On the “I” as a Vessel of Memories or the “I” as Ideational Representative (Vorstellungsrepräsentanz) : A treatise of memory, autism, and nation : Series of Philosophical Psychology of Reconciliation, Part I
Nojiri, Eiichi
Osaka Human Sciences, 2024, 10, 169-200
Number of Access:201（2025-07-05 16:08 Counts）
|
|
Identifier to cite or link to this item: https://doi.org/10.18910/94834
|
Link to primary information
| File |
Format |
Terms of use |
Size |
Views |
Date.Available |
Description |
information |
|
ohs_10_169
|
pdf
|
None
|
3.47 MB |
58
|
2024.04.04
|
|
|
Item Information
Output File
Export EndNote Basic
Export Mendeley
| Title |
|
| Creator |
|
| Subject |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| Abstract |
This article is the first (Part I) of a series comprising two parts. In this series, the author aim to examine how to address the challenges associated with memory and historical cognition through the lens of philosophical anthropology or philosophical psychology. Furthermore, I will evaluate whether such research can contribute to the vision of a new academic field, “reconciliation studies.” Emphasis is placed on interdisciplinary approaches in the humanities and social sciences. This will involve reinterpretation of Western classical philosophical theories of memory, introduction of recent findings in psychopathology, and decoding problematic constructs on memory present in contemporary representational culture such as literature, film, manga, and anime. The genealogy the author suppose with the term “philosophical anthropology/ psychology” includes the theories of imagination and memory included in “Anthropologie” developed by German idealists of the 18th and 19th centuries, such as Immanuel Kant and G. W. F. Hegel, the psychoanalysis of symptoms and unconscious memory undertaken by Sigmund Freud from the late 19th century to the early 20th century, the philosophical memory theory of Henri Bergson, the collective memory theory of Maurice Halbwachs, the Frankfurt School’s critical theory, a fusion of psychology (Freud) and social theory (Karl Marx) since the middle of the 20th century, such as Max Horkheimer, Theodor Adorno, and Walter Benjamin, which dealt with the mechanisms of imagination, memory, and generation of history in popular culture and commodity space, the relationship between representation and structural causality as conceived by Louis Althusser, and Jacques Derrida’s problem of Western metaphysics as blank memory, Fredric Jameson’s theory of daydreaming, representational culture, and utopianism in contemporary society, Slavoj Žižek’s discussion of politics and culture as general psychoses or “symptoms” using Hegel and Lacan, Paul Ricoeur’s philosophy of memory, history, and forgetting, and Anne Whitehead’s humanities of memory, which summarizes them from a twenty-first century perspective. Here, we trace the ideas we have identified as important milestones, forming a set of interconnected interpretations and hypotheses, and testing what practical visions philosophical psychology can offer for reconciliation. The group of hypotheses presented in this discussion covers the following points: (1) the linkage between memory and empathy, (2) the structural equivalence between memory, representation, and symptom, (3) the historicity of the fact that memory became the basis of personal identity after the 19th century, and (4) the structural causality between personal memory representation and the state-capitalist (multilateralist) social construction from the late 19th century to the late 20th century. Each of these is a new hypothesis, but all of them are theoretically possible in the thought of the thinkers listed above. What we attempt here is their extraction and synthesis. To conclude, we consolidate all of the results obtained from this process into the term (5) “Poetics and Micropolitics for Reconciliation Studies”. In this Part I, points (1) through (3) are primarily discussed; in Part II points (4) and (5) are discussed. While taking on the challenges of the new discipline of “reconciliation studies,” the series brought innovative reinterpretations of existing theories. Its achievement is the application of Lacanian psychoanalytic theory to elucidate the structure of people’s imagined identities (especially memory and nationalism) in the context of historical structural changes in society. At the same time, the series has complemented Lacanian theory, which lacks a theory of historical social change and the formation of collective memory and collective images, with Maurice Halbwachs’ theory of collective memory, Ian Hacking’s work on false memory, and more recent research on developmental disorders and autism. In particular, the upgrading of the theory of “object a” into the theory of “object-a-structure” and its opening to the field of history and collectivity is regarded as a major achievement of this series.
