Your argument for construction of ³good stories² is quite compelling to =
me,
and very much in line with what I anticipate of the world, and yet....there
is an outlying Gestalt that still catches my attention, which I believe
also fits into the paradigm espoused by a Dr. Hebb???
What happens when patterns start showing up in these constructs, and all
these stories have some parts of beginnings, middles and ends that begin to
fall into patterns. What happens when this pattern recognition also proves
to be statistically significant along the lines of DSM? Or perhaps it
helps to reference aspects of these patterns in terms of its language when
communicating with colleagues? I see pattern recognition as a foundation
of what we learn to be human.
Isn¹t that the spirit of Ana Almeida¹s communique? In some circles it i=
s
quite in vogue to go on DSM-bashing, but I do not believe that validates
those intellectual cliques by itself. We do not need to react against the
vogue of the DSM to define ourselves. It¹s not even really about peaceful
coexistence. I believe a truly successful shift in paradigms is able to
co-opt those it replaces and use its defining elements to support the
newly-constructed narrative. A dominant paradigm must stand on its own
sturdily-construed merits.
So when the condescending psychiatrist tries to brush off your construals,
you simply smile and run theoretical circles around his rigid,
pharmaceutical-pushing construct like a moat around a medieval fortress.
Perhaps, then, the psychiatrist will have ³no exit² but to engage the ne=
w
paradigm....
all in fun, greg
Greg Bail, 2nd yr. MSW Student, UC Berkeley
gbail@usa.net, cal4pooh@uclink4.berkeley.edu
******************************
It seems common sense is not all that common....
%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%