engleski

Corporality and Inclusion in a Psychosocial Dimension

Corporality may be considered as a space in and by which harmony and deviations from a certain ideality are manifested. Reading of Francis of Assisi’s writing Opuscula Sancti Patris Francisci Assisiensis may invoke an experience of his spiritual iconographic figure and divine lecture (lectio divina) on the world, the body, the physical and spiritual man. The drama of Hadamar is also in a certain way a ethical aspect of the phenomenon of corporality, which can reflect normal and psychopathological consciousness, pain and pleasure, strength and weakness. Should one accept the thesis that the development of consciousness is a cosmic phenomenon manifested in the microcosmic space of corporality through the determinants of genetic, immunologic, phenotypic, cultural, spiritual and other characteristics of the Self, then, in a broader sense, the behaviour of the subject and the social model itself may be considered through these aspects. Various forms of handicaps, destruction caused by wars, diseases, education, religion, increases in population, employment and technological progress, ethnic (national) allegiance, sexual identity, cloning, environmental problems, culture ... are only some of a number of problems for the existence of big populations of the present. What one experiences as a narcissistic wound, ecstasy, anxiety, depression, uniting or separation, at the biological (somatic) but also psychosocial level, may also be explained as a genetic, phenotypic or immunologic response of the subject but also of a certain social milieu. In the psychosocial context it is therefore possible to consider various aspects of corporality as developmental stages of the Self but also as an epiphenomenon of other bodies. E.g., the “complementary language” and expressiveness of various forms of art show to us archaic and actual levels of consciousness in different forms of existential tension of an individual. If one understands biochemical changes in the body as an expression of behavioural archetypes, then – symbolically but also functionally – “the immunologic body” represents a referential (biochemical) space from and by which, within a framework of a permanent existential tension, possible attitudes of rejection and/or acceptance in a certain psychosocial dimension are reflected: subject – subject, subject – population, population – population ... but also existential values such as good and evil, love and hate, health and illness ... beautiful and ugly, sense and insanity ... On the one hand, e.g., “our limbic system mediates emotional arousal by its influence over the neuroendocrine system”. On the other hand, “our speech and symbol systems give us a certain invulnerability to limbic arousal as long as we perceive ourselves to be socially supported”. The results of some research carried out for the purpose of studying the dynamics of changes of attitudes in public opinion, in clinical and educational practice, may possibly be a contribution to the consideration of this hypothesis. This refers to the changes observed in some controlled variables, such as education, interpersonal sensitivity, the aesthetic dimension of existential experience, body image, quality of life, mechanisms of coping, etc. In any case, such research and considerations at the contact points of biomedical, humanistic and social sciences offer a new insight into a number of problem areas and dynamics of the relation subject – subject (object), as well as in the dynamics of relations within and among different populations.

nije evidentirano

nije evidentirano