|
| Publisher |
|
| Source Title |
|
| Volume (Issue) |
|
| Page |
|
| Date of Issued |
|
| Language |
|
| Handle URL |
|
| DOI |
|
| NCID |
|
| Access Rights |
|
| oaire:version |
|
| Category |
|
|
|
| Resource Type |
|
| Local Type |
|
| DCMI Type |
|
| DCTERMS.bibliographicCitation |
|
| DC.title |
|
| DC.creator |
|
| DC.publisher |
|
| DC.language' scheme='DCTERMS.RFC1766 |
|
| DC.type' scheme='DCTERMS.DCMIType |
|
| DCTERMS.issued' scheme='DCTERMS.W3CDTF |
|
| DC.subject |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| DCTERMS.abstract |
This article is the first (Part I) of a series comprising two parts. In this series, the author aim to examine how to address the challenges associated with memory and historical cognition through the lens of philosophical anthropology or philosophical psychology. Furthermore, I will evaluate whether such research can contribute to the vision of a new academic field, “reconciliation studies.” Emphasis is placed on interdisciplinary approaches in the humanities and social sciences. This will involve reinterpretation of Western classical philosophical theories of memory, introduction of recent findings in psychopathology, and decoding problematic constructs on memory present in contemporary representational culture such as literature, film, manga, and anime. The genealogy the author suppose with the term “philosophical anthropology/ psychology” includes the theories of imagination and memory included in “Anthropologie” developed by German idealists of the 18th and 19th centuries, such as Immanuel Kant and G. W. F. Hegel, the psychoanalysis of symptoms and unconscious memory undertaken by Sigmund Freud from the late 19th century to the early 20th century, the philosophical memory theory of Henri Bergson, the collective memory theory of Maurice Halbwachs, the Frankfurt School’s critical theory, a fusion of psychology (Freud) and social theory (Karl Marx) since the middle of the 20th century, such as Max Horkheimer, Theodor Adorno, and Walter Benjamin, which dealt with the mechanisms of imagination, memory, and generation of history in popular culture and commodity space, the relationship between representation and structural causality as conceived by Louis Althusser, and Jacques Derrida’s problem of Western metaphysics as blank memory, Fredric Jameson’s theory of daydreaming, representational culture, and utopianism in contemporary society, Slavoj Žižek’s discussion of politics and culture as general psychoses or “symptoms” using Hegel and Lacan, Paul Ricoeur’s philosophy of memory, history, and forgetting, and Anne Whitehead’s humanities of memory, which summarizes them from a twenty-first century perspective. Here, we trace the ideas we have identified as important milestones, forming a set of interconnected interpretations and hypotheses, and testing what practical visions philosophical psychology can offer for reconciliation. The group of hypotheses presented in this discussion covers the following points: (1) the linkage between memory and empathy, (2) the structural equivalence between memory, representation, and symptom, (3) the historicity of the fact that memory became the basis of personal identity after the 19th century, and (4) the structural causality between personal memory representation and the state-capitalist (multilateralist) social construction from the late 19th century to the late 20th century. Each of these is a new hypothesis, but all of them are theoretically possible in the thought of the thinkers listed above. What we attempt here is their extraction and synthesis. To conclude, we consolidate all of the results obtained from this process into the term (5) “Poetics and Micropolitics for Reconciliation Studies”. In this Part I, points (1) through (3) are primarily discussed; in Part II points (4) and (5) are discussed. While taking on the challenges of the new discipline of “reconciliation studies,” the series brought innovative reinterpretations of existing theories. Its achievement is the application of Lacanian psychoanalytic theory to elucidate the structure of people’s imagined identities (especially memory and nationalism) in the context of historical structural changes in society. At the same time, the series has complemented Lacanian theory, which lacks a theory of historical social change and the formation of collective memory and collective images, with Maurice Halbwachs’ theory of collective memory, Ian Hacking’s work on false memory, and more recent research on developmental disorders and autism. In particular, the upgrading of the theory of “object a” into the theory of “object-a-structure” and its opening to the field of history and collectivity is regarded as a major achievement of this series.
|
| DC.identifier |
|
| DC.format |
|
| citation_title |
|
| citation_author |
|
| citation_publisher |
|
| citation_language |
|
| citation_date |
|
| citation_journal_title |
|
| citation_volume |
|
| citation_firstpage |
|
| citation_lastpage |
|
| citation_public_url |
|
| citation_doi_detail |
|
| citation_doi |
|
