O dispositivo anal��tico no hospital na cl��nica com transexuais: entre o ser e o sujeito

P��s-gradua����o em Psicologia - FCLAS

Entre la��os e n��s: (im)possibilidades de um psicanalista nos espa��os de Educa����o Permanente em Sa��de

P��s-gradua����o em Psicologia - FCLAS

Literacy Research: Issues of Authority, Ownership, and Representation

With the ���social turn��� of language in the past decade within English studies, ethnographic and teacher research methods increasingly have acquired legitimacy as a means of studying student literacy. And with this legitimacy, graduate students specializing in literacy and composition studies increasingly are being encouraged to use ethnographic and teacher research methods to study student literacy within classrooms. Yet few of the narratives produced from these studies discuss the problems that frequently arise when participant observers enter the classroom. Recently, some researchers have begun to interrogate the extent to which ethnographic and teacher research methods are able to construct and disseminate knowledge in empowering ways (Anderson & Irvine, 1993; Bishop, 1993; Fine, 1994; Fleischer. 1994; McLaren, 1992). While ethnographic and teacher research methods have oftentimes been touted as being more democratic and nonhierarchical than quantitative methods���-which oftentimes erase individuals lived experiences with numbers and statistical formulas���-researchers are just beginning to probe the ways that ethnographic and teacher research models can also be silencing, unreflective, and oppressive. Those who have begun to question the ethics of conducting, writing about, and disseminating knowledge in education have coined the term ���critical��� research, a rather vague and loose term that proposes a position of reflexivity and self-critique for all research methods, not just ethnography or teacher research. Drawing upon theories of feminist consciousness-raising, liberatory praxis, and community-action research, theories of critical research aim to involve researchers and participants in a highly participatory framework for constructing knowledge, an inquiry that seeks to question, disrupt, or intervene in the conditions under study for some socially transformative end. While critical research methods are always contingent upon the context being studied, in general they are undergirded by principles of non-hierarchical relations, participatory collaboration, problem-posing, dialogic inquiry, and multiple and multi-voiced interpretations. In distinguishing between critical and traditional ethnographic processes, for instance, Peter McLaren says that critical ethnography asks questions such as ���[u]nder what conditions and to what ends do we. as educational researchers, enter into relations of cooperation. mutuality, and reciprocity with those who we research?��� (p. 78) and ���what social effects do you want your evaluations and understandings to have?��� (p. 83). In��the same vein, Michelle Fine suggests that critical researchers must move beyond notions of the etic/emic dichotomy of researcher positionality in order to ���probe how we are in relation with the contexts we study and with our informants, understanding that we are all multiple in those relations��� (p. 72). Researchers in composition and literacy stud��ies who endorse critical research methods, then, aim to enact some sort of positive transformative change in keeping with the needs and interests of the participants with whom they work.

NOTES ON THE FREUDIAN CONCEPTION OF ANXIETY

NOTES ON THE FREUDIAN CONCEPTION OF ANXIETY This article belongs to the field of history and epistemology of psychoanalysis, specifically to research on the conceptual genealogy pertaining to the construction of Freudian metapsychology of anguish. It aims to present the main arguments that allow us to discuss that theories contained in Freud's work on anxiety are not exclusive and may be considered, as a whole, a single explanatory model that would encompass the various stages of production on anxiety This paper intends to examine the barriers that can be seized in the Freudian formulations, under what is conceived, since Freud, as a "second theory of anxiety".

