Homo psychotherapeuticus, or psychotherapy in the reflection of contemporary philosophy
- Authors: Zotov A.M.1
-
Affiliations:
- Samara National Research University
- Issue: Vol 21, No 7-8 (2021)
- Pages: 40-48
- Section: Philosophical sciences
- URL: https://ogarev-online.ru/2410-3764/article/view/81116
- DOI: https://doi.org/10.55531/2072-2354.2021.21.4.40-48
- ID: 81116
Cite item
Full Text
Abstract
Psychotherapeutic practices are always based on personality theories. The century-old experience of psychotherapy has shown relatively equal effectiveness of various directions. Can philosophical anthropology help in the study of the equivalence paradox? Can specialists in their search step beyond the usual psychotherapeutic discourse in understanding the subject of psychotherapy? The article examines the connection between the “fate of the subject” in the philosophy of the XX century and the issues of personology in psychotherapy. The article is addressed to philosophers, psychologists, educators, those specialists who implement a personalistic approach in their practice.
Full Text
##article.viewOnOriginalSite##About the authors
Alexey M. Zotov
Samara National Research University
Author for correspondence.
Email: am-zotov@mail.ru
Postgraduate student, Department of Philosophy, Chief physician of the «Sofia» Medical Center
Russian Federation, SamaraReferences
- Hajgl-Ehvers A, Khajgl F, Ott Yu, Ryuger U. Bazisnoe rukovodstvo po psihoterapii. Transl. from Germ. T. Bellendir i dr. 3-e. izd., pererab. Saint Petersburg; 2001. (In Russ.)
- Boecij. Protiv Evtihiya i Nestoriya. In: “Uteshenie filosofiej” i drugie traktaty. Moscow: Nauka; 1990. (In Russ.)
- Vinokur VA. Psihologicheskie aspekty integratsii v psihoterapii, sistemnyi analiz i “effekt babochki” [Internet]. Medicinskaya psihologiya v Rossii. 2012;(1(12)). (In Russ). Available from: http://mprj.ru/archiv_global/2012_1_12/nomer/nomer03.php. Accessed: 14.08.2021.
- Gurevich AYa. Kategorii srednevekovoi kul’tury. 2-e izd. Moscow: Iskusstvo; 1984. (In Russ.)
- Zhukova OI, Zhukov VD. “Narcissistic” Person as a Symbol of Modern Society. Bulletin of Kemerovo State University. 2015;(1-2(61)):203–206.
- Kalmykova ES, Kehkhele Kh. Izuchenie psikhoterapii za rubezhom: istoriya i sovremennoe sostoyanie. Zhurnal prakticheskoi psikhologii i psikhoanaliza. 2000;(1):5–10. (In Russ.)
- Kostomarov AS. Maska kak sposob ob”yavleniya lica v socio-kul’turnom prostranstve [dissertation]. Samara, 2006. (In Russ.)
- Lekhcier VL. Bolezn’: opyt, narrativ, nadezhda. Ocherk social’nykh i gumanitarnykh issledovanii meditsiny. Vil’nyus: Logvino literatūros namai; 2018. (In Russ.)
- Mazin VA. Sub’’ekt Freida i Derrida. Saint Petersburg: Aleteiya; 2010. P. 5–9. (In Russ.)
- Mak-Vil’yams N. Psihoanaliticheskaya diagnostika: Ponimanie struktury lichnosti v klinicheskom protsesse. Transl. from Engl. M.V. Glushchenko, M.V. Romashkevich. Moscow; 2001. (In Russ.)
- Perlz FS. Vnutri i vne pomoinogo vedra. Transl. from Engl. Saint Petersburg: Petersburg-XXI v., 1995. (In Russ.)
- Popov MV, Verhoturova NYu. Filosofskie osnovaniya kognitivno-povedencheskoi psikhoterapii po tekstam Dzhudit Bek. Innovacii v nauke. 2018;(4(80)):41–46. (In Russ.)
- Burdin MV, Ignatova ES. Psihologicheskoe konsul’tirovanie i psikhoterapiya: tekhnologiya sokraticheskogo dialoga: uchebnoe posobie [internet]. Perm’; 2019. (In Russ.). Available from: http://www.psu.ru/files/docs/science/books/uchebnie-posobiya/psikhologicheskoe-konsultirovanie-i-psikhoterapiya-tehnologiya-sokraticheskogo-dialoga.pdf. Accessed: 22.06.2021.
- Psihoterapevticheskaya entsiklopediya. Ed. by B.D. Karvasarsky. 2-e izd., dop. i pererab. Saint Petersburg: Piter; 2000. (In Russ.)
- Robin Zh-M. Byt’ v prisutstvii drugogo: etyudy po psihoterapii. Transl. I. Dubrovskii, M. Pavlovskaya. Moscow, Institut Obshchegumanitarnykh Issledovanii; 2013. P. 41–46. (In Russ.)
- Sosland AI. Psychotherapy in the circuit of contradictions. Psychology. Journal of the Higher School of Economics. 2006;3(1):46–67. (In Russ.)
- Stavcev SN. Formy sub’’ektivnosti v filosofskoi kul’ture XX veka. Vvedenie. In: Formy sub’’ektivnosti v filosofskoj kul’ture XX veka. Saint Petersburg: Sankt-Peterburgskoe filosofskoe obshchestvo; 2000. (In Russ.)
- Kurpatov VI, Osipova SA, Kolchina VV. Personality theory in integrative personality-oriented reconstructive psychotherapy. Neurology, Neuropsychiatry, Psychosomatics. 2010;2(1):19–23. (In Russ.) doi: 10.14412/2074-2711-2010-65
- Ty hochesh’ pogovorit’ ob etom? Novaya psihologicheskaya kul’tura v postsovetskoj Belarusi i Ukraine. Ed. by T.V. Shchitcova. Vil’nyus: EGU; 2014. (In Russ.)
- Hassan I. K kontseptsii postmodernizma [Internet]. Postmodernistkii povorot. 1987. (In Russ.). Available from: http://culturolog.ru/content/view/2765/. Accessed: 27.08.2021.
- H’ell L, Zigler D. Teorii lichnosti: Osnovnye polozheniya, issledovanie i primenenie: uchebnoe posobie dlya vuzov. Transl. from Engl. Saint Petersburg: Piter-press, 1997. (In Russ.)
- Chernousova LN. Basic Conceptions of Personality. Vestnik Sibirskogo gosudarstvennogo aerokosmicheskogo universiteta imeni akademika M.F. Reshetneva. 2006;(6(13)):263–266. (In Russ.)
- Yaspers K. Obshchaya psihopatologiya. Transl. from Germ. L.O. Akopyan. Moscow: Praktika; 1997. (In Russ.)
- Yaspers K. Smysl i naznachenie istorii. Moscow: Politizdat; 1991. (In Russ.)
Supplementary files
