RISULTATI RICERCA

La distinzione fra bisogno e desiderio, fra sentire la necessità di una relazione e la scelta consapevole di "stare con" qualcun altro, è un elemento importante in ogni transazione terapeutica, sia rispetto alle relazioni che osserviamo nei clienti, sia rispetto alla stessa relazione terapeutica. Il presente articolo si propone di esaminare le dinamiche di bisogno e desiderio all’interno di diversi contesti terapeutici, da quello della terapia individuale a quello di coppia, e la loro evoluzione nel corso della terapia. La tesi fondamentale è che un buon andamento della terapia stessa implichi il passaggio da relazioni di bisogno a relazioni di desiderio, in cui la libertà di scelta personale e relazionale dei clienti possa trovare una piena espressione. Si tratta pertanto di sostituire al paziente bisognoso (del terapeuta), condizione che in genere produce un senso d’urgenza e di spinta all’azione, il paziente desideroso, favorendo così la riflessione e la condivisione. Usare la dicotomia bisogno-desiderio può, più in generale, facilitare una presa di coscienza della posizione assunta nella relazione, e anche aiutare il paziente a situarsi all’interno della propria storia familiare, in particolare riflettendo su quanto i modi di stare in relazione appresi nella famiglia d’origine possano incidere sulla costruzione delle proprie premesse rispetto al personale modo di amare. L’obiettivo è quello di fornire chiavi di lettura nuove, rendere i clienti consapevoli della loro partecipazione alla costruzione della loro storia, nel qui e ora della stanza di terapia, fino a far loro comprendere quanto e quando questo avvenga anche nella loro vita di tutti i giorni. L’efficacia dell’utilizzo dell’abbinamento bisogno-desiderio probabilmente risiede nel fatto che rimandano a due concetti semplici, sentimenti esperiti da tutti i pazienti in modi diversi e in diverse fasi della vita. Che, quindi, irrompono prepotentemente nel processo di ricerca di cause, conseguenze, connessioni, proprio per quel loro alto valore evocativo.

La sclerosi laterale amiotrofica (SLA) è la più grave delle malattie del motoneurone e causa limitazioni motorie ingravescenti, nonché problemi nelle funzioni della respirazione, della deglutizione e della parola. Per le caratteristiche del decorso e della sintomatologia, la malattia minaccia continuamente l’autonomia delle persone affette e impone un carico assistenziale enorme ai caregiver e alle famiglie. Un’ampia letteratura descrive l’impatto della SLA sulla qualità di vita dei pazienti e dei loro caregiver, mentre poco studiato è il rapporto tra queste variabili e il funzionamento della famiglia nel suo insieme. Scopo del presente lavoro è proprio quello di valutare determinati indici di organizzazione familiare, nello specifico coesione ed adattabilità, in rapporto a variabili quali il carico assistenziale dei caregiver e la qualità di vita dei pazienti. I dati evidenziano un’elevata incidenza di famiglie che tendono verso punteggi estremi rispetto a tali indici, punteggi che tuttavia non si associano ad esiti negativi sul piano dell’adattamento psicologico ma, al contrario, mostrano correlazioni positive con le variabili che indicano processi funzionali di adattamento. Gli autori avanzano ipotesi sull’interpretazione di questi dati alla luce delle caratteristiche della malattia in esame, nonché su aspetti metodologici relativi all’utilizzo del questionario FACES III.

Since the beginning of Western thought, social, political and legal order has always been conceived of as depending on the unity, internal coherence, hierarchy and often also homogeneity of the community seen as the basis for social interaction. In the last decades, yet, a new approach to the understanding of order has been developed, in which the plurality of norms and institutions is accepted as a desirable perspective. After introducing the fundamental elements of the unitary conception of order in its particularistic and universalistic variants, the article presents the three main ways of happiness» was not caused by the excessive subjectivity of happiness and its lack of fixity and certainty. In fact, the disappearance of the right to the pursuit of happiness has been a consequence of the reduction of the «abcivil society» in a «commercial society». This way, economics lost its ‘civil’ characterization. overcoming the unitary notion of order that have been recently elaborated (systems theory, post-modernism, communicative paradigm).