The Social Principles of Jesus: A Critical Re-examination of Walter Rauschenbusch���s Social Gospel

It has been nine decades since Walter Rauschenbusch (1861-1918) published a slim volume entitled The Social Principles of Jesus. Though today less well known than his other works Christianity and the Social Crisis (1907) and Theology for the Social Gospel (1917), it is Social Principles that most adeptly summarizes the theological ethics of Rauschenbusch���s ���social gospel.��� Taking the form of a pedagogical treatise, Social Principles reads as both a finely tuned analysis of the modern relevance of the teachings of Jesus, and an impassioned plea on the part of its author for an end to the folly of interpreting Christianity solely in ���individualistic��� terms. It is Rauschenbusch���s expressed aim to resurrect the core teachings of Jesus, which are social and ethical, and apply these to a renewed, socially conscious liberal democracy, establishing a grand harmony between religion, ethics, and social evolution. How far this vision was from the burgeoning ���fundamentalism��� of his day (and ours) is more than evidenced by the critical reaction of many of his more conservative peers, but also indicates the continuing relevance of his work for theologians and others looking for alternative paths. The following exposition is supplemented with appreciative and critical comments.

An Ethical History of Photography in Combat and of Combat Photography in the United States during World War II

With the United States��� entry into the Second World War, the word ?censorship? was seen largely as antithetical to, rather than a necessary counterpart to, victory among Americans. People did not want to be censored in their writing, photographs or speech,but it proved to be necessary even before the war began, in order to protect government secrets and the people on the home-front from scenes that were too disturbing. Even before the war had officially begun, there were problems with censorship among journalists and newspapers. The initial response of outrage in reference to censorship in the United States was common among journalists, newspapers, magazines, and radio news; nevertheless, there was a necessity for censorship among Americans, on the home frontand the front lines, and it would be tolerated throughout the war to ensure that enemies of America did not gain access to information that would assist in a defeat of the United States in the Second World War. The research I have conducted has dealt with the censorship of combat photography during World War II, in conjunction with the ethics that were in play at the time that affected the censors. Through exploring the work of three combat photographers ��� Tony Vaccaro, James R. Stephens and Charles E. Sumners ��� I wasable to effectively construct an explanatory ethical history of these three men. Research on the censorship and effects it had on the United States brought me to three distinctareas of censorship and ethics that would be explored: (1) the restrictions and limitations enforced by the Office of Censorship, (2) a general overview of war and photography as it influenced the soldiers and their families on the home-front, (3) and the combat photographers and personal and military censorship that influenced their work. Although their work was censored both by the military and the government, these men saw the war in a different light that remained with them long after the battles and war had ceased.Using the narratives of Tony Vaccaro, Charles E. Sumners and James R. Stephens as means for more in depth research, this thesis strives to create lenses through which to view the history and ethics of censorship that shaped combat photography during the Second World War and the images to which we refer as representative of that war today.

A Critique of Authenticity and Recognition

While forms of ethics based upon authenticity and recognition are holding sway in contemporary philosophical debates (Ferrara, Honneth, Fraser, etc.), many of the implications of both processes ��� conceptual, moral, political ��� are still insufficiently reflected upon. The talk will offer a ���critique��� (in the Kantian sense) of both, based upon an analysis of the ���semiotics��� of authenticity and the resulting perpetuation of a regime of authority of experts, as well as commenting upon the striking absence of the realm of literature and the arts from this debate, except in some references to a rather abstract notion of Aesthetics. It will also critically revaluate the concept of agency implicit in an ethics of authenticity and recognition.

New Sites, New Challenges? Ethical and Methodological Questions in the Context of Research on Migration Exclusion

