Thesis--Uppsala. / Scandinavian University books. Bibliography: p. 204-218.

Thesis--Uppsala. / Scandinavian University books. Bibliography: p. 204-218.

Submitted by Renata Lopes (renatasil82@gmail.com) on 2016-01-07T13:16:37Z No. of bitstreams: 1 julianagoncalvesblaser.pdf: 1145879 bytes, checksum: a8431f26237035be63ba806e0f977f3a (MD5) / Approved for entry into archive by Adriana Oliveira (adriana.oliveira@ufjf.edu.br) on 2016-01-25T16:44:33Z (GMT) No. of bitstreams: 1 julianagoncalvesblaser.pdf: 1145879 bytes, checksum: a8431f26237035be63ba806e0f977f3a (MD5) / Made available in DSpace on 2016-01-25T16:44:33Z (GMT). No. of bitstreams: 1 julianagoncalvesblaser.pdf: 1145879 bytes, checksum: a8431f26237035be63ba806e0f977f3a (MD5) Previous issue date: 2015-02-09 / A Psicologia francesa do final do século XIX, recentemente separada da Filosofia, utilizava como um de seus principais métodos o estudo dos estados alterados de consciência e das doenças mentais no intuito de compreender melhor o funcionamento normal da mente humana. Dentre os pioneiros desta Psicologia, destacou-se Pierre Janet. Seu estudo sobre as alterações mentais, principalmente o hipnotismo e a histeria, deram origem às suas concepções sobre força e fraqueza psicológica, dissociação e atividade subconsciente, ideias estas que abriram margem para um novo entendimento da atividade mental fora da consciência, contribuíram para o desenvolvimento da psiquiatria dinâmica e, principalmente, apresentaram à sua época um caráter conciliador entre as novas tendências da psicologia e a antiga psicologia. Contudo, embora tenha sido um autor relevante, seus trabalhos são pouco conhecidos na atualidade e, em língua portuguesa, a bibliografia sobre ele é escassa. Nosso objetivo foi, portanto: (i) analisar o surgimento do conceito de dissociação na obra inicial de Pierre Janet, assim como as suas principais acepções; (ii) apresentar como Janet chegou à formulação deste conceito e como esse se desenvolveu ao longo de sua obra; (iii) explicar o mecanismo da dissociação segundo o autor; (iv) esclarecer o que ocorre com os elementos dissociados da consciência; (v) apresentar a relação da dissociação com outros conceitos fundamentais da obra de Janet, tais como vontade, fraqueza de síntese e automatismo e; (vi) expor as explicações de Janet para a histeria, hipnotismo e duplas personalidades com base na sua teoria da dissociação. Para tanto, realizamos uma leitura analítica da segunda fase de suas obras, que vai desde 1885 a 1894 (contendo 3 livros e 17 artigos), na qual este autor se dedicou a estudar profundamente este tema, buscando estabelecer a definição dos principais conceitos desta fase de suas obras, com ênfase na dissociação, e também as relações existentes entre eles. Como resultados obtivemos que conceito dissociação apareceu pela primeira vez nas obras de Janet em 1887 no artigo L'anesthésie systématisée et la dissociation des phénomènes psychologiques. Nele Janet coloca que a dissociação ocorre quando um item, seja uma memória, uma sensação ou um movimento, não se liga à ideia de eu do sujeito, sendo, portanto, removido da consciência normal. Porém, a partir de 1889, da obra L’automatisme psychologique, não vemos mais aparecer o termo dissociação, mas sim um novo termo, o termo desagregação (désagrégation), o qual acreditamos ser, contudo, seu sinônimo. O mecanismo da dissociação é apresentado por Janet, principalmente, quando ele explica a formação dos sintomas histéricos. Para ele estes sintomas histéricos, ou seja, as anestesias, as abulias, as amnésias e os problemas do movimento são todos causados por uma fraqueza de síntese psicológica que leva, por sua vez à desagregação psicológica. Nestes quadros, devido à fraqueza de síntese, certos grupos de sensações, memórias, emoções ou informações sobre o ambiente deixam de ser sintetizados à ideia de eu (fator fundamental, segundo Janet, para que um fenômeno possa fazer parte da consciência) e, portanto, permanecem dissociados da consciência normal, gerando, respectivamente: as anestesias, as amnésias, as modificações do caráter e as abulias. Estes elementos não sintetizados continuam, contudo, a existir podendo “ficar isolados e desaparecer ou podem se associar com outros fatos igualmente separados de toda a consciência e formar uma segunda personalidade” (Janet, 1887 p.402). A ação destes cada um deles sobre a consciência da histérica, por sua vez, é a raiz do que Janet chamou de acidentes histéricos dentre os quais estão incluídos as contraturas, a catalepsia parcial, o sonambulismo, os ataques, alguns delírios e os atos subconscientes. É possível concluir que a dissociação é de fundamental importância para a compreensão da histeria sob o ponto de vista de Janet e que é também um conceito chave da fase inicial de suas obras. / The French psychologists of the XIX century used, as one of its main methods, the exploration of the altered states of consciousness and mental illness to achieve a better understanding of the normal human mind. Among this French psychologists, Pierre Janet is a central figure. His studies on hysteria and hypnotism gave birth to his conceptions about psychological weakness, dissociation and unconscious activity. His theories held to a new understanding of mental activity occurring outside of conscious awareness, contributed to the development of the dynamic psychiatry and, specially, seemed to conciliate the two divided trends of the XIX century French psychology (the medical and the philosophical one). Even though Pierre Janet be an important French psychologist, in Brazil, there is a lack of studies about him. Because of it, our aim was to: (i) find out when Janet started to use the concept “dissociation”, its definition, and its changes; (ii) show how did Janet conclude about the existence of dissociation of consciousness, (iii) point out the relationship between the dissociation and the mental weakness, (iv) explain the mechanism of dissociation according to Janet, (v) describe what happens to the elements dissociated to normal consciousness and (vi) show the role of dissociation on hysteria, hypnotism and double personality according him. To achieve our goal we analyzed Pierre Janet’s works between 1885 and 1894 (3 books and 17 articles). As a result we noticed that the concept dissociation appeared for the first time in the article of 1887 L'anesthésie systématisée et la dissociation des phénomènes psychologiques. In this article, Janet explains that dissociation happens when an element, a memory or a sensation, is not synthesized to self, being, consequently, removed to the normal consciousness. However, from 1889 and beyond Janet substituted the term dissociation for another one, desegregation, keeping for both the same meaning. The mechanism of dissociation is described by Janet while he is explaining the hysterical symptoms. According to him, its symptoms (anesthesia, amnesia and movement disturbances) are due to a problem to synthesize sensations, memories and information about the environment (respectively) to self. This elements which were not synthesized can continue existing outside the normal consciousness, isolated or grouped, in a more or less complex system, being able to originate a secondary personality. These elements can affect the hysterical psychism giving birth to the hysterical accidents as contractures, the hysterical crises, the delirium, the catalepsies, the somnambulism and the unconscious acts. To sum up, it is possible to conclude that dissociation in a fundamental concept of the initial works of Pierre Janet and it is an essential concept to understand his views of hypnotism, hysteria and double personality.

La somme romanesque que représente À la recherche du temps perdu se constitue au prix d’une « recherche » qui est à prendre au pied de la lettre, et qui instaure le sujet connaissant en savant-chercheur face à son objet de savoir. Proust fait en effet du « savoir » la condition même du talent, et fait entreprendre à son héros une exploration qui se présente en priorité comme étant une quête de savoirs. Ce travail se situe dans le sillage de l’épistémocritique qui étudie l’inscription dans le texte littéraire des savoirs en général, tout en insistant sur les savoirs qui relèvent de la science. Notre but est de dégager la posture épistémique qui caractérise le narrateur de la Recherche face aux divers savoirs qu’il récolte au cours de ses observations. Le parcours cognitif du narrateur est examiné suivant les quatre grandes étapes de sa recherche, que nous redéfinissons en termes de paradigmes : le paradigme de l’Exploration, qui définit une « épistémologie de l’observateur » ; le paradigme de la Communication, qui définit une « épistémologie de l’homme social » et une « épistémologie de l’homme moderne » ; le paradigme de l’Introspection, qui prépare à l’élaboration d’une « épistémologie du personnage intérieur » ; et enfin, le paradigme de la Vocation, qui rassemble les réponses trouvées par le narrateur à la plupart des questionnements qui auront jalonné son parcours cognitif. Ce dernier paradigme se présente sous la forme d’une « épistémologie de la création », d’une « épistémologie du réel » et d’une « épistémologie du hasard ». Car en dépit d’une démarche qui apparaît soumise aux médiations culturelles, la recherche du héros proustien se présente comme une « pensée de l’imprévisible » : fortement déterminée par la recherche cognitive du protagoniste, elle demeure pourtant irréductible à cette seule recherche. Nous dégageons, pour terminer, le statut réservé à la science et aux savoirs positifs en regard de la découverte de la vocation, mais aussi par rapport à l’élaboration d’une théorie de la création littéraire : ces deux grands domaines du savoir sont-ils considérés par Proust comme inconciliables avec une priorité évidente de l’un sur l’autre ou, au contraire, participent-ils tous deux d’une manière égale à la connaissance et à la création artistique ? / The comprehensive novelistic survey presented by À la recherche du temps perdu is worth a research to be taken literally and establishes the knowledgeable subject as a scholar-researcher against his object of knowledge. Proust makes of “knowledge” the condition of talent and engages his hero in an exploration that presents itself as a priority for being a quest for knowledge. The present essay follows in the wake of Epistemocritique, a discipline that studies the inscription of knowledge in the literary text in general, with a specific focus on knowledge related to science. Our aim is to bring forward the epistemic position that characterizes the narrator of À la recherche du temps perdu as he acquires various forms of knowledge in the course of his observations. The narrator’s cognitive path is examined with regard to the four main pillars of his quest, which we redefine in terms of paradigms: the paradigm of exploration, which defines an “epistemology of the observer”; the paradigm of communication, which defines an “epistemology of the social being”; the paradigm of Introspection which prepares for the elaboration of an “epistemology of the internal character”; and finally, the paradigm of vocation, which combines the answers to most of the questions that have marked the narrator’s cognitive path. This last paradigm presents itself as an “epistemology of creation”, an “epistemology of reality”, and an “epistemology of chance”. For, in spite of an approach that appears to be subject to cultural interventions, the quest by Proust’s main character appears as a thought of the unpredictable. Although strongly determined by the cognitive quest of the protagonist, it nevertheless remains irreducible to this sole quest. In conclusion, we emphasize the status reserved to science and to positive knowledge from the perspective of the discovery of vocation, but also in view of the elaboration of a theory of literary creation: does Proust consider these two areas of knowledge as irreconcilable, with one having an evident priority over the other, or, to the contrary, does he considers them as equal factors in knowledge and artistic creation?

