You are on page 1of 58

1

CLINICAL PHILOSOPHY - PROPEDEUTICS

Presentation
In a cold morning of June, I was walking to the Packter Intitute, sheltered in my wool sweater, in no hurry, getting warm by a rather sleepy sun. I opened the curtains and prepared my usual dying which is the way my students call my coffee. Nothing special: three spoons of strong coffee powder for none of sugar. The scent was soon spread among the rooms in the Institute. In a huge glass table I lost myself in the correction of pre-traineeships, traineeships, documents, letters and all those papers. Half the stuff scattered about the floor until I could find the wireless telephone, which rang under some heap. On the other line, an editor, whose voice was slow and firm, Paulo Ledur, had heard of the Clinical Philosophy from a friend of his, a philosopher, who had called him from Belo Horizonte. The invitation was simple: a book about Clinical Philosophy comprising origins, definitions, applications, method, basis and some other ten thousand rational sins. So, an invitation I would rather receive later has just been made. I kept wondering how unbearable a formal treaty about Clinical Philosophy might be...I offered him our class books. The books are clinical notebooks containing transcriptions of recorded classes, notes, all kinds of editorial errors, and some methodological boasts. The editor insisted on the proposal. He passed by the Institute in the afternoon, gathered the clinical notebooks (5 from the 18) and took them. Some weeks later I called him on the eve of a long trip, exactly for being the eve, and heard what I was expecting to, but it sounded much worse because it was said so politely. The notebooks are heaps of dry texts directed to philosophers. They do not look like books and are destitute of corrections -- the editor said. Well understood message, OK. So, we compromised on this book. One part of it was written on the small personal computer in airport lobbies, restaurants, hotel rooms, in every moment I had in the period of a month, while I was traveling by over ten thousand kilometers around Brazil, preparing classes, giving lectures and interviews and starting new Clinical Philosophy groups. Not very different from the way the clinical notebooks had been written. After that, I traveled to the South of Santa Catarina, home of my parents, and finished it. All this effort to make it possible to publish it during the Book Fair in Porto Alegre, a literal sacred occasion for the gachos. But this book is not a treaty. It is an illustration about what the Clinical Philosophy is and does. It was written to the Philosophy student, the psychoanalyst, the psychologist, the doctor, and also to anyone who is interested in philosophy and to the Human Science researcher. After this book, the treaty about Clinical Philosophy will certainly come soon; a formal folio book exclusively written to professional philosophers, with all the imponderable academic strictness, with no concession to the lay, just like Kant would like, published in other languages, hardback, and so on. I was piously saved from this task, which will be written by some ten clinical philosophers, masters in Philosophy, university professors and other specialists from the Packter Institute philosophers team.

Introduction

The eighties seemed amazing to whom lived them by the point of view of the pampas. Almost twenty years old, I never believed that there could be a war in this part of the world. The Coup of 1964 had not been a bloody event, and after that the war sounded remote. In the absence of a bigger bloodbath, our army specialized in torturing political prisoners. In 1982 the shock was immense! Except the usual talkers, nobody in the academic environment imagined that Argentina could attack the Falkland Islands, let alone that it could be turned out in a similar way. Embarrassment came as the fright ceased. It seemed like the English had taken the islands back too easily, and they had indeed. To the ordinary Brazilians, who knew the Argentineans from when thousands of them used to spend their vacations in our beaches in January and February, besides the rivalry when soccer was involved, those brave neighbors made us think that the fight would be bigger. For those who saw the scrap of the Argentinean ships and planes, remaining rubbish from World War II knew that there would not be the least chance for them. The shock was especially bad for me. I had been to those islands some years before; I had a good time in Port Stanley. Because of that, for months I couldnt associate the wind, the sea, and the people of the place to a stupid context of bombs and explosions. Even today, I cant. Well, in the eighties the PT, Partido dos Trabalhadores (Workers Party) increased. Sometime before 1989, the union of all the possible political left in Brazil seems to have happened. As a member of the cheerful left, I found a comfortable place; a comfort that was in fact troublesome... Until 1985, especially when Sarney assumed the presidency due to the sudden death of Tancredo, I dont think anybody knew exactly whether the political opening was true or not. There was some distrust in the air. I remember that only a few revengers, as they were called, just because they had been tortured and deprived, and now thought they had the right of shout, the revengeful ones. We didnt know the limits of the new liberty, which was rather given by them than taken for us, we didnt know how far we could go without fear, how far would the limit be before we could come back, things like that. Being able to say what we think is a very recent thing. It took us a long time to understand how it was to live with no fear. The irony happened still in 1989, when Reagan (Reagan!) and Gorbachev friendly met. And then, again 1989, the years when the wall fell. It was wonderful. I was in a bar in Curitiba, near the Passeio Pblico, when the TV showed the people galloping the wall, stabbing, taking clods from it. Some Germans knelt and prayed, some danced around, some only walked along that alive scar of stone, now startled, ready to heal at once. I wiped my tears away with my shirtsleeve. I wanted to see, I wanted to drink everything with my eyes, and so I did. The eighties were years of relief, of tears, of love. They were a surprising decade. A few years before, even the most delirious historian would not dare to raise events like, for instance, the perestroika. It was beautiful indeed. Amid that context I started researching into something which would later be called Clinical Philosophy. Almost fifteen years later, when in 1994 I finally opened the Packter Institute (the name is a homage to my fatherly grandfather), in Porto Alegre, my researches were already informally known and commented, although my colleagues didnt have a more precise idea about the content of my work. The comments were about a new theory based on advice, like what the Dutch philosophers used to do, or some support therapy. Some of these comments were really funny, like in the night when, in a tavern some kilometers from Porto Alegre, in Viamo, a

4 colleague philosopher explained me carefully what the Clinical Philosophy really meant, without having even heard about that. However, what was about to happen was unexpected. It caused a strong impact and thrilled me. Imagine what it means to open an institute to work on Philosophy, to specialize philosophers to clinical work, in a city that was considered one of the central points in Psychoanalysis in Latin-America, not to mention the uproar among the family, the friends, the ones who were not so friends and the others... Tens of legal aspects, accounting details, law devices of this and that, warrants, licenses, a copy of the diploma to register at the council, register offices, taxes, my Goodness! Besides the ones who didnt agree with the idea, of course. Well, it happened that, despite everything, my own university professors and my colleagues from the Philosophy College came to the Institute to enroll for the Clinical Philosophy course...! Filling up all the vacancies in the first two groups. Imagine! After that, what happened was a beautiful dream, which I have been living since then. The Clinical Philosophers joined and formed nucleus in many Brazilian cities. Many of them specialized in Clinical Philosophy for children, for people who are about to die, for obese people, adolescents, groups, consultancy to companies; they took the Philosophical clinic to schools, colleges and much more. An ethics committee was formed and an ethics code constituted after months of work. The Packter Institute hired juridical and accountable accessory and a juridical embasement to the Clinical Philosophy based on the actual Brazilian Constitution was inquired. We consulted the Ministry of Education, legalized our papers before the laborite aspects and a Comisso de Implantao de Cursos (Course Implantation Commission), whose purpose is to care for the clinical philosophers formation, was structured. In the next three years, more than thirty cities (USA, Europe, and Latin-America) will have their own Clinical Philosophy centers. In the coming pages you will learn the reasons for this raise. The Clinical Philosophy is just the academic Philosophy directed to clinic, performed only by philosophers who were graduated in colleges that are avowed by the Ministrio da Educao. The discourse is then directed to philosophers. I understand that it would be an ethic outrage to people if the clinical philosophers were not graduated in Philosophy first. In the Philosophy College we learn Knowledge Theory, Ethics, Logic, Ontology, Methodology, Philosophy of Science, of Religion, of History, Metaphysics, Language, Philosophy History, the theories of some dozens of important philosophers and much more. These teachings are the basis of our clinic. The clinical philosopher uses his philosophical knowledge with method and base in the persons therapy. Defining to whom the clinical philosophers work is directed is too simple and still very comprehensive: to everyone who seeks his services, as a therapist, aiming experiment philosophy in existential matters. It is directed, for instance, from the consulting to companies to the group or individual therapy, from community therapy to service to institutions or even ideological systems evaluation. Please, I have a request now: let us not go deeply into themes like prescription, methods, basis and bibliography. These and other subjects will be at the end of these pages, OK? My objective is to show how the philosophical clinic works, and after that go to the methodology. Well then, let us work.

1 How it works

In a sunny afternoon, the clinical philosopher is in his office, which is in an old and pleasant bungalow, smoking his pipe and delighting himself with some fragments of Seneca, specially when he says that it is necessary to seek refuge in ourselves, because the relationship with people who are too different from us disturb our balance, and so on, when an old fisherman shows up looking for being interviewed. The man, to be literal, looked thin and dry and had the back part of his neck deep wrinkled by deep wrinkles. The dark strains that the sun rays always produce in the tropical seas filled up his face, expanding along his arms, and his hands were covered by deep scars, which had been caused by friction of the rough lines hooked in heavy and huge fish. None of these scars were recent, however. Everything in him was old, but his eyes, which had the color of the sea, happy and indomitable. Well, the old fisherman soon exposed his reason to be looking for a philosopher, as we will see now. But first we want to know something really important: what is the clinical philosophers starting point to attend the old fisherman? Notice that the clinical philosopher didnt know the old fisherman who wanted to talk, and had never seen him before. And now, hoe does the clinic start? As the answer is quite simple, no panic. The philosopher soon remembers that, more than two thousand years ago, there were tens of thinkers trying to explain everything, from the human desires to the mystery of the stars. A heavy gang, all of them talkers that would make the sports commentators jealous. Actually, they were able to talk well or bad about anything, according to the payment. Among them there was a man, Protagoras, who taught me that as each thing appears to me, so it is to me; as each thing appears to you, so it is to you. He summarized it by saying, Man is the measure of all things. I will give some examples that will make things easier. Imagine if you have ever heard someone saying: The world belongs to the smart; all rich are robbers; here we do here we pay; all women are equal; all men are no good; life is just a dream; love does not exist; appearances are deceiving; every politician is a liar; whatever burns heals; silence gives consent; better alone than in a bad company; slowly but surely; haste makes waste; it takes loving for one to be loved; revenge is sweet; whoever says what he wants, hears what does not want; like father like son; being a mother is suffering in paradise; raising children is a hard work; sow the wind and reap the whirlwind; God helps those who help themselves; one needs to love oneself before loving someone else; the good we wish to the other returns to us; respect to be respected; eyes do not see the essence; whoever struggle values what one has; whoever loves does not kill; whoever loves never betrays; violence begets violence; there is time for everything; a true relationship is built on mutual respect etc, etc. Well, Protagoras taught us that this is so to the people who say so - because they are the measure of everything that concerns to them. If someone says, only the one who was loved can now love!, if he says that, it doesnt matter whether I agree or disagree; what matters is that, probably this is true to him. It is the criteria he uses to experience things that are related to this idea. It is not important to know whether the persons ideas right or wrong (if there is right or wrong there!), whether it is good or bad (ditto), whether he is saying the truth or deceiving me, pretending to say the truth. None at all.

6 The first fundamental lesson in Clinical Philosophy is that whatever someone feels, lives, affirms, imagine, does this is so to him regardless of being shared with other people, of being accepted, criticized, mocked, forbidden, and so on. Each one is the measure of all things, like our first philosopher said. Because of that, each person feels a loving kiss, the scent of coffee, the wind in the hair, the reading of a poem or the listening of a beautiful love song, the soft moonlight. Each person lives each thing in a particular way, and it is him/her who will know the pleasure or lack of pleasure of what he/she is living, because it is up to him/her and to nobody else to measure what he/she lives... even if he/she adopts the same standard of measurement as someone else. He wrote just like this: "Man is the measure of all things, Of things that are, that they are, And of things that are not, that they are not." Later than Protagoras, another philosopher, called Arthur Schopenhauer, resumed the subject and taught that the world is my representation, but he also warned that the world goes much farther than my imagination. Hold on. I will explain it. However intelligent, expert in theories, wonderful as a human being, studious, prodigious you may be, even so the world will have millions of things you do not know and do not even imagine. That is what Schopenhauer wanted to say; OK? It is worth the effort to know a piece of what the philosopher wrote: The world is my representation... When the man acquires this conscience... then he knows clearly that he does not know neither the sun nor the earth, but only that he has an eye which sees the sun and a hand which feels the contact of earth. He knows that the circumstantial world only exists as representation, that is, always and only in relation to another being, to the being that perceives him, to himself... Everything that the world includes or can include is undeniably dependent of the subject, not existing but to the subject. The world is representation. However, we are now facing a really serious problem. We cannot go on before we deal with it. Think with me about this: if each one has a particular opinion, if each one lives each event his way, if whatever is correct, noble, good, fair, true, beautiful, pleasant, is so only to the one who thinks so, in the world he represented to himself, then, what about truth? The general truth, that truth that is true for everybody? Will we fall now in a mess of concepts in which everything becomes relative? What will happen to the world and to us if each one does whatever one wants, claming that whatever one is doing is the right thing? Imagine two people arguing because their points of view about the same question diverge! Well, its just your representation!, one says. And this that youre telling me about my representation is just your representation!, the other says. Its yours!