The challenges of research ethics and methodologies have been reflected on extensively, but ��� aside from the context of feminist methodologies ��� less so in relation to research on particular migration sites such as in transit, detention centres, at the borders or within migration administration. First attempts in this direction have been made (D��vell et al. 2010, Fresia et al. 2005, Riedner 2014, van Liempt/Bilger2009), however, more reflection and theorization is needed, considering the contested nature of these temporal and volatile sites. In this workshop, we thus aim at examining methodological as well as ethical questions that arise during field work: We attempt to reflect the power relations involved in the research process, the ethics of research design, the dissemination of research results, the question of gaining access to and ��� whenever necessary ��� staying in contact with our research subjects. How can we negotiate informed consent with subjects whose life is currently marked by transit and insecurity concerning their own future, and who are in an uncertain situation in which substantial information (legal, social, cultural etc.) is likely to be missing? How do we deal with the dilemma of possibly contributing to knowledge production that might facilitate removals and deportations in the future, considering that the reception of the results is not in the hands of the researchers? How do we deal with the anticipated as well as unexpected impacts of our research on social and political practice? Regarding fieldwork in state institutions, how do we negotiate the multiple loyalties we often find ourselves faced with as social researchers, both with the excluded migrants and with the authorities implementing the exclusions ��� two groupings considered to be opposite to each other (Lavanchy 2013)? Which different roles do researchers need to take on? The aim of our workshop is first and foremost to exchange experiences on fieldwork with others doing qualitative research on related topics and to consider its possible implications ��� including affective dimensions ��� for all participants involved in the research process: the migrants, the security staff of detention centres, its social workers, border police and bureaucrats and, last but not least, the researchers themselves. Furthermore, we generally wish to reflect upon the question of how best to conduct research in this contested field, applying an interdisciplinary perspective.

Na 1 Nachlass Max Horkheimer, 640 - "Simmel and Freudian Philosophy", "Authoritarianism and the Family Today" und "The Chances of Democracy in Germany" (p. IX 18.1-3-IX 19a)

"Simmel and Freudian Philosophy" (GS 5, S. 396-405); 1. Nachruf, verlesen beim Memorial Meeting for Ernst Simmel; datiert: 13.12.1947; ver��ffentlicht in: International Journal of Psychoanalysis, 29. Jahrgang, 1948, S. 110-113; 2. Abschrift aus Werken und Briefen Siegmund Freuds; Typoskript, 9 Blatt; 3. Freeman, Burriel: 1 Brief mit Unterschirft an Max Horkheimer, Chicago, 10.06.1949; 1 Brief von Max Horkheimer, Los Angeles, 15.06.1949, 2 Blatt; "Authoritarianism and the Family Today" (GS 5, S. 377-395); 1. Aufsatz, datiert 1947, ver��ffentlicht in: Ruth Nanda Anshen (editor), "The Family: Its Function and Distiny", New York 1949. a) Typsokript, 20 Blatt b) Typoskript mit handschriftlichen Korrekturen, 20 Blatt c) Typoskript mit eigenh��ndigen Korrekturen, 20 Blatt d)-f) deutsche Fassung mit dem Titel "Autorit��t und Familie", ��bersetzt vom Institut f��r Sozialforschung, 1960; ver��ffentlicht in : "Erkenntnis und Verantwortung. Festschrift f��r Theodor Litt", D��sseldorft, 1960 d) Typoskript, 20 Blatt e) Typoskript, 20 Blatt f) Korrekturfahnen aus der Litt- Festschrift, mit dem Titel "Autorit��t und Familie in der Gegenwart"; 6 Blatt; 2. Sch��nbach, Peter: 1 Brief mit Unterschrift an Max Horkheier, ohne Ort, 23.06.1960; 1 Blatt; 3. Sch��nbach, Peter: 1 Brief mit Unterschrift an Friedrich Pollock, ohne Ort, 22.06.1960; 1 Blatt; "The Chances of Democracy in Germany" (GS 12, S. 184-194); 1947 [?] a) Typoskript, 10 Blatt b) Typoskript mit eigenh��ndigen Korrekturen, 11 Blatt c) Typoskript mit eigenh��ndigen Korrekturen ,11 Blatt;

Three Dichotomies in Lawyers��� Ethics (With Particular Attention to the Corporation as Client)