La somme romanesque que représente À la recherche du temps perdu se constitue au prix d’une « recherche » qui est à prendre au pied de la lettre, et qui instaure le sujet connaissant en savant-chercheur face à son objet de savoir. Proust fait en effet du « savoir » la condition même du talent, et fait entreprendre à son héros une exploration qui se présente en priorité comme étant une quête de savoirs. Ce travail se situe dans le sillage de l’épistémocritique qui étudie l’inscription dans le texte littéraire des savoirs en général, tout en insistant sur les savoirs qui relèvent de la science. Notre but est de dégager la posture épistémique qui caractérise le narrateur de la Recherche face aux divers savoirs qu’il récolte au cours de ses observations. Le parcours cognitif du narrateur est examiné suivant les quatre grandes étapes de sa recherche, que nous redéfinissons en termes de paradigmes : le paradigme de l’Exploration, qui définit une « épistémologie de l’observateur » ; le paradigme de la Communication, qui définit une « épistémologie de l’homme social » et une « épistémologie de l’homme moderne » ; le paradigme de l’Introspection, qui prépare à l’élaboration d’une « épistémologie du personnage intérieur » ; et enfin, le paradigme de la Vocation, qui rassemble les réponses trouvées par le narrateur à la plupart des questionnements qui auront jalonné son parcours cognitif. Ce dernier paradigme se présente sous la forme d’une « épistémologie de la création », d’une « épistémologie du réel » et d’une « épistémologie du hasard ». Car en dépit d’une démarche qui apparaît soumise aux médiations culturelles, la recherche du héros proustien se présente comme une « pensée de l’imprévisible » : fortement déterminée par la recherche cognitive du protagoniste, elle demeure pourtant irréductible à cette seule recherche. Nous dégageons, pour terminer, le statut réservé à la science et aux savoirs positifs en regard de la découverte de la vocation, mais aussi par rapport à l’élaboration d’une théorie de la création littéraire : ces deux grands domaines du savoir sont-ils considérés par Proust comme inconciliables avec une priorité évidente de l’un sur l’autre ou, au contraire, participent-ils tous deux d’une manière égale à la connaissance et à la création artistique ? / The comprehensive novelistic survey presented by À la recherche du temps perdu is worth a research to be taken literally and establishes the knowledgeable subject as a scholar-researcher against his object of knowledge. Proust makes of “knowledge” the condition of talent and engages his hero in an exploration that presents itself as a priority for being a quest for knowledge. The present essay follows in the wake of Epistemocritique, a discipline that studies the inscription of knowledge in the literary text in general, with a specific focus on knowledge related to science. Our aim is to bring forward the epistemic position that characterizes the narrator of À la recherche du temps perdu as he acquires various forms of knowledge in the course of his observations. The narrator’s cognitive path is examined with regard to the four main pillars of his quest, which we redefine in terms of paradigms: the paradigm of exploration, which defines an “epistemology of the observer”; the paradigm of communication, which defines an “epistemology of the social being”; the paradigm of Introspection which prepares for the elaboration of an “epistemology of the internal character”; and finally, the paradigm of vocation, which combines the answers to most of the questions that have marked the narrator’s cognitive path. This last paradigm presents itself as an “epistemology of creation”, an “epistemology of reality”, and an “epistemology of chance”. For, in spite of an approach that appears to be subject to cultural interventions, the quest by Proust’s main character appears as a thought of the unpredictable. Although strongly determined by the cognitive quest of the protagonist, it nevertheless remains irreducible to this sole quest. In conclusion, we emphasize the status reserved to science and to positive knowledge from the perspective of the discovery of vocation, but also in view of the elaboration of a theory of literary creation: does Proust consider these two areas of knowledge as irreconcilable, with one having an evident priority over the other, or, to the contrary, does he considers them as equal factors in knowledge and artistic creation?