Skip to main content

Freud, Piaget, and Jargon, Part I

 


"Without Piaget's ... genetic-epistemology, arriving on the heels of Freud's death, or the integration of semiotic mediation,the fundamental continuity between body and mind, and therefore the translation from unconscious to conscious modes of thought, remained highly polarized and mired in physicalist metaphors describing, but not explaining, the functional/formal shifts in organization of a multi-tiered, polysemic, sign-infused psyche."

I believe I've already mentioned in this blog the anthology in psychoanalysis and the mind-body problem published recently by Routledge.

The above passage is drawn from that anthology, from an essay by Anna Aragna. The passage is quite difficult to follow (and no, not because I have removed it from a context that would otherwise have been illuminating -- it just IS.) 

But, abstracting where I can from the jargon, what I gather is this. Aragna sees the "fundamental continuity of body and mind" as both a premise and a puzzle. It is premise because all our experience speaks to their continuity. Even an Olympic gymnast whose body was in champion shape had to bow out of competitions not long ago because her mind was boggling for some poorly understood reason.

It is a puzzle though because we experience our mind as something intangible and our body as something that pushes and pulls other bodies. The connection between them is not self-evident.

In Aragna's view, and that of the other authors in this book, part of the answer to the puzzle is this: the Freudian 'unconscious' is stuff that the body does. The Freudian conscious mind, or ego, is a built-in observer of that stuff the body does. 

But, also in Aragna's view, Freud did not do enough to clarify this connection. He was still trying to make sense of it when he died in London in 1939. Gratuitously, Jean Piaget picked up some of the connected questions in his work soon thereafter. [The phrase "on the heels of" is itself what one might call a physicalist metaphor.] 

Piaget was appointed professor of experimental psychology and sociology at the University of Lausanne in 1938 and continued in that post until 1951. This accounts for the expression about Piaget following Freud's heels. His later publications may be traced to his work at Lausanne.   

So, behind all the jargon, Aragna is saying that Piaget's work, describing the cognitive development of children, helps us understand how human beings learn to observe ourselves, that is, how the ego arises out of the id, that is again, how the mind emerges out of the body. 




Labels:

Comments

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

A Story About Coleridge

This is a quote from a memoir by Dorothy Wordsworth, reflecting on a trip she took with two famous poets, her brother, William Wordsworth, and their similarly gifted companion, Samuel Taylor Coleridge.   We sat upon a bench, placed for the sake of one of these views, whence we looked down upon the waterfall, and over the open country ... A lady and gentleman, more expeditious tourists than ourselves, came to the spot; they left us at the seat, and we found them again at another station above the Falls. Coleridge, who is always good-natured enough to enter into conversation with anybody whom he meets in his way, began to talk with the gentleman, who observed that it was a majestic waterfall. Coleridge was delighted with the accuracy of the epithet, particularly as he had been settling in his own mind the precise meaning of the words grand, majestic, sublime, etc., and had discussed the subject with William at some length the day before. “Yes, sir,” says Coleridge, “it is a maj...
9 comments
Read more

Searle: The Chinese Room

John Searle has become the object of accusations of improper conduct. These accusations even have some people in the world of academic philosophy saying that instructors in that world should try to avoid teaching Searle's views. That is an odd contention, and has given rise to heated exchanges in certain corners of the blogosphere.  At Leiter Reports, I encountered a comment from someone describing himself as "grad student drop out." GSDO said: " This is a side question (and not at all an attempt to answer the question BL posed): How important is John Searle's work? Are people still working on speech act theory or is that just another dead end in the history of 20th century philosophy? My impression is that his reputation is somewhat inflated from all of his speaking engagements and NYRoB reviews. The Chinese room argument is a classic, but is there much more to his work than that?" I took it upon myself to answer that on LR. But here I'll tak...
17 comments
Read more

Recent Controversies Involving Nassim Taleb, Part I

I've written about Nassim Taleb on earlier occasions in this blog. I'll let you do the search yourself, dear reader, for the full background. The short answer to the question "who is Taleb?" is this: he is a 57 year old man born in Lebanon, educated in France, who has been both a hedge fund manager and a derivatives trader. He retired from active participation from the financial world sometime between 2004 and 2006, and has been a full-time writer and provocateur ever since. Taleb's writings for the general public began where one might expect -- in the field where he had made his money -- and he explained certain financial issues to a broad audiences in a very dramatic non-technical way. Since then, he has widened has fields of study, writing about just about everything, applying the intellectual tools he honed in that earlier work. As you might have gather from the above, I respect Taleb, though I have sometimes been critical of him when my own writing ab...
4 comments
Read more