisse und Aussagen. Bonn (Athenäum) 1956 [=Gesamtausgabe Bd. 5]
Gleiss, Irma/ Seidel, Rainer/ Abholz, Harald, Soziale Psychiatrie. Zur Ungleichheit in der psychiatrischen Versorgung, Frankfurt/Main (Fischer) 1973
Goffman, Erving, Asyle. Über die soziale Situation psychiatrischer Patienten und anderer Insassen, Frankfurt/Main (Suhrkamp) 1973
Goffman, Erving, Stigma. Über Techniken der Bewältigung beschädigter Identität, Frankfurt/Main (Suhrkamp) 1975
Gottschalch, Wilfried/ Neumann-Schönwetter, Marina/ Soukup, Gunther, Sozialisationsforschung. Materialien, Probleme, Kritik, Frankfurt/Main (Fischer) 1971
Haaker, Friedrich, Aggression. Die Brutalisierung der modernen Welt, Reinbek2 (Rowohlt) 1973
Habermas, Jürgen, Erkenntnis und Interesse, Frankfurt/Main (Suhrkamp) 1968
Heidegger, Martin, Sein und Zeit, Tübingen12 (Mohr/Siebeck) 1972
Hegel, Georg Friedrich Wilhelm, Phänomenologie des Geistes, Theorie-Werke-Ausgabe Bd. III, Frankfurt am Main (Suhrkamp) 1969
Hollingshead, August B./ Redlich, Fredrick C., Social Class and Mental Illness, New York
Josuttis, Manfred/ Leuner, Hanscarl, Religion und die Droge. Ein Symposion über religiöse Erfahrungen unter Einfluß von Halluzinogenen, Stuttgart (Kohlhammer) 1972
Jüngel, Erberhard, Tod, Reihe Themen der Theologie, Stuttgart (Kreuz Verlag) 1971
Jüngel, Erberhard, Unterwegs zur Sache, München (Kaiser) 1972
Keilbach, Wilhelm, Techniken religiöser Ekstasen, in: Josuttis/Leuner 1972,9-22
Koch, Kurt, Leben auf Abruf. Skizze der Endzeit nach Matthäus 24, Berghausen (Evangelisationsverlag) 1969
Kogon, Eugen, Derr SS-Staat, Das System der deutschen Konzentrationslager, München (Kindler) 1974
Kornhauser, Arthur, Mental health of the industrial worker, A Detroit study, New York/Oxford (John Wiley) 1965
Kraepelin, Emil, Psychiatrie. Ein Lehrbuch für Studierende und Aerzte, Leipzig (Barth) 1899
Kühnl , Reinhard , Formen bürgerlicher Herrschaft , Liberalismus - Faschismus, Reinbek (Rowohlt) 1971
Laing, Ronald David, Phänomenologie der Erfahrung, Frankfurt (Suhrkamp) 1959
Laing, Ronald David, Das Selbst an die Anderen, Köln (Kiepenheuer & Witsch) und Erice (Editione Continua) 1973
Laing, Ronald David, Das geteilte Selbst. Eine existentielle Studie über geistige Gesundheit und Wahnsinn, Köln (Kiepenheuer & Witsch) und Erice (Editione Continua) 1974;
Laing, Ronald David/ Philipson, Herbert/ Lee, A.J., Interpersonelle Wahrnehmung, Frankfurt (Suhrkamp) 1973
Lorenzer, Alfred, Sprachzerstörung und Rekonstruktion. Vorarbeiten zu einer Metatheorie der Psychoanalyse, Frankfurt/Main (Suhrkamp) 1973
Luther, Martin, Von der Freiheit eines Christenmenschen, Kritische Gesamtausgabe der Werke, Weimar (Hermann Böhlau) 1883ff (= WA, Weimarer Ausgabe)WA VII (1897), 12-38
Marcuse, Herbert, Der eindimensionale Mensch, Neuwied (Luchterhand) 1967
Schneider, Kurt, Klinische Psychopathologie, Stuttgart7 (Thieme) 1966
Schottroff, Luise, Der Glaubende und die feindliche Welt. Beobachtungen zum gnostischen Dualismus und seiner Bedeutung für Paulus und das Johannesevangelium, WMANT 37, Neukirchen-Vluyn (Neukirchener) 1970
Schweitzer, Albert, Reich Gottes und Christentum [I] (1967), Gesammelte Werke IV, 511-731, hg. v. Rudolf Grabs, Berlin 1971
Spiegel, Yorick, Der Prozeß des Trauerns. Analyse und Beratung, München (Kaiser) 1973
Teilhard de Chardin, Pierre, Der Mensch im Kosmos, München4 (Beck) 1959
Tillich, Paul, Systematische Theologie - III, Stuttgart (Ev.Verlagswerk) 1966
Tillich, Paul, Der Mut zum Sein, Stuttgart (Furche) 1968
Watzlawick, Paul/ Beavin, Janet H./ Jackson, Don D., Menschliche Kommunikation. Formen, Störungen, Paradoxien, Bern/Stuttgart/Wien (Huber) 1968 
Wittgenstein, Ludwig, Tractatus logico-philosophicus, Frankfurt am Main (Suhrkamp) 1973