[ Pobierz całość w formacie PDF ]
.Indeedpessimistic clinicians in this field can be seriously demoralising for sufferers, it is vital after such traumatic experiences to have an attitude of hope, resolve and self-belief.Cynicism about outcome is damaging not only for patients/clients but for the verystaff assisting them.I am hopeful that a chapter such as this, written by someone who is botha professional and a peer of the patients, will encourage sufferers to write aboutthe background and causes of their crises.Service user research which focuses only onevaluation of services, as so much of it does, is a particularly one-eyed view of thecontribution former sufferers can make to the psychosis field.Research by peoplewith inside knowledge into causes and precipitating factors, in my view, should be‘the dominant eye’ of service user research and could contribute greatly to under-standing, stigma reduction, prevention and early intervention.‘On Not Drinking Soup with a Fork’73ConclusionsThe single case study presented here reminds us starkly that no one singularperspective, be it biochemical, cognitive or whatever, can totally embrace theunderstanding of psychosis nor should it dominate recovery from it.Here, we haveseen likely genetic factors, family processes, cognitive biases, social stigma, moralissues, spiritual and existential problems, indeed it is clear that a whole reticularpotpourri of factors are involved in leading a person both into and out of psychosis.This offering also is obviously a study in qualitative psychology and implicitlyargues for the value of the single case study in psychology and psychiatry.It is clearthat ‘all is not number’ [a position not entirely fairly attributed to Pythagoras(Waterfield, 2000)] and it would hardly have been nourishing, satisfying ormeaningful to have recounted the above only in an arid analytical way.One doesnot drink soup with a fork and it often is the case, that if one wants more clarity onehas to settle for less truth – but if one wants more truth, one has to suffer less clarity.The integration of science, art and spirituality which I have tried to orchestrate inmy own work on psychosis (e.g.Chadwick, 2008) will I hope help students andpractitioners not feel embarrassed (as usually they are) about putting God on thepage in what they write.Delusional thinking, as well as involving intriguing issues ininformation processing psychology, can also be the release of a fiction-making abilityand an encounter with the very outer reaches of human phenomenology.It would beabsurd, and wrong, to reduce this via a model based only on the physical sciences.7Spiritual Experience:Healthy Psychoticism?Gordon ClaridgePreambleIt is appropriate to open this chapter by considering the fundamental dilemmaconcerning the manner in which individually we are inclined to interpret the putativeconnection between psychosis and spirituality.The dilemma can be stated as follows.If it is the case that spiritual beliefs and experiences are phenomenologically similarto a psychotic world view, then should we not conclude that religions are just a formof madness and the religious merely insane? Or could we not equally well decide thatthose diagnosed as clinically psychotic are really misunderstood visionaries, wronglylabelled and disparaged by others who fail to share their sensitivities? Of course, fewwould adopt either of those two extreme positions, at least as generalisations aboutall examples.But the point is made and the contributors to this book have beenobliged, in one way or another, explicitly or implicitly, to touch upon the issue.Thedebate has several strands.For example, it need not be argued, just because spiritual experience and psychosissuperficially look alike, that they share the same ‘aetiology’, whether this is construed sociologically, psychologically or biologically.There are many phenomena whosesimilarity does not extend throughout the whole range of causal relationships.Andeven if in this instance the isomorphism was to prove to be complete, there is stillplenty of scope for individual expression – for in nature the general rule is, notidenticality, but variability.In the present instance, the sources for such variation are many.Socio-culturalinfluences often dictate whom we label mystic and whom we label psychotic.Withinthe same society that decision (and the behaviours and experiences leading to it) willbe shaped by the person’s life history, current emotional relationships, scarcelyfathomable personal strengths and weaknesses, as well as economic circumstances,timing, and sheer luck.Since as yet we really have no idea what madness is, we arePsychosis and Spirituality: Consolidating the New Paradigm, Second Edition Edited by Isabel Clarke© 2010 John Wiley & Sons Ltd.ISBN: 978-0-470-68348-476Psychosis and Spiritualityperhaps entitled to shelve for the moment trying to answer the ‘big question’ in thespirituality/psychosis dilemma; concentrating instead on seeking clues as to what theanswer might, eventually, be.The present chapter is written in that vein.It offers a particular view of the topic,drawing upon what, it must be admitted, is a rather messy concoction of clinical andabnormal psychology, on the one hand, and some parts of contemporary personalitytheory, on the other
[ Pobierz całość w formacie PDF ]