7 No way, its yours...! How boring... There was a philosopher who wrote about this problem in 1873. He, Nietzsche, explained the confusion very well telling a brief little story. Here it goes: In some remote corner of the sparkling universe which spills out in a numberless of solar systems, there was a heavenly body once, in which intelligent animals invented knowledge. It was the most superb and lying minute in the universal history: but it was also just a minute. After some breaths of nature, the heavenly body froze, and the intelligent animals had to die. So somebody could have made up a fable and even so would not have illustrated enough how mournful, how ghostly and transitory, how purposeless and gratuitous the human intellect is inside nature. There were eternities in which he was not; when he has once more passed, nothing will have happened. Because, to that intellect there is no wider mission, which conducted to beyond human life. On the opposite, he is human, and only his owner and generator takes him so pathetically, as if the hinges of the world turned around him. Please, do not let the style of Nietzsche startle you. He used to write like someone who had just had a whole of coffeepot of black coffee. Translating our restless philosopher, we can say that the truths of a bee are not necessarily the truths of a small panda bear, which on their hand are not the truths of a rock, parked in the lunar ground, that on their hand are not the truths of a person. So, a clinical philosopher who works in some village squeezed against a hill in one of the big Latin-American cities, can hear the same saying set by John Steinbeck in Of Mice and Men, in 1937, even being out of our times: Everybody wants a piece of land, not much. Something that is ours. A place where we could live without being bounced out. I have never had something like that. I have already planted for almost every unfortunate in this state, but they were not my crops; and when I made the harvest, it was not mine. But now it will change, you can be sure... Lennie, George and I. We will have a place to ourselves. And a dog, and rabbits and chickens. And also a lot of green and, who knows, even a cow or a shegoat. This person does not speak about his world or mine. It is always, anyway, his world, the world according to what he understands and lives. Another man, in the same situation, could have a very different understanding. In Clinical Philosophy, there are two basic kinds of truth. The creamy hot chocolate your lips touch, the affection feelings that you experience, your opinions, your knowledge, the distant sound of a wooden flute that gets to your ears, the delicate colors of fall, the perfume of your beloved hair, these are your truths. So, the first kind of truth is the one that inhabits your heart, your cells, you. The second basic kind of truth is the kind that is conventioned, consensual, commonly established by people. So, the green sign of the traffic light indicates that the way is liberated to

8 pass, the hours that a clock marks stipulate a pattern of time, the word honey has a meaning or more than one, according to the conventions, and so subsequently. Many times a persons subjective truth can associate harmoniously, or collide, or deny, or increase, or contemplate, or avoid the stipulated truth. Imagine what would happen if you decided to date your friends women exactly in the society we live... Therefore, even if each one has his own truth, that does not mean that he can do whatever he wants without having to render account for that. Then, let us go on. The philosopher received in his clinic the visit of the old fisherman searching for his services, and now the clinical philosopher knows that whatever the old fisherman says or does will be only a sample of what things are like to the fisherman himself. If he affirms that life is good or bad, difficult or easy, brief or long, painful, happy, fair, hard, laborious, finally, it will only show that it is so to the fisherman. Consequently, we can consider that the philosopher started well his task. There is another important thing that I need to tell you. When the fisherman arrived at the philosophers bungalow, the philosopher looked at him and had the thoughts I will discreetly describe: Here is an experienced man, worker, tanned by the sun and by the events of his life, acquainted with the movements of the tides, a sea man, poor, humble, a man who deserves all my respect. Well well! But what is this? Even before the fisherman said anything, the philosopher started evaluating and deducting lots of judgements...! Is it not clinically wrong? After all, the philosopher not even let the man express himself and concluded so many notes... Everything could be perfectly different. Discreetly, once more I want to say that it is unavoidable. When you are introduced to Bem Pouquinho, my dog, even before seeing it you will already have made a thousand thoughts about it. There is no problem. A philosopher called Hans-Georg Gadamer studied deeply what he called pre-judgements. The pre-judgements are truths that we carry and that will render accounts with our new experiences. For example: even without knowing well the old fisherman, the clinical philosopher concluded: Here is an experienced man, worker, tanned by the sun and by the events of his life, acquainted with the movements of the tides, a sea man, poor, humble, a man who deserves all my respect. The fisherman, however, could be exactly the opposite of what the philosopher thought. Likewise, when you look for the clinical philosopher, you can be thinking about many things even before talking to him: Will he think that I am normal? Will he fill me with questions? Will he tell me to read all those boring philosophers? How much will he charge? I think he will be analyzing me. Pre-judgements, therefore. A girl can go to a dance with so many unpleasant pre-judgements, that even before arriving at the place she may want to go back home. Other times, she has so many pleasant prejudgements that her heart discharges in strong emotions of so much desire of being in the middle of the dance. Well, then the clinical philosopher already knows that whatever the old fisherman days or does will show what things are like to him and that, anyway, the philosopher will start the clinic with a little heap of pre-judgements (which he may later throw away). So far, so good.

9 Now, let us deepen our knowledge. The old fisherman took a tress-straw chair, sat down and started a conversation which I will literally report: Bed is my friend. Just bed. Bed will be a great thing. It is easy when you are beaten. I never knew how easy it was. And what beat you. Nothing, I went too far. After that the old fisherman went on: I must not think nonsense. Luck is a thing that comes in many forms and who can recognize her? I would take some though in any form and pay what they asked. I wish I could see the glow from the lights. I wish too many things. But that is the thing I wish for now. Then he spoke about some things that a fisherman experiences in open sea: If there is a hurricane, you always see the signs of it in the sky for days ahead, if you are at sea. They do not see it ashore because they do not know what to look for. The land must make a difference too, in the shape of the clouds. But we have no hurricane coming now. He remembered his thoughts when he was in his boat, far from the coast: In the turtle boats I was in the cross-trees of the mast-head and even at that high I saw much. The dolphin looks greener from there and you can see their stripes and their purple spots and you can see all of the school as they swim. Why is it that all the fast-moving fish of the dark current have purple stripes or spots? The dolphin looks green of course because he is really golden. But when he comes to feed, truly hungry, purple stripes show on his sides as on a marlin. Can it be anger or the greater speed he makes that brings them out? Finally, he told me about the time when he was with a big fish in the point of the line, when he fought a lot and felt dizzy and weak; he thought: I could not fail myself and die on a fish like this. Now that I have him coming so beautifully, God help me endure. Ill say a hundred Our Fathers and a hundred Hail Marys. But I cannot say them now. Consider them said. Ill say them later. And finished the speech with a sentence: The moon affects the sea as it does a woman. The question now is what to do with everything that the old fisherman brought to the philosopher. Should the philosopher ask for more information? Should he silence so that the old man continues his stories? Should he conclude that the man is senile and tired?

10 Well, before I answer, let me tell you what I have just done. I took a small and wonderful book published in 1952, called The Old Man and the Sea, by Ernest Hemingway, and just withdrew literal parts of the experiences told by old Santiago, but I did it in a completely aleatoric way. Respectively, pages 121, 117, 59, 71, 87 and 27 from the edition of 1959, printed at The Alden Press, Oxford. My purpose was to show what is really the most frequent in clinic. The person appears bringing any subject to be treated: a ruined marriage, the death of a beloved one, precarious and painful affective states (anguishes, emptiness, morbid anxieties), confusion, existential conflicts, and other subjects. The problem is that these questions are usually brought exactly like the depositions of the old fisherman Santiago were placed. There are temporal and logical jumps; there is no evident definition about the social, historical and geographical context; there is no safe reference where the brought questions may find a firm anchorage. Summarizing, the existential co-ordinates are missing! In practice, the clinician cannot identify what is being brought and may even get lost in a puzzle of situations and facts that will let him precisely so: lost. The first idea is that everything is loose and confuse. But we will solve it soon. At the beginning the clinical philosopher knows that what the person is saying is only something immediate, like someone who looks for a doctor with a high temperature of 39 o C with the intention of getting rid of the fever. But the doctor, sensible, will not give antifebriles and analgesics to the person and send him home to rest. He will start a series of medical exams to find out what is causing the fever: an infection, an inflammation, and a more serious disease. In the same way, the philosopher welcomes what the person brings as an immediate subject, but immediately starts to research philosophically the interrelations associated to the subject. And how is it done? It is done when after the first minutes of contact both talked about that immediate subject the way it was brought by the person. It is a free chat. Two people talk just as if they would talk in a park, in a library, in a casual meeting at the market or on the street. Right after the philosopher begins something that we call categorial exams.

1.1 Categorial Exams Let us have a bit of history. Aristotle brought from home a rooted methodical and empirical tradition of his fathers, a doctor. But he had been Platos pupil for almost twenty years. Plato was a poet rather than a philosopher and led Aristotle to mix up certain antagonisms that were never solved, maybe because some things need to be just the way they are. When Plato read his works in the Academy, like the treaty about the soul, one of the few students who withstood and followed attentively all the reading was exactly Aristotle. Aristotle really loved his master. And he did not only carry on what he learned, but also went much farther his friend philosopher. Aristotle developed ten categories, fundamental basis for us to research anything: substance, quantity, quality, relation, place, time, position, possession, activity, and passivity.

11 We should not be mistaken with this apparent tecnicism, since Aristotle became rather a poet and a metaphysician than a scientist when considering the human being and his emotions and behavior. So many centuries later, Kant resumes Aristotles categories, and even having affirmed that his objective was the same as his masters, it was not so. Likewise, now the Clinical Philosophy uses these categories, modified and adapted to clinic. I believe that our masters would understand our necessity of having done these modifications. The purpose of using the categories in clinic is to locate the person existentially. Through the categorial exams the philosopher will know the persons language, their habits, their time, the politics and social data of the place where they lived, the religious and historical context, besides other aspects that may be important. Well, I resume the question: how is it done? Imagine that instead of bringing literal pieces of the old fisherman Santiagos experience, like I did here, I brought to you the whole story, well organized, since the day when he left his poor house, alone, went to the seas, kept a hard relationship with an enormous fish, until the day he returned. Moreover, that I brought my story well orderly, without logical or temporary jumps which would make it inconceivable. An immediate result is that those detached speeches would simply get a place in the story, would start making sense, an identity inside a context. Therefore, now the philosopher will ask the person to tell him his story, from the farther times he remembers to the present days. The philosopher needs that the person tells his story by himself with no interpreters and will try to stay attentive all the time, avoiding interferences that may distort the persons story. In the case of the fisherman Santiago, follow an illustration: The morning sun has made my eyes hurt during my whole life, the fisherman says. Yes. But they are still very good. OK, go on. In the late afternoon I can look directly to the sun without hurting that much. It is in the afternoon that it is more intense. However, it is in the morning that makes me hurt more. In the four or five initial consultations, the philosopher will be limited to expressions like And then? And so? Continue, please. Go on telling. What else? How does it follow? You were telling me about that, go on. Because the philosopher simply has interest in a superficial description that starts, has a development and get to an end. Amid that there are breaks in which a lot of chat can take place, but only in the breaks. The cares are necessary. I want to illustrate some mistakes that are common in this initial part of the clinical work. The morning sun has made my eyes hurt during my whole life, Santiago said. It would be a mistake by the clinical philosopher to draw inferences and to ask questions like: What do you think is causing that? Have you ever looked for a doctor in the village? Dont you think that this ache in your eyes can be caused by something else? Why are you telling me this? What do you think of the sun? Tell me more about your problem. Has it disturbed you much lately?

12 These inferences and similar ones would deviate the course of the story which is being told by the person himself leading the philosopher to sophistic conclusions about what is being dealt with. Later, in another part of the clinical works, the philosopher will have the right of chatting however he wants, but not now. Initially the philosopher verifies a huge variation from person to person according to the description. For example, there are people who remember only the last five years of their lives. Others evidence enormous spaces without remembering anything. There are people who remember their lives didactically, year after year, dividing their existences by a temporary approach. Others make divisions by ethical events (my little brother used to lie to me and was very ugly), or cognitive ( I learned how to ride a bicycle before learning how to write), or axiological (I remember things I used to consider important by the point of view of my aunt and uncles religion), and so on. The philosopher soon realizes how the person tells his existence and accompanies him. After all, what does the philosopher initially know about the person with whom he has just had a first contact? He knows a little, a little indeed. He may be a desperate person who tries to maintain an all right appearance; he may be of the aggressive kind, omitted, wounded, a talkative person, someone who needs only love, or just wanting to chat... What can we affirm from the beginning, after all? Another important aspect is that, as each person has an individual world as representation, the philosopher cannot start the clinic of typologies or stereotypes or dogmas like: -This persons heart lacks God. -This person does not allow the natural flowing of emotions. -There is a sexual disturbs somewhere. -He runs away from present. -He does not like himself, that is the problem. -There is no sense in his existence. -He plays unhappy existential games. -The child who is inside him fights with the adult who is inside him. -This narrowing and tension in the neck shows a secondary narcissism. -The first thing is to release the diaphragm, so that he can breathe. -What might have happened in his past life to cause this person to present such problems now? -The person is whatever he eats. What kind of trash is poisoning this person to the point of leaving him this way? I am exaggerating, it is evident. I want to affirm that the clinical philosopher will not start from one of these truths as a pattern to the clinic. His pattern is different. If you take the autobiography of Charles Chaplin and read it from the beginning to the end with attention, you will probably perceive that mans subjective truths. You will know whether he believed in past lives, in Edypian threesome, in dialectical materialism, or even without believing suffered the influence of these or other ideas. I probably

