
Richard Noll
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Richard_Noll
less
Related Authors
John Radzilowski
University of Alaska Southeast
Francesco Gallo
Università della Calabria
Joan L Saverino
University of Pennsylvania
Tomasz Pudłocki
Jagiellonian University in Krakow
Earle Spamer
American Philosophical Society
Michael H. Crawford
University of Kansas
InterestsView All (135)
Uploads
Videos by Richard Noll
Papers by Richard Noll
Translator: Jerzy Korpanty
Kraków, Poland: Vis-à-vis Etiuda LTD, 2021
It was published in Kikan Minzokugaku (Ethnographic Quarterly), a publication of the National Museum of Ethnology (MINPAKU) in Osaka, Japan in the Winter 2019 (No. 167) issue, pp. 86-95.
Translator: Jerzy Korpanty
Kraków, Poland: Vis-à-vis Etiuda LTD, 2021
It was published in Kikan Minzokugaku (Ethnographic Quarterly), a publication of the National Museum of Ethnology (MINPAKU) in Osaka, Japan in the Winter 2019 (No. 167) issue, pp. 86-95.
ABSTRACT
The current fascination with “category work” and the negotiation, objectification and policing of the boundaries of diagnostic categories may be a reflection of presentist biases of historians of psychiatry that occlude subtle nuances of the medical cognition and practices of past actors. Historians fawn over fringes: liminal phase changes such as the moving targets of thresholds, of dimensions that coagulate into categories and then dissolve again into novel continua, of relentless streams of hyper-reflexive nomenclature that bubble up and bury the bodies of patients.
The oscillating dialectic of figure/ground reversals provoked when contemplating the relationship of category to fringe is a mesmerizing one. Perhaps too mesmerizing. One difficulty for historians attempting to understand this relationship may stem from the implicit assumption that physicians of the past engaged in an explicit cognitive exercise at the point of diagnosis. Instead the practice may have been more akin to recognizing a melody or a scent. Another difficulty for historians may be the presentist assumption that physicians of the past shared our concern with “error.” Evidence suggests in fact that a century ago, at least in the United States, most did not. This was especially true for those devoted to the treatment of nervous and mental diseases. If diagnostic error is not a concern, neither are sharply defined categories, or policed boundaries, or prodromes or fringes. It is left to historians to chase these phantoms.
Of all the modern medical specialties, psychiatry had (and continues to have) the greatest difficulty in not only accepting, but negotiating the conceptual boundaries of objective “error” and “medical certainty.” Using chronic psychosis and its prodromes as a thread, this paper explores the efforts of early 20th century US alienists and neurologists to adopt a moral economy of science based on the negation of subjectivity – and why this failed.
“The paranormal” is a comparative category that serves as a dumping ground for a wide variety of beliefs, experiences and claims that fall outside the normative boundaries of our culture’s notions of scientific reasoning and conventional religious doctrines. By default, both scientific and religious elites have left it to experimental psychology and psychiatry to try to make sense of these domains of human experience, and more than a century of such research has much to tell us about how to critically evaluate this material. However, psychology is not enough to grasp all of the dimensions of the paranormal. Therefore, as we develop our “tool kit” of critical thinking skills we will need to also approach this material from perspectives in philosophy, sociology, comparative religions, anthropology, history and investigative journalism. This course, then, will be multidisciplinary in its approach, with insights from psychological research providing the Ariadne’s thread to help us find our way through and out of this labyrinth. After all, we don’t really want to meet the Minotaur (or Mothman), now do we?