Search

It is often noted that the health of any system is predicated upon a healthy dose of doubt and intrinsic scepticism. This is a requisite for identifying areas of improvement, blind spots and biases as well as culling out weak and diseased variables that might pose an eventual risk to the overall health of a system. Equally applicable to biological and natural systems as well as humanistic branches of epistemology, cosmology, sociology and other defining features of the human condition, suspicion ensures that the operational integrity and guiding principles of a collective are maintained, optimized and differentiated from other like bodies. This paper endeavours to resuscitate the forgotten historical lineage of doubt that constituted the early genesis of therapeutics in depth psychology and psychotherapy through the following question: 'How can suspicion facilitate self-awareness and existential clarity within the therapeutic alliance?' Answering this question will be done primarily through a case-study that makes the point that suspicion is not something fabricated by psychology after the fact, but rather, that psyche itself is implicitly guided by contrarian ways that draw out the meaning and messages of symptoms, impulses and unconscious imagery leading people to seek therapy in the first place. Doubt, it is argued, is not something to be reductively paved over in counselling, but is the very therapeutic crucible of transcendence and self-awareness necessary for authentic, embodied transformation to unfold. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

As a confluence of unique values and activities, the collective practice of community psychology is difficult to characterize in a simple way. Increasingly, however, professional contexts are laden with pressure to define any practice-from library work to medical interventions-in the orderly, compact language of traditional science. This trend has historically been resisted in the field by those sensing a fundamental lack of fit between the fluid, emergent aspects of community psychological practice and the fixed, precise language of classic science. In response to this “language-practice gap,” some have attempted to adapt the traditional language of science to better fit the field’s practice, while others have explored alternative languages of practice seemingly more indigenous to the messy “swamp” of actual communities. While the former effort leaves some theoretical contradictions intact, the latter tends to discount scientific identity entirely. This paper proposes a potential step forward by resituating questions of disciplinary language and identity within a current philosophical discourse where the nature of social science itself remains sharply contested. This suggests shifting attention away from “should webe a science?” to “what kindof science might we be after all?”; in turn, alternative languages may be re-cast as legitimate contributors to a kind of science more authentic to human communities-even a viable “science in the swamp.” One such language-philosophical hermeneutics-is presented as a particularly valuable supplement to traditional science. Illustrations highlight ways that hermeneutics may advance the formal language of the field towards a closer fit of what actually happens in practice, while preserving and even bolstering the empirical rigor and scientific identity of the field. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]