Made available in DSpace on 2016-04-28T20:38:54Z (GMT). No. of bitstreams: 1 Henrique Guilherme Scatolin.pdf: 2277504 bytes, checksum: 63f2217a44c6208fd15b5c910c4cdd12 (MD5) Previous issue date: 2014-06-27 / Coordenação de Aperfeiçoamento de Pessoal de Nível Superior / This study investigated the identificatory problematic in a case of obsessional neurosis. Thus, this analysis was based on four central pillars: the Oedipal resolution of patient Paul's parents, his libidinal and identificatory history, the incorporation of the sadistic penis and identification with the superego. The methodology of this study is based on the Freudian psychoanalytic theory of obsessional neurosis, the contributions of Piera Aulagnier to the Freudian metapsychology and psychopathology, as well as the reading of post-Freudian psychoanalysts about this neurosis and its contemporary manifestations, such as Lacan, Green, Bleichmar, Calligaris and Leclaire. Throughout the results, I have produced my floating theorisation, emphasizing the patient s reports and associations. Upon hearing his story, it was possible to understand the presence of his parents desire since his birth, underlining how the paternal function, next to the maternal, was always present in his constitution. Throughout this analysis, I have highlighted how aggression and hatred pointed toward his father, which also hold passive impulses towards him, have intensified throughout his psychic constitution, being repressed after the assumption of castration. These ambivalent movements became explicit in his symptomatic formations, manifesting his identificatory problematic. If, on the one side, along the psychotherapy, the positivity was gaining ground, giving a new destiny to his feelings and identificatory references, on the other side, such way has been achieved due to psychotherapeutic interventions focused on manifestations of the unconscious hatred and destructive feelings located in the intrincacies of his guilts, doubts and rituals (and that fed his resistances and paralyzations in the clinical setting), denoting that in his identificatory problematic, his debt towards his father was of the order of his own desire. This study concludes that the four central pillars are very important for elucidating the identificatory problematic in cases of obsessional neurosis, becoming interchangeable to guide the future analyst s look when he comes across the typical clinical manifestations of this neurosis / O presente estudo procurou investigar a problemática identificatória em um caso de neurose obsessiva. Para tal, buscou alicerçar tal análise a partir de quatro pilares centrais: a resolução edipiana dos pais do paciente Paulo, a sua história libidinal e identificatória, a incorporação do pênis sádico e a identificação ao superego. A metodologia deste estudo fundamenta-se na teoria psicanalítica freudiana sobre a neurose obsessiva, nas contribuições de Piera Aulagnier à metapsicologia e psicopatologia freudiana, como também na leitura de psicanalistas pós-freudianos sobre esta neurose e suas manifestações contemporâneas, tal como Lacan, Green, Bleichmar, Calligaris e Leclaire. Ao longo dos resultados, construo as minhas teorizações flutuantes, dando ênfase aos relatos e associações deste paciente. Ao ouvir a sua história foi possível compreender a presença do desejo dos seus pais desde o seu nascimento, ressaltando como a função paterna, ao lado da materna, esteve presente, desde sempre, em sua constituição. No decorrer desta análise, realço como que a agressividade e o ódio direcionados ao pai, que também resguardavam os impulsos passivos frente ao mesmo, intensificaram-se ao longo da sua constituição psíquica, sendo recalcados após a assunção da castração. Estes movimentos ambivalentes tornaram-se explícitos em suas formações sintomáticas, resplandecendo a sua problemática identificatória. Se, de um lado, ao longo da psicoterapia, a positividade foi ganhando espaço, dando um novo destino as suas pulsões e aos seus referenciais identificatórios, de outro, tal caminho foi alcançado devido às intervenções psicoterapêuticas focadas nas manifestações do ódio inconsciente e das pulsões destrutivas que residiam nos meandros das suas culpas, dúvidas e rituais (e que alimentavam as suas resistências e paralisações no setting clínico), denotando que, em sua problemática identificatória, a sua dívida ao pai era da ordem do seu próprio desejo. Este estudo conclui que os quatro pilares centrais são de extrema relevância para a elucidação da problemática identificatória nos casos de neurose obsessiva, tornando-se intercambiáveis ao nortear o olhar do futuro analista quando este se deparar com as manifestações clínicas típicas desta neurose

Dans le contexte utilitariste de l’éthique des populations, deux positions s’opposent naturellement à propos de ce qui a de la valeur et de ce que nous devons faire afin de bénéficier au plus grand nombre. Là où certaines intuitions nous invitent à chercher la maximisation totale du bien-être, d’autres soulignent l’importance de faire de notre mieux pour parvenir à la plus haute moyenne possible. Ce document a pour vocation de traiter le débat théorique qui oppose ces deux avenues. Il s’agira donc de décrire et de préciser le fonctionnement et les conséquences de ces positions, afin de tenter d’apporter des éléments de réponses sur la solidité et la robustesse de ces deux axiologies. Dans ce but, nous évaluerons et répondrons aux objections qui leurs sont présentées, et ferons la lumière sur leurs lacunes respectives. Plus précisément, ce document s’intéressera principalement aux problèmes de la Conclusion Répugnante et de la Conclusion Sadique, qui ont fait couler beaucoup d’encre, mais également à d’autres objections couramment discutées dans la littérature. Nous conclurons que contrairement à ce qu’ils peuvent laisser croire, ce ne sont pas des arguments décisifs à l’encontre de ces positions. Il s’agira de surcroît d’interroger et d’expliquer les intuitions qui fondent ces positions, les biais qui les menacent mais également les conséquences contre-intuitives qui en découlent. / In the utilitarian context of population ethics, two positions are naturally opposed about what has value and what we ought to do to benefit the greatest number. Where some intuitions invite us to seek total well-being, others stress the importance of doing our best to achieve the highest possible average. This paper aims to adress the theoretical debate between these two avenues. It will therefore be necessary to describe and clarify the functioning and consequences of these positions, in order to try to provide elements of answers about the solidity and robustness of these two axiologies. To this end, we will assess and respond to the objections presented to them, and shed light on their respective shortcomings. More precisely, this paper will focus on the problems of the Repugnant Conclusion and the Sadistic Conclusion, which have caused a lot of ink to flow, but also on other objections commonly discussed in the litterature. We will conclude that contrary to what they may suggest, these are not decisive arguments against these positions. In addition, the document will question and explain the intuitions that underlie these positions, the biases that threaten them but alo the counter-intuitive consequences thats follow.