A striking feature of post-modernism is its distrust of the subject. If the modern period, beginning with Descartes, sought in the subject a source of certainty, an Archimedian point from which all else could be derived, post- modernism has taken the opposite tack. Rather than taking the self as a foundation, it has seen it as founded, as dependent on the accidents which situate consciousness in the world. The same holds for the unity of the subject. Modernity, in its search for a single foundation, held the subject to be an indissoluble unity. Post-modernism’s position, by contrast, is announced by Nietzsche: “The assumption of one single subject is perhaps unnecessary; perhaps it is just as permissible to assume a multiplicity of subjects, whose interaction and struggle is the basis of our thought and our consciousness in general? ...My hypotheses: The subject as multiplicity.” Given this, there is a natural correspondence between the success of post- modernism and the current interest in multiple personality disorder. In the latter, we actually have the experience of a “multiplicity of subjects” in their interaction and struggle. The subject stands there before us “as multiplicity.” It gives us a concrete case, one which raises some of the pressing questions associated with the post-modern denial of the subject. Confronting it, we ask: how real are the personalities composing the multiplicity of this disordered self? What, in fact, does this multiplicity tell us about the self? about its genesis and status? What does it reveal about “our thought and consciousness in general”? I plan, in the short compass of this paper, to sketch some answers to these questions. §1. A brief description of MPD. The American Psychiatric Association gives two criteria for (MPD) multiple personality disorder. First, and most obviously, there is “the existence within the person of two or more distinct personalities or personality states (each with its own relatively enduring pattern
|Keywords||No keywords specified (fix it)|
|Categories||categorize this paper)|
References found in this work BETA
No references found.
Citations of this work BETA
No citations found.
Similar books and articles
Personality Disorder and the Law: Some Awkward Questions.Jill Peay - 2011 - Philosophy, Psychiatry, and Psychology 18 (3):231-244.
Multiple Personality and Irrationality.Grant Gillett - 1991 - Philosophical Psychology 4 (1):103-118.
The Poverty of the Regent.William McNeill - 2004 - Epoché: A Journal for the History of Philosophy 8 (2):285-296.
Moral Status and the Treatment of Dissociative Identity Disorder.Timothy J. Bayne - 2002 - Journal of Medicine and Philosophy 27 (1):87-105.
Informed Consent for Research in Borderline Personality Disorder.Rachel E. Dew - 2007 - BMC Medical Ethics 8 (1):1-4.
The Problem of Who: Multiple Personality, Personal Identity, and the Double Brain.Andrew Apter - 1991 - Philosophical Psychology 4 (2):219-48.
A Discursive Account of Multiple Personality Disorder.Grant R. Gillett - 1997 - Philosophy, Psychiatry, and Psychology 4 (3):213-22.
Unity and Multiplicity in Hypnosis, Commissurotomy, and Multiple Personality Disorder.D. G. Benner & C. Stephen Evans - 1984 - Journal of Mind and Behavior 5 (4):423-431.
Delusion, Dissociation and Identity.Jeanette Kennett & Steve Matthews - 2003 - Philosophical Explorations 6 (1):31-49.
Fuzzy Fault Lines: Selves in Multiple Personality Disorder.George Graham - 1999 - Philosophical Explorations 2 (3):159-174.
Added to index2009-01-28
Total downloads64 ( #83,046 of 2,178,178 )
Recent downloads (6 months)4 ( #73,172 of 2,178,178 )
How can I increase my downloads?