The relationship between Filangieri and Franklin points out a double political influence: on the one hand, Jefferson’s political and social thought influenced Filangieri’s work The science of legislation; on the other, the Neapolitan Philosopher’s way of thinking contributed to the political and legal foundations of the United States of America. The decline of «abthe right to the pursuit of happiness» was not caused by the excessive subjectivity of happiness and its lack of fixity and certainty. In fact, the disappearance of the right to the pursuit of happiness has been a consequence of the reduction of the «abcivil society» in a «commercial society». This way, economics lost its ‘civil’ characterization

Hegel and Schleiermacher agree that modern individualism carries within itself the danger of an ethical unsatisfying arbitrariness and both of them elaborate a systematic solution, in order to mediate between individuals’ modern freedom, on the one hand, and social contents, on the other. There are nevertheless differences in these two systematic solutions. Hegel focuses above all on the processes of recognition in a social and political whole, which is superior to individuals’ peculiarities. Schleiermacher, on the contrary, supports the concept of plural communities that do involve the individuals’ peculiar contributions

This article inquires the significance of the concept of individuality, the purpose of which is particularly stressed in the first writings of Schleiermacher, i.e. the accomplished system and especially the Ethics. At first, it is the interpretation of Spinoza’s writings which is put forward as the fundamental philosophical inspiration of Schleiermacher’s project (including the Ethics). But the adoption of a systematic framework after 1803, especially in Dialectics after 1811, risks undermining the importance dedicated to individuality. It is in the original conception of time that lays the key connection between the systematic logic of functional differentiation and the ethical logic of individualisation

Schleiermacher’s moral theory takes as its central value the concept of individuality that has been anchored to the feeling of infinity in the Discourses on Religion. The analysis of Monologues confirms a substantial continuity on this point. Finally, the exposure of legal and social features in Kantian ethics concludes this path in the Kritik der bisherigen Sittenlehre. Among repressive and eudemonistic systems, Schleiermacher follows the lead of the ‘abproductive’ ethics of Plato and Spinoza. These precursors do not express in a typical way the individualistic-romantic instance that Schleiermacher carry out, but their ‘abreligious’ spirit ensures that the affirmations of individualities occur within the horizon of a fundamental harmony.

In this paper the author, following Schleiermacher’s approach to religion, addresses the issue of the constitution of religious experience, as well as of her specificity and plurality. In virtue of such a transcendental constitution it is settled an asymmetrical existence-relationship to the divine. This structure does give rise to religious lived experiences. They take form in a plurality of life contexts; what accounts for the plurality of religions. Indeed, the asymmetrical relationship to the divine is the last root and the ground of individual Self and of his/her freedom

Adaptive demystification, conservative critique, anti-transformative unmasking: it is with these definitions that the status of a certain critique - whose end coincides with the preservation of the though deplored world order - seems to be describable. Such a critique - one that judges power as illegitimate and though unmodifiable - assumes the false consciousness necessary to incorporate the contents and symbols of the power itself, while always keeping itself at security distance from the project of transcending it. Separated from the praxis that modifies its own object, critique becomes an expressive function of the very power against which it stands out.

Today, many have the impression of being faced with a sea change in the way ordinary people understand the world in which they happen to live, i.e. that we are witnessing the end of the critical passion, that animated modern minds for centuries and encouraged them to imagine and pursue a radical change of world and society. In the essay, this putative historical transition is analyzed in light of the master narrative about religion’s role in human evolution, developed by Robert Bellah in his recent book with the same title (Religion in Human Evolution, 2011), in order to raise some questions about the fate of social criticism in a radically secular age.

The Left is defined by the idea of equality. Although this is the basis of all modern politics, modern Right and Left have different interpretations of equality, which refer to a different moral kernel of it. This moral content is shown by the distinction between «abtreating persons equally» and «abtreating persons as equal». Treating as equal is different from treating equally when, in order to respect the equal dignity of persons, simple equality becomes unjust. The Left preserves its identity if it thinks that moral content as an idea of absence of domination, not only apparent, but also latent, mediated by opaque social relations.

A short article to show that individuation, i. e. the possibility to be an individual in the sense of kantian autonomy, is closely related with a concept of emancipation in a broad sense. The author advances the thesis that a form of strange individualistic universalism is more fundamental in modern culture than any form of pure and simple universalism. But without a citizenship as a whole of substantial rights, no individuation - maybe just an imperfect individualism - would be possible.