13 say that because not everything that is meaningful is important in clinic is exactly expressed or, even expressed, assimilated by the clinician. The clinical philosopher will have a kind of autobiography of the person, and it is from this point that the work is accomplished. Sometimes the person erased ten years of his life and do not remember having lived them as a way of dealing with a great suffering he had in that period. Sometimes it is the opposite: the person remembers perfectly that suffering because he believes that it is necessary to suffer a lot in this life so that one can reach the door of Heaven. Sometimes the person invented facts and created stories that have never existed as a personal way of standing a difficult existence. There is much discretion that the clinical philosopher should obey so that the person may elaborate his autobiography adequately. These discretions escape from the illustrating objective of this book and would make its reading unbearable; that is why I will only mention the most usual aspects. Sometimes the person comes to the philosopher feeling subjectively terrible, like a volcano on the previous day of the eruption, and it would be grotesque to the philosopher do the categorial exams because he would not be able to. In cases like that we use a procedure denominated aesthetic, a kind of free addressed course (?), like the opening of the floodgates of a dam. The person then starts crying in a convulsive way, or he bursts out talking in an opulent way and with no breaks, or presents reactions such as faintings and vomits. There are cases in which the person expresses oneself verbally in a precarious way, if we compare his expression when he draws, plays a string instrument, dances or cooks. The philosopher searches for the persons semiosis data. It means that the philosopher will try to develop his clinic using the richest and most accessible expression data, which the person has. That is why, besides subjects like Art Philosophy, History, Sociology, Language Philosophy taught in Philosophy colleges -- the clinical philosophers also study clay and sculpture, languages, movies, painting and somaticity at Packter Institute. Otherwise, how would it be possible the clinic of a mute person, or of a blind and deaf person, who were not able, for any reason, to express himself verbally? It can also happen that, when asking and orienting the person to give me an autobiographical report of his life, I am headlessly confronting the way how this person understand things, what things are like to him (Protagoras). For example, a person may consider a extravagance that the philosopher wants four or five fifty-minute consultations to have his history, when the problems he is bringing are present, pressing, and, in his opinion, they need to be solved right away, from the immediate circumstances. There are still cases in which a superficial autobiographical exam is simply unbearable to the person due to the way he is. There are people, for instance, who think it useless or illusory to do a historical revision of his own life, even under the pretext of condition to start the clinic. Others may believe that every historical revision is a farce in which a liar tries to become rehabilitated. Three are others who believe that the past does not help to explain the present, that the present must be explained by itself. The clinical philosopher should accept such manifestations as genuine of the person, since it is so to him. They might be denying the past, they might have passed dialectically a historical reading of themselves, the past may not have any meaning to them, but how can the philosopher know that a priori? There are people who broke up so definitively with their own past that it becomes a massacre to use it as a beginning for the clinic. It is not the persons fault, I think, but the philosophers if he tries to force an intervention that affronts the persons way of being. A priori we know the least about the person.

14 The only thing we know is that we need to negotiate an alternative. To do the categorial crop by photographs chronologically set and commented by the person, to raise a detailed report through family members; by notes the person might have taken on a diary or any alternative that may be worked on. It is not a great solution. Sometimes it is the only one the philosopher may have. I am commenting extreme cases, since in the habitual practice it is rare to find people who oppose or feel uncomfortable with the usual means. Well, after having the complete report of the person, the philosopher lingers on some passages that were not properly understood by both of them. The categorial exam finishes when the clinical philosopher can locate, with a good margin of approach, lose or grouped information that the person provides. One example is the case of our old friend and fisherman Santiago. If we do a proper survey on this mans life, we will know with a close estimate, it is possible, the meaning, the importance, the circumstance, the motives, the consequences and other implications in his life to which the following passages refer: Only I have no luck any more. But who knows? Maybe today. Every day is a new day. It is better to be lucky. But I would rather be exact. Them, when luck comes you are ready (p. 29). And then: Think constantly about the fish. Think about what he is doing. You should not distract yourself not even for one minute. And then: Old people like me should never be alone, but it is unavoidable. Then whatever was displaced, detached, and inconceivable, acquires context, ground, bonds, becomes a necessary part of something bigger. THE SUBDIVISIONS OF THE CATEGORIAL EXAMS In Clinical Philosophy we use five categories in the Categorial Exams: subject (immediate and final), circumstance, place, time and relationship. Accompany the following traced line, exemplifying the 25 years lived by a person until today: ______________________________________________ 0 5 10 15 20 25 Subject Subject Circumstance Circumstance Place Place Time Time Relation Relation

15

After two or three months working with the person, the clinical philosopher will have more stable references about important points. He will know, for example, what matters the person dealt with when he was 5 years old (subject). He will know the entire context around those matters, and what aspects were relevant in this context (circumstance). He will have the notion of how the person sensorially, lived, his somatic experience, in his environment (place). He will be able to consider with higher accuracy, this persons temporality, if the time was subjectively short, long, fragmented, insignificant (time). He will be aware of what relationships were decisive to the person at the age of five, if they were with his siblings, with his friends, his teacher, his teddy bear, or maybe with himself (relations). The philosopher will understand the intersection among the five categories. It will be calm then to verify that sometimes the category circumstance may remain the same for almost the entire life of a person or change every year and the implications of this are; what kinds of relationships (relation) the person had all his life long, and so on. The philosopher will learn surprising data. For instance, let us consider the category time. There are people who frame their lives in the future in such a way that if the philosopher wants to work the present or the past with them he will cause from some embarrassment to violent representation shocks. In other cases, people with temporal orientation predominantly linked to the past will come to the clinic; they seem to live in the past ... they want to solve overcome subjects, not for them, of course. One example is the person who wants very hard to understand why he was unhappy in any relationship or understand why he threw his life away. Very well, but is not this initial intervention on the part of the clinical philosopher a clinical action before knowing the persons individuality? Yes, it is. Then, does not such intervention have in itself considerable risks to the person? Again, yes. INSTRUMENTS The clinical philosopher uses effective instruments in his activity. First of all, the formal logic, which studies the concepts, the judgements and the reasoning, besides the laws of thought. Let us understand the practical reasons of this use of logic in clinic, all right? Suppose a person undergoes hypnoses and reaches a deep trance. Through followed inductions, such person starts to believe, more than anything in the world, that everytime he drives to a certain street, there will be a place where he can park his car, since the power of mind can everything, etc. Days after the experiment, the person drives to the predetermined street, having in himself such a faith that arriving there he will find a place to park his car. It happens that, getting there the person realizes that there is no parking place on that street, actually, there is no place at all, because there is no pavement for cars; what is there is a pedestrian walk. Moreover, by reading the signboard with the name of the street, the person finds out that it had its name changed, being thus another street. The old street no long exists.

16 A second example is the one of the woman who got married carrying an inexpugnable certainty: if she is a good mother -- which in her conception means, for instance, take care of her childrens hygiene, her happiness is warranted. The problem is that the more she endeavors to a hygiene that comes close to the hospital sterilization, the more her familiar life collapses, so that the poor woman returns to an endless vicious circle being her more and more legitimately an unfortunate person. Notice that in both cases, although the conceptual form is correct, it does not have correspondence in the content. It happens in clinic that many times the person has structured himself beautifully, the shape of his ideas (mental objects) is right. Then the boy is sure that working hard, being competent in what he does, being ethical and persistent, when he gets to the age of 50 he will have a tranquil existence, and in any sophist way he is convinced of that to the last cell of his body. He will be happy if the other categories contribute to such an intent, which usually does not happen. The most common is that successive shocks start to happen among the concepts that inhabit the boys intellective mesh and the empirical data of the hard ground that supports him, leading to a conclusion which is rather pitiable than previsible. Other times the person builds any mental hell due to unhappy formation of conceptual structuring. One example is the person who hates people of black ascendance, creating a whole system of ideas that gives a rational basis to that hatred, until he inadvertently falls in love with a person who is exactly of black origin. Depending on the strength crash, such a conflict may make great portions of the persons existence unfeasible, taking him to every sort of conflicts. During the categorial exams, the clinical philosopher remains attentive in order to identify problems related to the formal logicism in the persons mental buildings. Another philosophical instrument is original from the English empiricism, from our masters Hume, Locke and Berkeley. During the categorial exams, the clinical philosopher searches the singular cellular data, which originated the particular and universal concepts. The philosopher looks for indications of the experience data that originate the complex ideas (Locke) the person lives. He tries to identify the relation between the concepts and the sensorial data. For example, a person, ignoring the warnings of Locke and Kant about the price to be paid for the one who ventures beyond the reason limits, may be living as if he were a brain without a body, almost like Descartes ratio would happily do. The body becomes to him like a prison, as Plato would say. And notice that this is not necessarily a problem. Usually, in clinic, it is easy to identify when this occurs. I believe that out of the clinic it is often identified. Think, for instance, of a person who claims sincerely to love you, while something in you reveals that he is not being sincere. Have you not ever heard a preaching about love, peace and fraternity done by someone who does not even know what it means...? It is important here to inform that taking the English Empirism, as a panacea is nonsense. After all, the person has sometimes lived sensorially a true hell in life, and, however, through complex ideas that he developed from there and maybe exactly because of that, he might have succeeded in living considerably well, according to his subjectivity. It is also because of that that the clinical philosopher associates the English Empirism to the formal logicism, and associates both to the language analytic.

17 After all, the philosopher needs clinical instrumentation to research the content of the term, the use, the meaning, and the ramifications. For example, if the person says that he loves the winter in the gauchas mountains, in the South of Brazil the clinical philosopher may want, depending on the case, search what this person understands by love. With all this explanation, which may be causing you nausea and vomit start, I just want to illustrate that the categorial crop does not stand for a simple autobiographic exercise, which I sincerely think is enough. The clinical philosopher disposes of proper instruments, which sometimes are as sharp as the Aristotelian confutation.

1.2 Thought Structure From now on we enter another development stage in philosophical clinic. The clinical philosopher starts now researching the persons thought structure. The thought structure is the way the person is existentially. What does it mean? It means the way all your feelings, your understandings, and your ethical and epistemological, religious data and whatever else are associated. If the categorial exams were accomplished with competence, it will be easier now to proceed to the thought structure research. I want you to think about any person you like, a person with whom you have lived for years, and a beloved person who is really important to you. Suppose now that I asked you about the habitual emotions that visit that person, about the specific emotions that inhabit him in a familiar meeting or in a dinner with friends. Suppose I insist and continue asking about what he thinks of himself in different contexts. And more, starving in my curiosity, that I ask him about what the world seems to him, his city, his friends. And go on asking what are the important values to this beloved person, what are the ideas he usually keeps close to himself, where he is going in his life, and all this just to start a conversation... I think you would be able to give me hundreds of answers, thousands of them, until I had a consistent impression of having a reasonable knowledge about that person you love, from his world as representation, it is evident. Objectively, you have an informal knowledge of the thought structure of the person you love. Now, If I could understand how all the pieces of information you gave me about that person link to each other, then your knowledge about the persons thought structure will reach greater and important depths. INTERACTION Now add the emphasis and the precision that will be obtained by a specially trained clinical philosopher.

18 The point now is how to proceed with such study? The answer is that the study starts with a whole Philosophy Faculty. After that, the philosopher will take about twenty months of specialization, taking pretraineeships and supervised traineeships, plus hundreds of video classes, study groups of clinical proceedings, eventual clinic attendance. By beginning the advanced part of the clinic, the philosopher will have deep knowledge adapted to the practice. For example, the philosopher will know that everything he considers about the person he is attending shows evidently how he, the philosopher, understands reality. I will illustrate it with a meeting between Charles Chaplin and Einstein, in 1926, in California; Chaplin wrote: His appearance was the one of a typical German from the Alps, in the best sense, jovial and welcoming. I felt that under his calm and polite manners there was a deeply emotive temper from which his extraordinary intellectual strength came. What Chaplin (the measure of all things) observed in Einstein reveals much about him, Chaplin; he saw, felt, interpreted according to his unique way. In clinic, the philosopher pays attention to the interaction between him and the person. Let us use the Mathematics of Georg Cantor to explain with certainty, all right? There is the positive interaction, which is subjectively pleasant to the involved people.

Here the relation is pleasant to the involved people. However, there can be another kind of interaction between people, like the negative interaction:

Here the people are living subjectively badly the relation. The relation may be unpleasant, bad, conflicting. I want you to pay much attention to what I will ask you. Well, why do some people maintain a negative interaction if it will be much more suitable to break the interaction? For many many reasons. A couple may be living a difficult relationship, subjectively bad to both people. However, they prefer to live this way until the children grow up and leave home.

19 There are other kinds of interaction besides these two kinds; there are many kinds. There is, for instance, the confuse interaction; the one in which the girl does not know what she feels for her boyfriend, she does not know whether she likes him or not, whether she is indifferent or something else. It is odd because after all she is dating the boy! But, as we have seen if each person has an own representation regarding the world and the things, it is possible that some people link to each other in this way. There is also the undetermined interaction, the one in which the girl now likes and now does not like the boyfriend. There is polarity. It is strange, I know, but you can bet it exists. Sometimes what links the therapist to the person is a negative kind of interaction. Did you know it? The therapist does not like the person but he is in a part of the treatment in which he should not abandon him, and the person does not like the therapist, but understands that he needs the work that has been done. So the interaction is negative and remains negative. Usually, the interaction between people oscillates, they change from positive into confuse, then positive and so on. It may happen that the interaction remains always the same, why not? The last part of Clinical Philosophy is called Symbolic Mathematics and studies the possible kinds of interaction using drawing and Mathematics. They are dozens of pages in which we study superposition, transparency, perspective and calculation, besides some other little horrors. But I have good news for you: we will not talk about it here, but a little more about thought structure instead. ... First because I want to answer a question I have let open: How do you understand the persons thought structure? The first step is not to get impressed by the names, please! We, philosophers, are used to using complicated and difficult names, like eleuteronomy, ataraxy, logical positivism, but this is only theory. None of us has a daughter called Ataraxy. Well, the clinical philosopher will start, with no false modesty, from 2,500 years of philosophy; so, beard and pipe ready, he points:

TOPICS Following, he places the first topic. 1. What the world seems And here he will place everything the person has mentioned about the environment, the world where he lives. For example: my city has trees that are good to feed the little birds. 2. What one thinks of oneself And here he will place everything the person has mentioned about what he thinks of himself.