Three usually unexpressed, and too often unnoticed, conceptual dichotomies underlie our perception and understanding of lawyers��� ethics. First, the existence of a special body of professional ethics and professional regulation presupposes some special need or risk. Criminal and civil law are apparently insufficient. Ordinary day-to-day morality and ordinary ethics, likewise, are not considered to be enough. What is the risk entailed by the notion of a profession that is special; who needs protection, and from what? Two quite different possible answers to this question provide the first of the three dichotomies examined in this article: one can understand the risk as primarily to a vulnerable client from a powerful professional; or, to the contrary, from a powerful client-lawyer combination toward vulnerable others. Second, what is the foundational orientation of lawyers? Are lawyers serving primarily their particular clients, and those clients��� preferences, choices and autonomy? Or is the primary allegiance of lawyers to some community or collective goal or interest distinct from the particular goals or interests of the client? The third dichotomy concerns not the substance of the risk, or the primary orientation, but the appropriate means of responding to that risk or that fundamental obligation. Should professional ethics be implemented primarily through rules? Or, should we rely on character and the discretion of lawyers to make a thought out, all things considered, decision? Each of these three presents a fundamental difference in how we perceive and address issues of lawyers��� ethics. Each affects our understanding and analysis on multiple levels, from (1) determining the appropriate or requisite conduct in a particular situation, to (2) framing a specific rule or approach for a particular category of situations, to (3) more general or abstract theory or policy. A person���s inclinations in regard to the dichotomies affects the conclusions that person will reach on each of those levels of analysis, yet those inclinations and assumptions are frequently unexamined and unarticulated. One���s position on each of the dichotomies tends to structure the approach and outcome without the issues and choice having been explicitly addressed or possibly even noticed. This article is an effort to ameliorate that problem. Part I addresses the question of what is the risk in the work of lawyers, or the function of lawyers, for which professional ethics is the answer. The concluding section focuses on the particular problem of the corporation as client. Part II then asks the related and possibly consequent question of what is the foundational orientation or allegiance of the lawyer? Is it to the individual client? Or is it to some larger community interest? Again, the concluding section focuses on the corporation. Part III turns to the means or method for addressing the obligations and possible problems of the professional ethics of lawyers. Should lawyers��� ethics guide and confine the conduct of lawyers primarily through rules? Or should it function primarily through reliance on the knowledge, judgment and character of lawyers? If the latter were the guide, ethical decisions would be made on a situation by situation basis under the discretion of each lawyer. Toward the end of each discussion possibilities for bridging the dichotomy are considered (and with such bridges each dichotomy may come to look more like a spectrum or continuum.). At several points after its introduction in Parts I and II, the special problem of the corporation as client is revisited and possible solutions suggested. Illustrating the usefulness of keeping the dichotomies in view, Part IV applies them to several exemplary situations of ethical difficulty in actual lawyer practice. For readers finding it difficult to envision the consequences of these distinctions, turning ahead to Part IV may be useful in making the discussion more concrete. Some commonalities across the dichotomies and connections among them are then developed in the concluding section, Part V.

Three Dichotomies in Lawyers��� Ethics (With Particular Attention to the Corporation as Client)

Three usually unexpressed, and too often unnoticed, conceptual dichotomies underlie our perception and understanding of lawyers��� ethics. First, the existence of a special body of professional ethics and professional regulation presupposes some special need or risk. Criminal and civil law are apparently insufficient. Ordinary day-to-day morality and ordinary ethics, likewise, are not considered to be enough. What is the risk entailed by the notion of a profession that is special; who needs protection, and from what? Two quite different possible answers to this question provide the first of the three dichotomies examined in this article: one can understand the risk as primarily to a vulnerable client from a powerful professional; or, to the contrary, from a powerful client-lawyer combination toward vulnerable others. Second, what is the foundational orientation of lawyers? Are lawyers serving primarily their particular clients, and those clients��� preferences, choices and autonomy? Or is the primary allegiance of lawyers to some community or collective goal or interest distinct from the particular goals or interests of the client? The third dichotomy concerns not the substance of therisk, or the primary orientation, but the appropriate means of responding to that risk or that fundamental obligation. Should professional ethics be implemented primarily through rules? Or, should we rely on character and the discretion of lawyers to make a thought out, all things considered, decision? Each of these three presents a fundamental difference in how we perceive and address issues of lawyers��� ethics. Each affects our understanding and analysis on multiple levels, from (1) determining the appropriate or requisite conduct in aparticular situation, to (2) framing a specific rule or approach for a particular category of situations, to (3) more general or abstract theory or policy. A person���s inclinations in regard to the dichotomies affects the conclusions that person will reach on each of those levels of analysis, yet those inclinations and assumptions are frequently unexamined and unarticulated. One���s position on each of the dichotomies tends to structure the approach and outcome without the issues and choice having been explicitly addressed or possibly even noticed. This article is an effort to ameliorate that problem. Part I addresses the question of what is the risk in the work of lawyers, or the function of lawyers, for which professional ethics is the answer. The concluding section focuses on the particular problem of the corporation as client. Part II then asks the related and possibly consequent question of what is the foundational orientation or allegiance of the lawyer? Is it to the individual client? Or is it to some larger community interest? Again, the concluding section focuses on thecorporation. Part III turns to the means or method for addressing the obligations and possible problems of the professional ethics of lawyers. Should lawyers��� ethics guide and confine the conduct of lawyers primarily through rules? Or should it function primarily through reliance on the knowledge, judgment and character of lawyers? If the latter were the guide, ethical decisions would be made on a situation by situation basis under the discretion of each lawyer. Toward the end of each discussion possibilities for bridging the dichotomy are considered (and with such bridges each dichotomy may come to look more like a spectrum or continuum.). At several points after its introduction in Parts I and II, the special problem of the corporation as client is revisited and possible solutions suggested. Illustrating the usefulness of keeping the dichotomies in view, Part IV applies them to several exemplary situations of ethical difficulty in actual lawyer practice. For readers finding it difficult to envision the consequences of these distinctions, turning ahead to Part IV may be useful in making the discussion more concrete. Some commonalities across the dichotomies and connections among them are then developed in the concluding section, Part V.

Death Threat Letters: Allegories of American Authorship in the Age of Terrorism

This dissertation examines novels that use terrorism to allegorize the threatened position of the literary author in contemporary culture. Allegory is a term that has been differently understood over time, but which has consistently been used by writers to articulate and construct their roles as authors. In the novels I look at, the terrorist challenge to authorship results in multiple deployments of allegory, each differently illustrating the way that allegory is used and authorship constructed in the contemporary American novel. Don DeLillo���s Mao II (1991), first puts terrorists and authors in an oppositional pairing. The terrorist���s ability to traffic in spectacle is presented as indicative of the author���s fading importance in contemporary culture and it is one way that terrorism allegorizes threats to authorship. In Philip Roth���s Operation Shylock (1993), the allegorical pairing is between the text of the novel and outside texts ��� newspaper reports, legal cases, etc. ��� that the novel references and adapts in order to bolster its own narrative authority. Richard Powers���s Plowing the Dark (1999) pairs the story of an imprisoned hostage, craving a single book, with employees of a tech firm who are creating interactive, virtual reality artworks. Focusing on the reader���s experience, Powers���s novel posits a form of authorship that the reader can take into consideration, but which does not seek to control the experience of the text. Finally, I look at two of Paul Auster���s twenty-first century novels, Travels in the Scriptorium (2007) and Man in the Dark (2008), to suggest that the relationship between representations of authors and terrorists changed after 9/11. Auster���s author-figures forward an ethics of authorship whereby novels can use narrative to buffer readers against the portrayal of violent acts in a culture that is suffused with traumatizing imagery.

Spinoza; a handbook to the Ethics,

Half-title: Ethics of Spinoza.

Present day tracts on the non-Christian philosophies of the age,

W. G. Blaikie: Christianity and secularism compared in their influence and effects.--N. Porter: Agnosticism.--W. F. Wilkinson: Modern materialism.--J. Iverach: The philosophy of Mr. Herbert Spencer examined.--J. R. Thomson: Modern pessimism.--J. R.Thomson: Utilitarianism.--J. R. Thomson: Auguste Comte.--J. Iverach: The ethics of evolution examined.