This study investigates irony in the clinical psychology experience. There are two modes in which irony is expressed: as instrumental irony and as abservation irony. Firstly, the concept of irony is analysed in terms of its uses and meanings. Then, some issues such as paradox, the abstinence rule and narcissism, appear as related matters that demand further investigation, in terms of technique and clinical theory.
Irony can generate paradoxes. There are certain techniques, in clinic, that make use of paradoxes and they are investigated from the theoretical perspectives adopted for this study. It is analysed the relation between irony and the application of these techniques.
The abstinence rule, as it is defined by Psychoanalysis, is taken in its relation to Kierkegaard’s irony conception. Kierkegaard’s conception is close to the concept of abstinence and this was extremely useful for considering the possibilities of creating new applications of this technique (abstinence rule), inspired by irony.
It was also emphasized that irony demands certain psychological abilities or conditions to work. This issue was investigated in regard to the relations between irony and narcissism.
In the last chapter, a clinical procedure was analysed by focusing on the matter of irony. The speech acts involved and their connections to the clinical classification which separate interpretation and suggestion as two radically differente clinical procedures were analysed. Based on contributions of Ordinary Language Philosophy, it is demonstrated this radical split, between interpretation and suggestion, does not exist. This was one more irony this study revealed. Sometimes when one interprets believing his procedure is free from suggestion, there is the risk of falling in to contradiction and making even more powerful and less manageable suggestions, because they areindirectly communicated.
Key-words: irony; paradox; abstinence rule; narcissism; speech acts; interpretation.
Nenhum comentário:
Postar um comentário