20

4. Emotions (Oops! Did you realize that I skipped topic 3?)


Here the persons emotions go: love, condescendence, caress, sadness. 5. Pre-judgements The truths a person has before living an event. For example, the one who loves forgives. Why! Only five topics to understand the structure of a person? ... In fact, this relation goes until it completes 30 topics. But yet, is it enough 30 topics to understand the structure of a person? I agree and sign: it is not enough. It happens that each of these 30 topics are subdivided into other 30, that on their turn are subdivided each one in other 30, and so on. It is up to the philosopher to manage it... it is his problem, and not the persons who looks for him. Another thing: Where does the philosopher take the information to place, for example, in the topic emotions from? That is easy: from the categorial exams, which is the first thing that is done in clinic. Let us go on. We saw the 5 first topics of TS (thought structure) of the person: 1. What the world seems 2. What one thinks of oneself 4. Emotions 5. Pre-judgements What does the philosopher do with that? He establishes relations. Would you like to see an example? Let us suppose a person, a beautiful girl who has the following pre-judgement, All men are no good; I would never love a man. Nevertheless, the same girl, in a warm spring day, ends up finding herself in love with a boy, a man. Now, what do you have here? Do topics of the girls TS are in conflict: 4. Emotions The girl is in love with a man. 5. Pre-judgements Men are no good; I would never love a man. Then, there is a conflict inside the girl. At the same time she believes that she would never love a man and that men are no good, she is in love with a man.

21 This expresses, in clinic, headaches, migraines, ulcers, faints, dizziness, cancer, fear, anxiety, anguish, depression and a million of other things. The person does not visit the philosopher saying that she has a conflict between the topics 4 and 5 of her thought structure. She will probably go to the philosopher saying that she is upset, or that there is emptiness in her chest, or that nothing else is making sense to her, or that she is afraid of losing control and going mad, etc. It belongs to the clinical philosopher to find out the shocks, conflicts, twistings, bad associations and other factors among the persons TS topics. Wow! The persons TS topics...!? As I said before, do not get impressed by the names. It is enough to understand correctly how it works. You can throw away the theory. Well, how about illustrating now a conflict between topic 1, What the world is like, and topic 2, What he thinks of himself? 1. What the world seems 2. What one thinks of oneself Let us suppose a boy who considers the world a filthy place, a place where everything is injustice, misery, where nothing is worth, where there are only exploitation, pain and falseness. And woe betide the one who makes sacrifices for such world willing to obtain in exchange affection and love from people. This is topic 1: what the world seems. Topic 2, what one thinks of oneself: Notwithstanding, he has had a religious education, he was raised by his parents to be a kind of saint, and believes he has to make a sacrifice for the world where he lives, so that he may get affection and love from people. Trouble set. At the same time he makes a sacrifice for the filthy world where he lives, to get affection and love from people, he knows that, in this world of exploitation, pain and falseness, he will not find what he is looking for. Now I want to go a little deeper in the teaching. First, the philosopher gathers all the information with which he will fill in each topic directly from the persons narrative; the philosopher learns during the course of Clinical Philosophy graduation the three kinds of interpretation that he has to watch: literal, literal and logic, and via common sense. The second important thing to know is that the clinical philosopher studies something called autogeny. Autogeny is the study of the relations among the persons TS topics. Now we can go a little deeper. The clinical philosopher verifies surprisingly kinds of TSs, sometimes. For instance, just as there are people who cannot see, who do not have one arm, one leg, there are people who do not have a certain topic of TS because they have not developed it, they have annulled it, they made it insignificant, who knows? So, some people only have the topics 1,2 and 5: 1. What the world seems. 2. What one thinks of oneself 5. Pre-judgements

22 Where is the topic 4, Emotions? Can a person live without having emotions? Answer: Yes, Sir and yes, maam, they can. Depending on what a certain person has lived, they can have cancelled topic 4 (Emotions), in their life, or they can have minimized it so much that they cannot even experience it -- giving primacy to other topics. One example of that is the person who loved too much and had a disappointment associated to this love, which is as strong as if someone had plucked out his heart from his chest. Form this moment, the person might have annulled from his life any kind of emotion, of pain, of pleasure or any other. Now I will tell you something that will surprise you. Do you know what? In clinical Philosophy there is no normal x pathological, there is no disease x normality! That means that if the person has annulled (cancelled, killed, extirpated, detonated) a topic like 4 (Emotions) from his life, it does not mean that he is abnormal, sick, repressed or any other thing. It only means that, due to what he has lived, that happened. There is no problem in a person start living without being able to love or hate other people, animals or objects. He may be subjectively well living this way. This may be the only way the person has found to survive after having suffered all he could bear. Who knows? Who knows, to judge, to censure and say that the person is wrong? Who has lived this persons life to say that he has to liberate his emotions, to get in touch with his fears and pains, in order to exorcise them? Please! This may be exactly what he needs to be put in existential knockout at once... The Clinical Philosopher is not a lawyer, nor a psychologist, nor a doctor nor an analyst. He is the father of these professionals; he is the one who tries to understand the whole, being it by parts, being it from the whole to parts. He is not in charge of judging. Well, now I have to talk about subjective weight, importance, meaning and subjective determination. I promise I wont be bore. Look at the subjective weight that each topic of Franciscos TS has to him, as follows: 1. What the world seems.......... 2. What one thinks of oneself................................................................... 3. 4. Emotions................ Well, our hypothetical Francisco has the topic 2 much bigger than the other topics of his TS. This is very common. For what we verify in clinic, each person has TS topics that they consider, developed, captivate, know, etc, more ore less than others do. Let us suppose that Francisco clinical philosopher, who knows Franciscos TS, finds the following situation: Francisco loves a girl and knows that, in the world she lives, she is an excellent girl; he wants to marry her and have children; yet, he thinks he is immature to assume such commitment. The clinical philosopher finds himself in front of a comfortable evaluation.

23 As in Franciscos thought structure What one thinks of oneself (topic 2) is decisive, has more subjective weight in relation to the other topics, Francisco will probably not assume such commitment. The philosopher knows each topic of the persons thought structure after a long and discerning research; he will group the information by situations, context, wide descriptions and a series of exigent criteria. The fulfillment of each topic is done by approach criteria and not by exactness; after all, we are not in the scientific grounds, we are in human area. Simple, isnt it? In practice, it is even simpler than it seems. I have taught Clinical Philosophy to philosophers all over Brazil (when I refer to philosophers I talk about people who are graduated from Philosophy Faculties avowed by the Ministry of Education and Culture, MEC), an extension of about five thousand kilometers. And I usually ask them to record or film our classes. I ask them to demand from me in the future, the veracity of what I teach them in class. I tell them that the philosophical clinic is easy, safe and calm when done in the given teachings. If you happen to meet one of my pupils, please, ask him about it and about the experience he has had. And after a brief little sermon, I think we can go on. Do you like what you are learning so far? Do you want more? ... well then, you will have much more, OK? We have talked about Francisco. Now, let us talk about Maria. What happens to Maria is utterly different. Maria does not show conflict among her TS topics. Maria shows conflict inside an only TS topic. How come? Follow it: 1. 2. 3. 4. Emotions..................................................... It happens that Maria loves and hates her brother. It may happen because sometimes the persons emotions mix indistinctly, or only form themselves in a way that no name or label can define them, or they appear as antagonists. When they appear as any indistinct structure, the philosopher will not name them; he will describe them in the corresponding topic. This is because not everything the person experiences can be named by them. It is convenient to say that sometimes any persons experience can be in more than one topic. For example: a man who affirms to love the beautiful women is referring to, at least, two topics. 4. Emotions.

24 5. Pre-judgements In practice, the topical associations are infinite. A clinical philosopher will observe along his life an endless variety of different topical associations. There we have zoology, botany, fauna, which are rich in changes, for every taste. I think it very important that you understand the practical application of this teaching. Let us suppose that your wife, concerning you, has the following pre-judgement: A husband outside home is an outlaw. And let us suppose that this pre-judgement has a huge subjective weight for her in relation to the other topics of her thought structure. 1. 2. 3. 4. 5. 6. ............ .................... .... ................ Pre-judgements ................................................................................................ ........................................

Hence, knowing informally your wifes TS, you know that the emotional, ethical, mechanical justification does not matter. As in her thought structure there is a determining prejudgement, a topic that alone can weigh almost the same as all the others together, it is no use trying to dialogue with her. You will be an outlaw, against all the proof in contrary, I am sorry. By the way, have you ever been involved with someone whose decisive topic relating to you were Emotions (4) and specially something green nicknamed jealousy? How about? I am sorry for having to refer to situations like this one. I want to confess something I found out working on clinic for thousands of hours: the thought structure is not unbending. The TS is changeable; it changes and develops during all the persons life. But in this case, how is it possible to clinic, since the person modifies year after year, sometimes overnight, according to his mood? Think with me. If we have a common friend called Joo Marreco, however his life may modify during his life, his knowledge and whatever else, even so we will keep identifying the person as Joo Marreco. Likewise, we always identify our children, siblings, parents, friends, for something unique that characterizes each of them, even modifying the most they can. So, although the persons TS modifies continually along his life... and so on. Usually, when I give a lecture or a longer interview to the Press, they ask me things like that: Lucio, what else is there in the thought structure? There are things like the topic 11, Search. Search is where the person is existentially directed. Some people have a strong Search, decisive to their existence. They know what they want, know that they are fighting for that and know that nothing can be more decisive for them. They are inclined to put everything or almost everything aside in favor of that. It would be more or less like this:

25

1. ... 2. ..... 6. ............ 8. ......................... 11. Search .............................................................................................. 12. ................... 14. ......... One example is the person who wishes to be rich, financially speaking, being thus willing to sacrifice his personal vanity, what he loves and whatever else. Believe me, this is quite rare. Other times the person does not have where to go, does not think and does not care about it, the person even thinks it is nonsense to plan the future. He is neither right nor wrong; he has just structured himself this way. And here there is another question they ask me and I have already mentioned before. If each person is different and this is neither right nor wrong, neither good nor bad and does not express good nor bad, how is it possible to live together in this planet; after all it seems that each one can do whatever one wants. It is not like that. The fact that each person has a peculiar world as representation it does not mean that one has autonomy to do whatever one wants. It is obvious. Try to get at your bank sliding window and tell the bank clerk to give you a hundred thousand dollars simply because in your representation he has to yield you such amount. ... Even understanding the peoples representation, how their TS is, even so in many occasions the collisions will be unavoidable. The clinical philosopher also studies the persons semiosis data, topic 15. Semiosis data are the means of the persons expressions. Do you remember your first girlfriend? Do you remember when you first danced with her? When you first caressed, calmly or nervously, her hair? Do you remember how you kissed her and then couldnt stop and almost suffocated the girl? Do you keep in memory the smiles, the whispers, the secrets you exchanged? Do you remember when she stole your photo, promising to return it, but she never did? Do you remember when you did the same to her? Therefore, the philosopher will research what is the expression data in your life circumstances. Some would rather write love letters, while some would rather associate love with Sex, others will never demonstrate what they feel, others will recite poems, some go straight verbally, others prefer touching carelessly. Finally, each person has his own semiosis data. One of my pupils, today a clinical philosopher, found increasingly difficulties in doing the categorical exams of a fifteen-year-old girl; when he verified the semiosis data she used to express herself, writing, he collected all the categories trough a diary that she began to write. There is also topic 20, Epistemology. In this topic the philosopher will search the way the person knows the things.

26 If you ever visited a childrens school, you might have been puzzled by the didactic way the content is transmitted. A philosopher has much to contribute with the didactics, the method, the acquisition, and the exercise of knowledge. There are children who learn by observing the adults. There are children who prefer learning alone, by trying. There are children who learn by copying, creating, and destructing or simply by being forced to learn. There are children who do not learn because this topic of their TS may be subordinated to another one... Oops, let us go more slowly! 4. Emotions 20. Epistemology As the topical associations have no limit, a child may associate the topis 4 and 20 of his TS. So, for example, he can condition his learning to fact of liking or not the teacher. One may also associate: 11. Search 20. Epistemology ... And thus learning only when one feels that the teaching contributes to what one long for achieving in life. Actually, it is impossible to classify and exemplify 0.1% of the cases, enormous the amplitude of variations. I think that at this advanced point of our study we can already go to philosophical reflexions of higher amplitude. Suppose we have a common friend, whose TS shows that topic 2, what one thinks of oneself, is worth a minimum to him in relation to the other topics of his TS. 1. 2. 3. 4. ................................................................... What one thinks of oneself...... .............................................................. ..............................................................................................

Imagine what may happen if our common friend goes to a bookstore to buy a self-help book which contains ready formulas: Look at the mirror and repeat: I love myself, I deserve every good thing, I am good, pure and perfect... Exactly to him, whom has this topic minimally developed! What usually happens is that he may throw the book away, may ridicule the teachings, and may get confused. Simply because he has bought a ready formula, a formula which did not consider the only TS he has, the only in the whole world. The same can now happen if he goes now to see a therapist who preaches the free expression of what he feels, etc. A dogmatic emphasis on topic 4 (Emotions) of the TS. Or else imagine if our poor friend becomes a member of an esoteric school that praises the necessity of the person in having an aim, the life objective, a Search (topic 11) as an existence condition.

27 Notice that it is not about the easy critic to one or another kind of thought system. It deals with how the interaction happens, the coercise way, with almost evident damage. When the philosopher has a solid research about the persons thought structure, he considers something that we have not mentioned with greater details yet. I am referring to the interactions between TSs.

INTERACTIONS BETWEEN TSs. Consider as an example that Maria and Francisco got married and showed up before the clinical because they have been having increasingly difficulties in their relationship. In this case, the clinical philosopher will study the quality of the interaction between the two of them.

Which are the topics of Marias TS that unite to which topics of Franciscos TS? Does it sound difficult? Maybe in the theory it seems difficult. In practice it is as calm as well water. Suppose that Maria has married Francisco mainly because she loved him (4. Emotions) and that Francisco has married Maria because he thought he could have a comfortable life, due to Marias wealth (5. Pre-judgements). What do we have then?

Maria 1. 2,3 4. Emotions-----

Francisco 1. 2.3.4. 5. Pre-judgements

Maybe, at the beginning of the relationship it might have been good for both, but after Francisco realized that Maria was as poor as he was, everything collapsed. Pre-judgement, Francisco decisive factor, which holds firmly his interaction with Maria, weakened. Maria, on her part, felt Franciscos interest disappear, and so the love she had for him vanished. The only aspect that still united them is religion, since What God has united only death can separate. But not always the decisive interaction in a person has to do with someone else. Sometimes a person may have a very strong relation with a religion, with an object (a car or a

28 plane), a political system (Marxism, Neoliberalism), anything, instead of being in decisive interaction with someone else. For example:

+
Sociedade

Carlos

-ngela

Carlos may have a decisive interaction, and positive, with the society where he lives, and, with ngela, his wife, he may have a negative interaction. And not only negative, but also little meaningful to him. As a rule, each person lives thousands of interactions every second. However, between one and three are usually decisive for them. In the graphic examples we saw, I tried to simplify it. Anyway, you can imagine the complexities that the interactions can comprehend. In many cases the biggest suffering caused to a person comes from the quality of the interaction, and from the intensity, referring to the TS one is intimately connected to. It may be, for example, the case of a three-year-old child who is spanked by his mother almost daily. In a case like that, maybe the first clinical movement is to break such interaction, separating the child from his mother through the competent authorities. There are different kinds of cases. A man can have his decisive interaction with the work of a late author, Fernando Pessoa, for instance. Another man may be fond of colorful stones, inclined to catch the power they emanate, and have such an impassible interaction with them that they may not have with another human being. Do such cases evidence any mental pathology? No, they do not. What is the problem if a person has structured himself in a way to love plants instead of loving people? What is the pathology if other people have good relationship with stones, religious theories, if they like looking for rare phenomena in the sky while they ignore a human being that is immediately by his side? Each person structures oneself in a unique way and will have an existence according to the structure one has developed, and thats all. In front of such variety, do you know what goes inside a clinical philosopher when he gets in touch with a person? I do not think I can answer precisely, but I can try to tell what I suppose that happens in most of the cases.

29

2 The role of the clinical philosopher


The clinical philosopher tries to feel the person, the way one touches, how one looks, speaks, moves, what is ones relation with the environment where one lives. The philosopher tries to know how this person is structured, what are their pre-judgements, emotions, prevailing passions, existential roles, among other data, and how they connect among themselves and with the environment. Then the clinical philosopher, after about three months of clinic, will understand that that person is structured in a certain way and because of that tens to work in a certain way. Usually, the work with a person do not go beyond six months. After that we do occasional consults for revision and support. And then we get to the third part of the philosophical clinic. In the first part, the categorial exams. In the second part, the research about the thought structure. And, in the third, the point is what to do clinically for the problems that are found in the persons TS... If the work has been well done so far, the remaining part will be tranquil and probably well succeeded. Think with me about a situation. Let us suppose that you have broken up an engagement and are upset, in a situation of sadness that has last for weeks and weeks. You really loved the person you were going to marry; you had a very seductive perspective for your near future and now you do not have anything else. I wonder how you would take in a friend who wanted sincerely to help you in this difficult moment, taking some of the following steps: first he invites you to go to a party where there will be music, nice people, funny stories. After that, he manages to convince you to follow him to a theater, a disco, and then, realizing that you are almost fainting of tiredness, he thanks God takes you back home. Another person, a female friend, teaches you breathing exercises alternated with cushion and mattress spanking, followed by screams and howls. There is the wise friend who will interpreter what you are living and will tell you what you are living, since you do not know it. The diagnosis is that you ignore your own science; the house is given incense. Until another friend arrives and sweeps out everything with salt, thus removing the negative strength from the place and the previous diagnosis. Some day, and it always happens, comes such friend giving you all the support and telling you all the perversity of that shameless whom, for God sake, you got rid of. Maybe some of those interventions have a really charming effect and bring you a great existential good. The problem is that it is not the way things usually happen. Simply because they were forced to you as a finished and standard therapeutic model;. The theory is ready and it seems that the only thing you can do is to be resigned and accept it. Of course you can refuse it, and then the same theory will find an excellent explanation to such a rejection from you, you can be sure of that. I do not want it to seem an attack to any therapeutic school. The philosophy also fits in these examples.

30 When, for instance, Seneca affirms that we should often seek refuge in ourselves: because the relation with people that are too different from us disturbs our balance, wakes our passions, annoys our remaining weaknesses and our not completely healed wounds. Let us mix, yet, both things: let us alternate the solitude and the world. The solitude will make us crave for the society and this will lead us back to ourselves, they are antidote, one to another: the solitude healing our horror of the crowd and the crowd healing our aversion to solitude he is also giving us ready recipes! After all we already know that what Seneca affirms in his fragments is so to him, but it does not mean that it is so for everybody. Before we go on I will make you a request: do not keep the impression that these teachings are wrong or are of bad nature. That is not the lesson. The lesson I wish to transmit is that the ready therapies have been important and appropriate for years, but now it ended. Now let us suppose something else; let us suppose that your therapist knows that you have a strong opinion about yourself, that only a few weeks of tears and retiring are necessary for you to recompose existentially, because that is what you know about yourself (topic 2). The therapist also knows that when you love you do it intensively, with great surrender and that you are used to having pets around you when you suffer any affective collapse, because it makes you feel good (topic 4, Emotions). He also knows that you have a stainless steel faith regarding suffering as necessary when one is young, to grow up and learn (topic 5, pre-judgement). My goodness, how much he knows! That is not all. He knows that you are used to going on long walks through the way of trees that goes from your house to the University; he knows that this is the way you deal, and deal well, with affective pains (topic 15, Semiosis). The philosopher equally understands that the way you use to understand and get rid of difficult situations of life is to reflect a lot about what happened and open your conclusions to a person you trust, but who should not give you advice; should only listen to you, because you solve your wounds by yourself (topic 20, Epistemology). And so on. Now, where did our philosopher take all these conclusions from? He took it from yourself! He took it from the information he collected in the few weeks he lived with you, from the categorial exams. Then, it is from this thought structure that he will know how to act. It is this TS, unique in the world, that will give him the necessary orientation of the clinical action. Maybe then he suggests that you accept that kitty that your aunt wants to give you. Maybe he advises you to go on walks by specific places. Maybe he accepts your tears with concern. Maybe he does not make interpretations on the contrary, maybe he asks you to think a lot and that you open the conclusions you reached in talks to him, and these are things he will only listen. Have you noticed that I am saying too much maybe? That is because there are other aspects that we are going to analyse next. But now, think sincerely of the happy property of a clinic made from the person to the theory, and never the opposite (almost never, since there are exceptions; emergencies, for example, in which a fast action is required and we do not have time for the previous exams). Imagine what it is to live with a person who will not judge your actions, who will not put you in a typological framing, who will follow you existentially respecting the way you are, who will be by your side when he has to, and will avoid useless affronts to the way you have structured yourself. If you have never experienced something like that, I wish it still happens, at least once in your life if your TS is available to such experience.

31 It is important to say that the clinical philosopher will not have a passive attitude, accepting and understanding quietly what is brought to him. I think a philosopher is unlikely to reach such attitude. After all, the clinical philosopher who is in front of you also has a thought structure that will be interacting with yours.

Clinical Philosopher

Person

Sometimes, the person may have a TS, a way of life, that affronts violently the philosophers TS, to such an urgency, that he simply cannot continue his clinical work. A work that requires basis and method. It is perfectly natural that something like that happens and obstructs the clinical activity causing the philosopher to suggest the name of a colleage. Some clinical philosophers of my team feel comfortable to attend close relatives, like parents, children, and even their wives. Others do not want to hear about it. What seems to be known by everyone is that the quality and the intensity of the interaction are fundamental to the clinical work; that is the reason to care so much. Let us consider the other aspects, ok? I put repeatedly the word maybe before for clinical reasons we will verify now. Suppose your little brother has the habit of having as school friends boys who are used to explore hi good will in helping the others. Then you find out that he does the homework to the others, he hardly ever eats his snack alone and comes back home starving, among other situations. Your little brother may be with a Pattern (topic 17 of the TS), a situation that repeats over and over. In this case, it is no use to work in a way that he keeps doing what he usually does to change the situation, if he wants to change it, of course. Because the boy may be happy about this situation. By the way, some parents usually bring their children to clinic for they believe that the children have some problem, which not always corresponds to their version. Exceptions aside, your little brother may be living a conceptual trap, an expression that the clinical philosophers use. Let me exemplify. Suppose a man who has in his TS the following pre-judgement as a decisive topic: It suffices to walk always ahead to reach the end of the road. However, this man is walking on a line which performs a circle. Even if he believes that sometime he will reach the end of the road, it will not happen even if he turns around a million times. Not even if he keeps walking all the eternity long. This is a conceptual trap.

32 It is common that the person has many conceptual traps, most of then insignificant to the persons life. But there are traps of very cruel concepts to the existence; they can make your life miserable. For example, maybe the person that wherever passes only spreads pain and destruction, maybe the guy who can fail in every undertaking in his life, maybe the girl that only falls in love with men who are unable to love and perverse emotional manipulators. Maybe the person also appreciates living morbid situations, which, for him, are somehow attractive. Who knows? It is convenient to say that conceptual trap does not mean something bad or unwelcomed to the person. There are truly beautiful and desirable conceptual traps, as a corresponded love that is lived with pleasure.

33

3 The submodes and their relation to the thought structure


Then the clinical philosopher knows that a woman that looks for him with an immediate subject, as we saw at the beginning, of willing to learn how to have more control over her children may bring him surprises. Maybe the woman is already extremely controller, willing now to learn how to become a despot. Well, what is the clinical philosopher going to work on this person? After all, every second millions of novelties happen in each persons TS: small shocks, conflicts, bad formations or unhappy formations and much more. One example is when you do not know whether you are going to have only a salad for dinner or will take the chance of the night for fasting. Now, probably there is no reason to be clinically worried with that. The philosopher is interested in the great shocks among the TS topics, in those important blind knots, in the existential issues. That is OK, but how to know what fundamental questions deserve clinical attention and what are the ones that do not represent so much? Giving an answer may be difficult if the philosopher does not know the persons thought structure, because he will have to use hypothesis and fragile reasoning. Now everything becomes different if the philosopher knows the persons thought structure. If you read Hemingways book about the odyssey lived by the old fisherman Santiago, you will have enough knowledge to locate the main questions, what is important and what little matters. Evidently, there is no mathematical precision in this location; there is what we philosophers call exactness by approximation. That is, there is a maximum of probability concerning the diagnosis. At that moment, that is the best one can do. When the philosopher identifies the questions that will be worked in clinic, he has at his disposal not 5 or 10 nor 15 clinical procedures. He has at his disposal 32 working manners. For those who think that 32 clinical intervention manners are an exaggerated number, we still have a little surprise a few lines ahead. Well, I have said before that it is not the person who goes to the theory, but that in Clinical Philosophy the theory is formed from each person. We should consider that we have already started with pre-judgements, which is unavoidable. Think about it: does not it seem like a contradiction now to affirm that we dispose of 32 manners, clinical procedures, with which we will work with the persons questions? The apparent contradiction goes straight down the drain... First, the clinical philosopher does not use the word technique, for he presupposes a rigid mode, a stereotype. The philosopher uses the word submodes, a mode from down up, irremediably conditioned to be subaltern to the thought structure. The submodes are forms without content. Do not worry about this apparent wording; in a minute everything will be as clear and illuminated as a sunny summer day. Well, finishing the study about our good old friend fisherman Santiagos writing, we will know that he catches big fish with his line and his skiff, that he goes to the seas and does not stay stuck at the sea shore. We will know some aspect of Santiagos thought structure, we will know a lot about what he wants, imagines, feels, knows, understands and much more.

34 Well, initiating from there we will know what clinical procedure use. Should we use advising? Should we make the old fisherman think? And think about what subjects? And what kind of thoughts? There are people who come to the philosopher because they want to understand how they work; they need urgently to understand why they are so jealous of the beloved person. To this kind of person the philosopher may need to research with him the functioning of what he lives. But there are people who cannot stand this kind of research. They go to the philosopher with any existential pain and want to get rid of that as soon as possible; they want the pain to cease; they do not want to study how they work. Let us be now even more specific. Thought structure = everything that is in you: knowledges, aptitudes, emotions, sensations, etc. Submodes = the way the person informally exercises what is in one. For example: Eduardo loves Amelia and sends her yellow perfumed flowers. The love Eduardo feels is what is inside him, in his thought structure. The action of entering a flowers shop, chose some flowers, buy them and then send them to Adelia constitutes the informal submode Eduardo found to express what was in his thought structure, that is love. This is quite simple, really easy. Now follow me in some curious manifestations that may occur. The TS finds efficient submodes. Example: Eduardo loves Adelia and kisses her to express his love; this informal submode he uses, kissing, is the loyal correspondence to what goes inside him, to the love he feels. Thing seem well enchained. But the TS may found self-defeating submodes. Example: Eduardo loves Adelia and forbids her of doing anything that does not have himself as the objective. It happens that, suffocating her like this he ends up corroding the love he feels for her and creating an atmosphere of mutual distrust. The TS may use submodes that it does not control. Example: Eduardo decides to cook for Adelia, when he actually is lucky for preventing the kitchen of burning up. The TS does not find expressive submodes. Example: Eduardo loves Adelia and is not able to manifest this love through a letter, through touch, through any way. He retains this love inside himself, thus suffering huge pain and anguish grieves. Again, there are dozens of examples.

35 Notice that a person may have advanced knowledge derived from ones studies, can master music, literature, can have lived various experiences, that is, one may have a rich thought structure, although one may not find ways to express all this richness...! The opposite is also true. I am being didactical. In practice everything is interconnected; there is no distinction. If you split a person trying to find there topic 23 or 30, I think you will get disappointed, because inside the person everything is just one thing. Well, now we can give a more approximate example of the submodes. A submode that is much used in clinic and symptomatic to an era like ours is called derived argumentation. It consists of the close reasons of a certain event. For example: Let us suppose that it is the case of searching in clinic the reasons a person has to boycott oneself in every projects in ones life. Then the philosopher, knowing the persons TS, will study a way to get as close as possible of the causes. Sometimes a person gets to the causes of a question just by talking informally about it; sometimes one needs that the philosopher conducts one through successive inquiry (Why that? Whats the reason? What led one to it? Tell me a reason for that, etc.). Sometimes the person will have almost immediate access to the causes one is looking for, if one can ask the philosopher about certain behavior and fell secure. Then, using derived argumentation means that the philosopher will go after the causes, the origins, but how it will be accomplished is not pre-determined, because it is the persons TS that will give him the parameters. If the philosopher has as a pre-judgement in his clinical activity that the cure happens through the discovery of the causes of the suffering, he will certainly be in trouble. To many people, knowing what is causing their suffering means to get rid of them. To many others, knowing what is causing their suffering do not represent any movement towards that direction. I may even worsen the whole situation or cause indifference. Because of that, the clinical philosopher will only use this submode, derived argumentation, when he finds clues in the persons TS that show him this way with a good possibility of assurance. Another very used submode is called resolutive scheme. Here the philosopher no longer goes in search of the reasons, the roots, anything. The resolutive scheme studies the way the person reasons to, right after use this same way to solve ones most urgent problems. There are people who reason so: Proposition I want to attend college. And they immediately consider all the worst that may happen to them to take such decision. Losses Having no money to pay, failing the exams, finding out that one is really an inferior creature. Finally, they conclude Conclusion I will not attend college. There are also people who reason so: Proposition I want to travel this vacation. Then, they start comparing all the advantages and disadvantages and put everything in a kind of scale: In favor X Against And they finally end up undecided, choosing to ask a person they respect for some advice. Or they abandon the question, or anything else.

36

In clinic, the philosopher will have the opportunity of observing the reasoning of true thought jugglers. Example: Proposition I want to go to Greece on vacation in July. Then the person remembers the last vacation and starts crying. The person cries a lot and remembers having got divorced on that trip. One elaborates a grim little story. Then, the person feels some strong anxiety and promotes an attack to the refrigerator. Exhausted, the person forgets the subject. Later on, by intuition, one decides that one has to travel. But ends up not traveling. When studying the persons reasoning, the philosopher finds out that there are the ones who can coldly reckon their own emotional matters. There are those who elaborate some chaotic reasoning when they deal with their own emotions. There are those who can only reason properly when the lives of others are involved. By saying properly, I am referring to the logical-formal aspects. Why do such variations happen? They happen because during the reasoning some intuitive and emotional data enter as intruder, because the attention escapes and ends up bringing back data that is strange to what has been reasoned, because the person commits some logical mistakes, because there are sophistic constructions and many other manifestations. Look at this example: Joaquim is going to build his reasoning from a strong pre-judgement in his TS: Pre-judgement The Jews are guilty of everything. Then he comes to talk to me, exactly when I am leaving the synagogue with my grandfather. He feels bad when seeing me and wants me to feel guilty of it. Derived argumentation Why do you always make me feel bad, Lcio? Them he ranks detached reasons , gives logical leaps, and at the end he gets angry because I did not understand his motives, what makes him say: This is also your fault! And goes away. Hence, the philosopher will not always be able to use a resolutive scheme with the person. There are people that really cannot stand reasoning in behalf of their own problems. It may be too painful, or too annoying, or they just solve such problems through intuitive data. It is, more or less, the fellow that does whatever in his heart, abruptly, and then goes to check what really happened. I consider it an ethical and philosophical crime to force a person into a resolutive scheme if this affronts ones representation. My goodness, the person simply does not work like that! Imagine a father telling his son that he has to think before doing anything, if the son does the things based on emotions! Imagine a son saying that he does not have his parents love because his parents do not talk to him, when, actually, the semiosis date with which the parents express their love by their son are accomplished by buying him expensive gifts! The clinical philosopher notices in these cases that interaction problems are occurring; never, at no time, would the philosopher say that there is one right and another wrong, because it does not exist.

37 Let us see the examples:

Pedro

Bela

Pedro and Bela have a positive interaction. They are happy together, until they get married. With the marriage the problems begin. The clinical philosopher that is in the couples service notices that the problems do not refer to each ones thought structure. The problems refer to the informal submodes! It happens that Pedro loves Bela, and expresses this love giving her a beautiful apartment, a robust bank account, social opportunities, but for any reason, he does not have intimate relations with her. On her part, everything Bela expected from the marriage to the man she loves was that he were a tender and ardent lover, more than anything else. Bela demonstrates her love for Pedro by wearing persuading underwear, trying to give caresses, which are hardly ever corresponded. Thus, as each one uses different informal submodes to express a strong feeling shared by both of them, and as the submodes, respectively, affront the TSs mutually , the conflict seems to be set. There are cases in which such impasse is quietly solved. It is true that sometimes the person may be perishing a lot for having learned how to reason in a way that causes the person to suffer. In this case, the philosopher may try to work with one in a resolutive scheme. I consider it important to mention that some people use, along all their lives, two or three basic submodes for almost all the questions. Other people are able to use proper submodes for each context. Others may get mixed up. Well, let us see another submode? There is a submode called towards the singular term, very used to give specificity, objectivity, congruence, discernment to the ideas. It is a beautiful submode. It derived directly from the work of philosophers David Hume, John Locke and George Berkeley, strongly based on the logical writings of Aristotle and Kant. It is not proper here to get in detail, so I suggest that you take a careful look at the bibliography that I wrote down on the last pages. Well, there are people who look for clearness, evidence, precision of thought, they are lost, afflicted, confused, etc. In these cases, the philosopher may choose to conduct the person responsibly to the cellular data. For example, what people do you refer to when you affirm that you were hurt? And among them, who exactly? And what did he do that hurt you? The same process can be somatically done. The philosopher, for instance, touches the persons hand and asks whether his touch is strong or weak, whether his skin is humid, whether his ring finger is folded, whether his complexion is lighter or darker than the persons, and so on.

38 However, in clinic, when the philosopher makes a choice for a somatic work, he will already have previous knowledge of the persons TS. Then he will know how to touch, where to touch, the motive, the objective. There are people that cannot stand being touched, they fell the body as a mere object that supports the wonderful thing which their ideas represent. Others see the body and the mind as an only formation, and there are the ones who give primacy to the body. Each one, as we have seen, has his own subjective truth, which is the measure of all things, because this is so for each one. If the person keeps daydreaming, whatever, all life long and has never asked for any opinion to whomever, because he feels subjectively well, it does not matter to anybody. There is no right or wrong way of living, from the existential point of view. If for any reason the person despises his body and lives predominantly in abstractions, almost without noticing the crack of the sticks in the fireplace in winter, without feeling the sensorial pleasure of making love with the beloved one, without feeling his own skin while bathing, this does not mean pathology. The person may be reckoning, imagining what the secrets of the Universe are, he may be working on some spiritual theory. At first, the clinical philosopher learns in the specialization course how to work each submode both somatically and verbally. Specifically for the body, the philosopher does not begin by ready formulas like: you need to relax, you need to breathe correctly, such tense muscle or such anatomical formation mean such and such thing. The philosopher learns that if the person has built any muscular armor it may be the way he found to survive, and maybe, in some cases, one should not put the hand. Other times, a short and superficial breathe is the right answer the person has found to deal with an excruciating phobia which was banned due to this informal submode. Would the clinical philosopher then stir something that, bad or well, the person has already solved? People have representations (Schopenhauer) greatly different. Some solve their problems by running away from them, asking for help, facing them in a suicide way, or studying proper ways, or denying that they have problems, or accepting the problems as blessings or teaching through which they have to pass. The philosopher, as the name says, is friends with the subjective truth, and not its owner. If you solve your problems by running away from them and are living well with this, then I believe that I should not put myself on it, and I wouldnt at all, unless I were called to do that. The society may have names as cowardliness, fear, lack of character for this behavior; I do not. In many cases, there is much more cowardliness in fighting than in running away. Then, by and large, the clinical philosopher will study which submodes will be used by specific criteria: does the person already use such submode informally? Does one use it with efficiency chance? What are the other submodes that can be used in this TS? What submodes have affinity, access, fitness to this TS? What submodes will have effect upon the specific problems to be treated in this TS? When attending a child, the philosopher may observe in topis 20, Epistemology, the he gives him conditions to teach the child resolution modes, submodes! For example: Even if the child cannot ride a bicycle (which would be an informal submode), he can learn how to ride a bicycle, according to the interaction with the instructor, according to his desire of learning, according to how he can learn, according, at last, to the way his TS holds such manifestation. Let us see, then, one more submode?

39 Let us remember of one , in special, which is used to enchant the apprentice clinical philosophers: rebuilding. We use rebuilding to rescue memories that were lost, to make tortuous existential ways over again, now in reasonably safe basis, to heal wounds in the persons TS, to rebuild experiences that for any reason have suffered commotions of large proportions. The rebuilding derives from studies done with language philosophers, analytical, added to mathematical philosophy: Bertrand Russell, Alfred Withehead, J.L. Austin, Wittgenstein, Bloomfield, Chomsky, Ryle, John Wisdom, G.E. Moore. I will use analogy to make the process more accessible. Suppose that for any reason the work in question is to recover any information, but the person has only a vague reference, like the following picture:

From this reference, the philosopher will use the studies of the English Empirism philosophers, mainly the three principles of David Hume, Scottish philosopher: contiguousness, cause and effect and similitude. Then he disposes of an infinity of processes that may recover, rebuild lost data: a) Asking for detailed explanations about the area subsequent to point 4; after all, the person has access to this piece of information. b) The philosopher uses every new piece of data to a new search, looking for details and specifications. c) The image is rebuilt like a puzzle. d) Even before the end of the process, the person joins instinctively all the left data and rebuilds the image.

40

If the clinical philosopher has access to a small piece of the persons experience (a scent, a soft breeze, an interval of a melody...), if he has only a little stone, he will probably be able to make a rebuilding. Consider the effect it may have over a person who gets to the clinic existentially overthrown... Through a small beam of light, depending on the conditions, the philosopher may increase the light of the candle so that it lights up the biggest part of the place. As an example, suppose you went to the beach once and enjoyed it a lot, but you cannot remember much. The philosopher could make insertions like Were you in sandals? Whats their color? What did you do while you were there? Ect. In a while the person may have beautiful and rich memories of something that was wonderful to his life. And be sure that the opposite is also true. If someone, for example, keeps asking you painful and subjectively bad things, or talking about unpleasant things, soon we start feeling awful. Attention now! We, clinical philosophers, consider it an ethical crime doing a rebuilding job on the person before having the categorial exams and the thought structure very well researched. Otherwise, the results could be disastrous. The rebuilding is appropriately done and with well-delineated clinical objectives. The philosophers questions and placements take in consideration dynamic and complex structural data. In clinic, as far as I am concerned, there is no magic. I cannot cure any phobia in ten minutes or make someone deeply disturbed have his disturb eradicated after a couple of consultations. What exists is seriousness, a lot of work, research and, fundamentally, ethics. Nobody will see a clinical philosopher showing on TV or doing tricks, because he is not formed for that, and would be immediately revoked by the Clinical Philosophy Regional Council. It is natural that a procedure like the rebuilding opens a big range of possibilities, specially in the enchantment that it produces in the person when properly done by a competent clinical philosopher. However, it is not a panacea. Well, I think that these examples of submodes brought you a notion of the clinical procedures used by the clinical philosopher. In the last part of the Clinical Philosophy, the philosophers learn how to build submodes from the data obtained from the persons TS. The 32 basic submodes are actually like the alphabet letters; by knowing how they connect, the philosopher can compose thousands of others. Imagine, for instance, how many words you could form from the alphabet letters! Our alphabet of clinical procedures is this: SUBMODES TABLE 1. 2. 3. 4. 5. 6. 7. Towards the singular term Towards the universal term Towards the sensations Towards the complex ideas Resolutive scheme Towards to the conclusion Inversion

41 8. Inversion reciprocity 9. Division 10. Derived argumentation 11. Short-cut 12. Search 13. Short dislocation 14. Long dislocation 15. Addiction 16. Route 17. Perception 18. Aestheticity 19. Selective aestheticity 20. Translation 21. Conducted information 22. Vice-concept 23. Intuition 24. Retroaction 25. Conducted individuality (filter) 26. Axiology 27. Autogeny 28. Epistemology 29. Rebuilding 30. Indirect analysis: Function Action Hypothesis Experimentation 31. Expressivity 32. Principles of truth In practice, the philosopher mixes the submodes. If you stopped suddenly the clinic to ask which submodes he is using, the clinical philosopher might have to think for a while before answering. You would think in the same way if I interrupted your talking to ask you What are the letters of the word philosophizing? The same happens to the persons thought structure. By the clinical practice, although the philosopher is more and more able to understand directly the whole, the relations, he still has to consider the parts, the cellular data. Because in practice the thought structure topics mix almost instinctively. THOUGHT STRUCTURE 1. 2. 3. 4. 5. What the world seems (phenomenologically) What one thinks of oneself Sensorial & Abstract Emotions Pre-judgements

42 6. Terms programmed in the intellect 7. Terms: universal, particular, singular 8. Terms: Univocal & Equivocal 9. Discourse: Complete & Incomplete 10. Reason structuring 11. Search 12. Decisive passions 13. Behavior & Function 14. Spatiality: Inversion Inversion reciprocity Short dislocation Long dislocation 15.Semiosis 16.Meaning 17.Pattern & Conceptual trap 18. Axiology 19. Topic of Existential Singularity 20.Epistemology 21.Expressivity 22.Existential role 23.Action 24.Hypothesis 25.Experimentation 26.Principles of truth 27.Structure analysis 28.Interactions of thought structure 29.Symbolic mathematics data 30. Autogeny It is also important to mention that in the symbolic mathematics, the final part of the Clinical Philosophy, these didactical divisions disappear little by little. The clinical philosopher will then occupy himself with complex studies. He studies anomalous topics, since there are people who develop rare topical associations, sometimes hard to be named and even to be described. They are topical associations that only appear as derivations of others. In the symbolic mathematics, the clinical philosopher also studies patiently the interactions among TSs. Now the philosopher examines the TS as a whole. For example: Let us suppose that you take your car to a mechanic claiming that it menaces to explode when the speed reaches 62 miles per hour, and that he is the fifth mechanic that examines his car. The first mechanic changes the tires. The second one changed the windows, which caused the wind come outside in. The third mechanic cleaned the engine; the fourth changed the engine. The fifth mechanic, however, explained with caress that a nice beetle 67 is like an old man. The windows and the engine are not the problem. Actually, there is nothing wrong with it. The problem is that it is a beetle 67 and so it behaves; there might be a serious problem if it wanted to follow a BMW, at a hundred miles per hour, on the Freeway, which links Porto Alegre to the beaches.

43 In the symbolic mathematics, the philosopher also let the words aside. He starts working with figures. The study of logic, aesthetics and language philosophy goes deeper. These studies are done after the Clinical Philosophy formation course and after the clinical philosophy has at least two years of clinical experience. So far, the clinical philosophers of the Advanced Study Group, set in Porto Alegre studied only one third of the symbolic mathematics.

44

4 Final Words
The first final consideration is that, when you go to a clinical philosopher, he must have the Philosophy graduation certificate, emitted by a Faculty avowed by the Ministry of Education, in a visible place. Besides, he must have the A Certificate from Packter Institute or from any Clinical Philosophy Center or Institute properly legalized. Otherwise, you can immediately contact the Packter Institute through its juridical department, which will take the appropriate legal steps. Since the Clinical Philosophy pioneer work has become known and has reached the professional respect due to the quality and responsibility of its philosophers, many illicit adventurers and explorers have appeared, using our work criminally. The Clinical Philosophy Specialization Course is done as follows: - At least fifteen months of class with a graduated clinical philosopher. - The student is given eighteen books. These books are called Notebooks and their identification is done by letters: from Notebook A to Notebook R. The students study the notebooks at home; the classes are practical. We give the books the informal name of notebooks because they are only a complement to the practical classes: they have transcriptions of class recordings, appointments, illustrations. These notebooks can be got at AGE Publishing House. - The student goes through a pre-traineeship with a clinical philosopher instructor, from the second or third month of class. In this pre-traineeship, the clinical philosopher does the categorial exams with the student. - The student starts taking classes of clay and sculpture, painting, languages, lectures, submodes research groups, film studies, optional activities. - After the ninth month of class, the student can start his supervised traineeship. He will attend a colleague and another one will attend him. It does not have to be in the same classroom. Both the pre-traineeship and the traineeship are documented by recordings and transcriptions; at the end of the work, the material always returns to the client. - If the instructor considers that the student is able to clinic, he is authorized to attend one or two clients besides the traineeship that is being done. However, these proceedings are necessarily supervised by the responsible clinical philosopher. - At the end of the classes and the traineeships, and taking in consideration the acquaintance of the student with the group and with the instructor, the student receives the A Certificate (able to clinic and research) or the B Certificate (able only to research, not to clinic). - Then the newly graduated clinical philosopher applies for the Clinical Philosophy Regional Council and receives the CPRC card. After what we have seen, I think that now we are able to characterize the clinical philosopher as the one who uses the academic philosophy, properly qualified, in ones clinical specificity. People usually ask me in what aspects the Clinical Philosophy is different from Psychiatric Medicine, from Psychoanalysis, from Psychology. The differences are enormous. Philosophy is the father and the mother of these subjects. It is a severe father, always ready to criticize. The counterpart is not less true, though. But this is getting to an end. Today we observe a mutual support, a more and more harmonious friendship. The interaction becomes quickly positive. The characteristics of the Clinical Philosophy are: - The use of philosophical writings, almost exclusively.

45 The use of theories and authors of Philosophy, usually philosophers. Absence of typology. Absence of medical criteria like normal x pathological, sick x healthy. No use of medicine and drugs. It looks at first for locating existentially the person through the categorial exams. After the persons existential location, the philosopher studies the persons thought structure and the respective associated informal submodes. The philosophers last action is the direct and continual applying of the submodes built from the persons specificity. The clinical treatment takes between six and ten months, with the maximum of two weekly meetings of fifty minutes each. The clinical philosopher does not have competence nor legal authority to attend people with such structuring that may be prevented from the free use of ones citizenship, requiring hospitalar and civil interdiction. He cannot act in specific medical cases like poisonings, neurological dispositions that require medical attendance and medicine or surgeries as well. In such cases the clinical philosophers action in only allowed with the familys authorization and the due doctors monitoring. Theoretical basis and method: formal logicism associated to the English empirism and to the analytic of the language (language philosophy), historicity and phenomenology. At last, symbolic mathematics. The attending is done anywhere: consulting office, gardens, canteens, schools. There is no limitation concerning that.

46 1 ETHICAL CODE OF THE CLINICAL PHILOSOPHERS ACTIVITY I PRESUPPOSITIONS The ethic-philosophical preambles consider their time and the influence they have received from previous philosophers. Because of that, nowadays, we have to search for an ethical code that has, at least, some minimal universal principles, since it does not imply the loss of the ethos of the people, the culture or the nation. The ethic-philosophical preambles should consider, besides the rational beings (Kant), the existent biodiversities, some of which already in danger of extinction. As a starting-point we have tried to unite the ethics of the ends and the means, associated with the responsibility Ethics and the environment Ethics (a kind of ethical pluralism), as it is proposed by the Clinical Philosophy. When working the human being investigating his experiences, possibilities and perspectives, we should see him as a plastic being, with a future, in search, in formation, considering the influent structure and structures, not only latent but also hidden. It starts from the humanist presupposition prioritizing the existential orientation, considering that the person is a complex and multifaceted being compound of the cognitive, volitive and sensitive aspects. II PRINCIPLES In Clinical Philosophy the main principle is to inter act with the clients Thought Structure (TS), so, for every and any action of the person who comes to us the clinical philosopher has to: 1) take the categories, with as few appointments as possible; 2 study the description of his Thought Structure (TS); and 3) via interaction, apply the submodes the person uses informally in his TS. Therefore, not only for the ingathering of the categories, but also for the study of the persons Thought Structure description and for the submodes applying, we have to base only in literal and logical data, via common sense, which the person provides, with as few appointments as possible. Then prior we cannot classify the person in typologies and /or use pre-defined theories, trying to fit them in one of them. On the contrary, we have to adjust the theory to the person, adjusting clinical procedures to the way the person usually acts. III AXIOLOGY (VALUES) As a main premise, we have three fundamental values in the field of Clinical Philosophy. They are respect, honesty and concern (for everything the person confides the clinical philosopher during the process of building shared in the therapeutic work), associated to the trilogy: feeling, thought and expressing (we presuppose that the human being is not only feeling or body, or reasoning, but also a whole addition and psyche, together with the expression of these two fundamental and constitutive structures). For having these evaluating criteria, it belongs to the clinic being able to understand what is going on with the person and, if necessary, lead him to a competent professional.

47 PREAMBLE I. II. III. The present Ethical Code has the norms that have to be followed by the clinical philosophers when exercising their profession, regardless of the function or position they occupy. To the exercise of Clinical Philosophy the inscription in the Regional Council of the respective state is mandatory. In order to guaranty the regard and complete execution of this Code, the clinical philosopher has to communicate the Ethical Council, with discretion and foundation , of facts he knows and characterize possible infringement in the present Code and of the norms. The verification and inspection of the execution of the norms established in this Code is the Ethical Council attribution. The offenders of the present Code will be submitted to the disciplinary penalties foreseen in this Code.

IV. V.

PART I - THE ATTRIBUTIONS

1
2 3 4 5 6 7

8 9

The clinical philosophers duties comprehend, besides the defense of the interest confided to him, the zeal of his class prestige and the improvement of the Clinical Philosophy studies and practice. The clinical philosopher is responsible for working for the perfect ethical performance of the Clinical Philosophy and for the prestige and good concept of the profession. The clinical philosopher has to improve continually his knowledge and use them in behalf of the human being. The clinical philosopher must keep absolute respect for the human, always acting in the clients behalf. He must never use his knowledge to cause physical or moral suffering. The clinical philosopher must exercise the job with wide autonomy, being not obliged to serve whom he does not want. The clinical philosopher cannot, in any circumstances or under any pretest, renounce to his professional freedom. He has to avoid that any restrictions or impositions damage the efficacy of his work. The clinical philosopher must keep secret of the confidential information he learn in the practice of his functions. The same is applied to companies, except for the cases in which the silence harms or puts in risk the workers or the communitys life, safety and comfort. The clinical philosopher must be sympathetic with the movements of the professional dignity defense, with the ethic-professional exercise of the Clinical Philosophy and his technical improvement. The clinical philosophers relations to the other professionals acting in the area should be based on mutual respect, in the freedom and each ones professional independence, always searching the clients interest and comfort.

48 10 The clinical philosopher must have respect, consideration and sympathy for his colleagues, without depriving them of authority and refusing to denounce to the Ethical Council any acts against the ethical postulates of the Clinical Philosophy activity. 11 The clinical philosopher must have respect, care and honesty for to client. 12 The clinical philosopher must be transparent in his professional relation. PART II - RIGHTS OF THE CLINICAL PHILOSOPHER The clinical philosopher has the right of: 13 Exercising the Clinical Philosophy without being discriminated for questions of religion, race, Sex, nationality, color, sexual option, age, social condition, political opinion or of any other nature. 14 Indicating the adequate clinical procedure to the client, observing the accepted practices and respecting the countrys legal norms. 15 Requiring public retaliation to the Ethical Council when touched in the exercise of his profession. 16 Dedicating to the client the time that his experience and professional capacity recommend to the performance of his activity, preventing the client from being impaired by the accumulation of charges or of consultations. 17 In face of facts that, to his discretion, impair the good relationship with the client or the full professional performance, the clinical philosopher has the right of renouncing to the attending. This is possible since he communicates the client or his legal answerable previously making sure of the continuity of the cares and providing the next clinical philosopher of all the necessary information. 18 Receiving remuneration for the professional service, including health insurance. PART III THE PROFESSIONAL EXERCISE 19 The exercise of the clinical philosophers profession is free all over the national territory, since the exigencies of this Ethical Council are observed. 20 The professional designation of clinical philosopher is only for the ones who are qualified by course of Specialization in Clinical Philosophy. 21 Can apply for the profession of clinical philosopher: a) The owners of a certificate of graduation in philosophy, acknowledged by the Ministry of Education. b) The formation in Clinical Philosophy will be done by a properly qualified Institution. c) Every Clinical Philosophy professional, to exercise his job, must subscribe in the Ethical Council of his action area. 22 The obtainment of the A Certificate and its registration in the Ethical Council is a mandatory condition to the Clinical Philosophers profession.

49 PART IV -- PROFESSIONAL RESPONSIBILITY It is forbidden to the clinical philosopher: 23 Practicing harming acts to the client that can be characterized as incompetence, imprudence or negligence. 24 Helping assuming responsibility over any clinical procedure he has indicated or taken part, even when other clinical philosopher had attended the client. 25 Exempting himself from responsibility over any professional act he has practiced or indicated, even having it been requested or permitted by the client or his legal answerable. 26 Withdrawing from his professional responsibilities, even temporarily, without letting another clinical philosopher in charge of his clients. 27 Becoming accomplice with the ones who illegally exercise the Clinical Philosophy; with professionals or institutions that practice illicit acts, and which are against this Ethical Code. 28 Keeping from elucidating to the client the social, environmental and professional determiners, already expressed in the 14th clause of this Code. 29 Keeping from fulfilling, without justification, the norms that are emanated from the Clinical Philosophy Ethical Code and of attending to their administrative requirements, summons or notifications, in the determined term. 30 Keeping from conducting himself with moderation in his remuneration establishment, having to consider the clients economical limits. 31 Keeping from adjusting previously with the client the likely price of the proposed procedures. 32 Exercising simultaneously to the Clinical Philosophy other practices of alternative therapy. PART V HUMAN RIGHTS It is forbidden to the clinical philosopher: 33 Effectuating any clinical proceeding without previous elucidation and approval of the client or his legal answerable, supported in the 11th and 12th clauses of this Code. 34 Discriminating the human being in any form or under any pretext. 35 Exercising his authority in a way to limit the clients right of freely deciding about himself and his comfort. 36 Taking part of torture practices or other degrading, inhuman or cruel procedure forms, being conniving with such practices or keeping from denouncing them when aware of them. 37 Providing means or knowledges that make easier the practice of torture or other degrading, inhuman or cruel procedure forms, relating to the client. 38 Omitting the denounce of any act that may be harmful to the clients Thought Structure, life, safety and comfort to the competent authority and to the Ethical Council. 39 Using the profession to corrupt the clients, commit or favor any crimes.

50

PART VI -- RELATION TO THE CLIENT AND RELATIVES It is forbidden to the clinical philosopher: 40 Disrespecting the clients right of freely deciding about the execution of diagnostic and therapeutic practices. 41 Keeping from using all the available means of diagnosis and treatment within his arms reach in behalf of the client. 42 Keeping from informing the client about the diagnosis, the prognosis, the risks and objectives of the treatment, unless when the direct communication can cause him harm. In this case, the communication has to be done to the legal answerable. 43 Exaggerating the gravity of the diagnosis or prognosis, complicating the therapeutics, or exceeding the number of consultations or any other clinical procedure. 44 Abandoning a client who is under his cares. 45 Using procedures without Categorial Exams and consequent awareness of the clients Thought Structure, unless when in urgent cases, having him, in this case, immediately after the impediment. 46 Disrespecting the chastity of any person who is under his professional cares. 47 Availing on the situations, due to the relation Clinical Philosopher client, to take physical, emotional, financial or political advantage. 48 Keeping from building the Thought Structure and the consequent Autogeny for each client. 49 Denying to the client access to explanations necessary to his understanding, unless when it causes risk to him or to the others. PART VII RELATIONS BETWEEN CLINICAL PHILOSOPHERS It is forbidden to the clinical philosopher: 50 Covering clinical philosophers mistakes or anti-ethical conducts. 51 Practicing dishonest competition with another clinical philosopher. 52 Keeping from sending back to the clinical philosopher the client that has been sent to him for specialized procedure, having him, in the occasion, to provide him of the due information about what happened in the period he was responsible for the client. 53 Keeping from providing another clinical philosopher with formation about the clients Thought Structure, since the client or his legal answerable authorizes him. PART VIII --PROFESSIONAL SECRECY It is forbidden to the clinical philosopher: 54 Revealing any fact is aware of due to the exercise of his profession, unless for fair cause, legal obligation or the express authorization from the client. This prohibition remains: a) even if the fact is of public awareness or if the client has died. b) during the deposition as a witness. In this case the clinical philosopher will come before the authority and will declare his impediment.

51 55 Revealing professional secret referred to under age client, including his parents or legal answerables, since the minor has capacity to evaluate his problem and to conduct himself by his own means to solve them, except when the no-revelation can cause harm to the client. 56 Referring to identifiable clinical cases, showing clients or their pictures in professional advertisements or in public releases and/or in social communication means. 57 Using title he does not own. 58 Inducing people to use his professional services. PART IX RESEARCH IN CLINICAL PHILOSOPHY It is forbidden to the clinical philosopher: 59 Taking part in any kind of experiment in the human being with warlike, political, ethnical or eugenic ends. 60 Doing research in a human being without his written consent, after very wellclarified about the nature and consequences of the research. 61 Executing or taking part in research in which there is the need of interrupting or keeping from using the Clinical Philosophy principles. PART X -- THE PROFESSIONAL INSPECTION AND THE DISCIPLINARY INFRACTIONS 62 Constitute disciplinary infractions, besides other: a) Transgressing any principle of the Code of Professional Ethics. b) Exercising the profession when hindered of doing so, or making it easier, by any means, its exercise for the non-subscribed or hindered ones. c) Requesting or receiving any favor from a client in exchange of illicit concessions. d) Practicing, in the exercise of the professional activity, any act that the law defines as crime or contravention. e) Keep from paying the Council, punctually, the contributions he is obliged to. 63 The applicable penalties for disciplinary infractions are the following: a) Warning. b) Fine. c) Censure. d) Suspension of the professional exercise, up to 30 (thirty) days. e) Abrogation of the professional exercise, ad referendum of the Ethical Council. 64 For decree of penalty, the errors that are directely related to the professional exercise will be considered specially grave. 65 The appropriate penalties will be applied for the illegal exercise of the profession to the ones who, being not subscribed to the Ethical Council, offer their services as a clinical philosopher by means of any publicity form. 66 The clinical philosopher, in the exercise of his profession, will complete the definitions of his responsibility, rights and obligations, according to the established

52 principles of the Universal Declaration of the Human Rights, approved on 12.10.1948 by the United Nations General Assembly. PART XI PUBLICITY AND SCIENTIFIC WORKS It is forbidden to the clinical philosopher: 67 Permitting that his participation in the release of subjects related to the Clinical Philosophy in the media, keeps from having character exclusively of clarification and education of the collectivity. 68 Releasing information about Clinical Philosophy in a sensationalistic, promotional or of untrue content way. 69 Giving consultation, diagnosis or prescription by means of any mass communication means. 70 Participating of commercial business advertisements of any nature, availing of the profession. 71 Publishing in his own name any scientific work in which he had not participated; impute to himself the authorship of a work which was accomplished by other professionals , even when they were done under his orientation. 72 Using, without reference to the author or without his express authorization, any data, information, or opinions which were not published yet. 73 Producing as original any ideas, discoveries or illustrations which are not his. 74 Producing works that had not been accepted in the practice of the Clinical Philosophy. 75 The line of the Clinical Philosophy concerning to the Ethical orientation: a) individual therapy, b) familiar therapy, c) group therapy, d) business consulting, e) formation, f) supervision, g) research, h) professional relations, i) public declaration. a) Individual therapy The clinical philosopher concludes a clear contract with the client approaching the frequency, the payment, the methods, the level of intervention and the specific objectives, as well as the duration of the sections and the therapy, if it is the case. b) Familiar therapy The ethical principle of the familiar therapy is the same as the individual therapy. the therapist, however, takes the Categories individually, joining then the Thought Structures to undo the shocks that may happen. c) Group therapy Here the principles will be the same as the individual therapy; however, they will be applied to a situation in which the therapist balances the exigencies of the group and the

53 exigencies of the individuals. That is, taking the Categories individually and see what shocks are there in relation to the group. d) Business consulting - The process of ingathering the Categories will have to be always in the first place. In this case, the ingathering of Categories will be of the company as a whole. After that, the existence of interaction with the workers Thought Structure will be observed. e) Formation - Here the principles are the same as in the therapeutic relations. However, they are applied to a situation in which the instructors attend to personal and group exigencies as a necessary part of the students professional capacity of development. The instructors will be responsible evaluators of the satisfactory process and of the formation conclusion, being able to reprove a student for reasons such as lack of maturity, persistency or ability. f) Supervision - The ethical principles of the supervision are the same as the ones of the individual therapy, although they are applied to a situation on which the supervisors lean and confront with the supervised ones, in the attempt of helping them to improve their professional performance. The supervisors will not accept in therapy (traineeship) people who are close to the supervised ones. g) Research - The researcher usually follows the orientation lines described to the relation that is involved in his research. The research involving the transgress of the ethical orientation lines of the Clinical Philosophy is submitted to the Ethical Council to be discussed. h) Professional relations - This category concerns rather to the symmetric than to the asymmetric relationships. The main ethical principle to be considered is respect. The clinical philosopher is respectful with the specific competence and with the colleagues and other professionals responsibility. i) Public declaration - The clinical philosopher acts with integrity when representing his profession and presents his work and his theories with exactness. PART XII - GENERAL DISPOSITIONS 76 The clinical philosopher who has any disease that makes him unable for the exercise of the Clinical Philosophy, investigated by the Ethical Council in administrative proceeding based on the analysis of the Thought Structure, will have his register suspended during his inability. 77 The clinical philosopher is obliged to regard and respect the Sentences and Resolutions of the Clinical Philosophy Ethical Council. 78 The Clinical Philosophy Ethical Council, after hearing the category, will promote the revision and the updating of the present Code whenever it is necessary. 79 The omissions of this Code will be amended by the Clinical Philosophy Ethical Council. 80 Stipulating the limits to be charged by the services of clinical therapy will be an attribution of the Ethical Council.

54 81 It will be up to the Ethical Council to determine the periodicity of the license and its renovation. 82 Every clinical philosopher must know, execute and make execute this Code.

JURIDICAL OPINION OF THE CLINICAL PHILOSOPHY

Flvio Denardin Gonzalez (OAB/RS 19,454) Tancredo Luiz Leal Dutra (OAB/RS 23,287) Lawyers 1. The PACKTER INSTUTUTE, situated at 1937, Lucas de Oliveira Ave., Porto Alegre, consults us regarding the legalization of the formation of a specialization course in a new area named Clinical Philosophy, put the present legislation and the orientations from the Ministry of Education and Recreation (MEC). At this ground, it is appropriate to register the non existence of any legal device to prevent the specialization course in Clinical Philosophy of working. Thus, it is possible to affirm the whole legality of the Consultant Institutes intention. ... 17. The constitutional precepts that legitimate, definitely, the structuring of the course of Specialization in Clinical Philosophy may be summarized in the determination that the expression of the intellectual, artistic, scientific and communicative activity is free, regardless of censure or license (inc. IX, art. 5), as well as the exercise of any work, occupation or profession, considered the professional qualifications that the law establishes (inc. XIII, art. 5)... ... 21.To conclude, it urges to show that there is no legal ordering that whether ordinary or by any device from the Ministry of Education, may restrict or forbid the course of Specialization in Clinical Philosophy, to be ministered by the Packter Institute, since the Resolution of the Education Federal Council CFE number 12/86 only establishes authenticity conditions to the certificates of improvement and specialization courses to the Superior Professorship, in the Teaching Federal System, which does not apply to the Consultants pretension. 22. Therefore, regarding the referred present constitutional mechanisms and in the face of the nonexistence of legal infra-constitution command against it, our opinion is that the legality of the course of Specialization in Clinical Philosophy of the Packter Institute might not be questioned... Porto Alegre, May 19, 1997.

55 2 SUGGESTED MOVIES FOR STUDY

Crimes and Misdemeanors, Woody Allen. Pelle Erobreren, Bille August. Fanny & Alexander, Ingmar Bergman. Henry V, Kenneth Branagh. The Piano, Jane Campion.

Luomo Delle Stelle, John Carpenter - City Lights Modern Times, Charles Chaplin. - Apocalypse Now, Francis Ford Coppola.

Missing, Costa-Gavras. King of Kings, Cecil Damille.

Bye Bye Brazil, Carlos Diegues. - Bird Unforgiven, Clint Eastwood. - O Casamento de Maria Braun, Rainer Fassbinder. * - Amarcord E La Nave V, Frederico Fellini. - One Flew Over the Cuckoos Nest, Milos Forman.

Lenny, Bob Fosse. Kuarup, Ruy Guerra. Eles No Usam Black-Tie, Leon Hirszman. * O Tesouro de Sierra Madre, John Huston. * Narayama Bushi-Ko, Shohei Imamura. Eu Te Amo, Arnaldo Jabor. Daunbail, Jim Jarmusch. O Turista Acidental, Lawrence Kasdan. *

The Unbearable Lightness of Being, Philip Kaufman. 2001 A Space Odyssey Dr. Fantstico, Stanley Kubrick. * - Dersu Uzala Ran Akira Kurosawas Dreams, Akira Kurosawa. - Quando Papai Saiu em Viagem de Negcios, Emir Kusturica. *

Metropolis, Fritz Lang. Ryans Daughter, David Lean. Serpico, Sidney Lumet.

56

Adeus, Meninos, Louis Malle. * - Big Awakenings, Penny Marshall. - Summer of 42, Robert Mulligan. - Birdy Fame, Alan Parker. - Chinatown Tess, Roman Polanski. - Jeremiah Johnson, Sydney Pollack.

The Beast of War, Kevin Reynolds. A Garota do Adeus, Herbert Ross. * Roma, Cidade Aberta, Roberto Rosselini. * Ana e os Lobos Mame Faz 100 Anos, Carlos Saura. Midnight Cowboy, John Schlesinger. Um Toque de Infidelidade, Joel Schumacher. * Le Bal A Famlia, Ettore Scola. * Goodfellas, Martin Scorcese. Blade Runner Os Duelistas, Ridley Scott. * Hook Schindler List The color Purple, Steven Spielberg. Wall Street, Oliver Stone. Mephisto, Istvn Szab. Cinema Paradiso, Giuseppe Tornatorde. Wings of Desire Paris, Texas, Wim Wenders. Gaijin, Tizuka Yamasaki. Dahong Denglong Gaogao Gua (Lanternas Vermelhas), Zhang Yimou.

57

BASIC SUGGESTED BIBLIOGRAPHY

Here you have a little valuable library for your home. I tried to name only the philosophers and writings that have to do with what I have said. Aristotle. Tratados de Lgica: rganon. Candel San Martin, Miguel (translated). Madrid: Gredos 1994. 2v. ----------. Categories and De Interpretatione. Ackrill, J. L. (translated). Oxford: Oxford University Press, 1978. Austin, John Langshaw. Quando Dizer Fazer: Palavras e Ao. Porto Alegre: Artes Mdicas, 1990. Basso, Delmar. Teoria dos Conjuntos. Porto Alegre: Ed. Do Professor Gacho, 1960. Berkeley, George. Tratado Sobre os Princpios do Conhecimento Humano. Trs Dilogos entre Hilas e Filonous em Oposio aos Cticos e Ateus. So Paulo: Abril Cultural, 1984. Chomsky, Noam. Language and Problems of knowledge: The Managua Lectures. Cambridge: MIT, 1996. Derrida, Jacques. Gramatologia. So Paulo: Perspectiva, 1973. Eco, Umberto. Semitica e Filosofia da Linguagem. So Paulo: tica, 1991. