Mental health – a normal state?

ABSTRACT

How can we conceptualize mental health; what is the relation between mental health and normality; and what has psychoanalysis to say about these questions? After a short resume of the views concerning normality and melancholia in the last centuries, the author turns to Freud and Bion. For Freud, mental health at best seems to be a relatively mild neurotic state, and perfect mental health is an unattainable ideal. Bion underlines the dynamic nature of the concept; mental health comprehended as a process. Problems connected to the individual’s subjective view of his or her mental health are considered, and some consequences that the questions under discussion have for psychoanalytic treatment are discussed. The author concludes with a reflection on the complex relation between mental health and normality.     

Hegel and Gadamer on Bildung

Hegel argues that Bildung (cultivation or education) involves an ability to reflect on one's habitual beliefs in a detached, uncommitted way. According to Hegel, the educated (gebildete) individual is able to consider a manifold of standpoints on a given issue through awareness of the historical and cultural variability of beliefs. Hans‐Georg Gadamer invokes Hegel's account of Bildung in arguing that historical study permits current presuppositions (Vorurteile) to become reflected through the awareness of cognitive plurality and change that such study brings about. The paper mainly tries to show three things: (i) that Hegel is a source of inspiration for Gadamer in this regard but that there are also important differences between their accounts of Bildung; (ii) that these accounts are not unambiguous; and (iii) that Gadamer, in particular, makes somewhat elusive claims on the power of Bildung.     

Engaging with Cultural Sport Psychology to Explore Systemic Sexual Exploitation in USA Gymnastics: A Call to Commitments

In this article, we engage with cultural sport psychology (CSP) to explore sexual exploitation in USA Gymnastics. Specifically, using critical reflexivity on the Larry Nassar case, we bring to life how systemic abuse in sport is more than a tragedy. We argue that perpetration of abuse persists in sport spaces largely because athletes train and compete in relations of force that privilege structures and practices to which athletes are subordinate. A return to recenter discussions on the significance of oppression and power in the larger discourse and ethical practice of CSP became imperative with the news of U.S. doctor Larry Nassar’s sexual predation. As tools in our advocacy for the reduction of sport sexism and sexual exploitation and abuse, we offer four ethical commitments to the field as we examine the ways systemic gendered violence and oppressions in sport are perpetrated in systems, decision-making, and every practices. We invite CSP scholars and sport psychology practitioners to interrogate and disrupt systemic intersectional disempowerment and cultures of sexual exploitation.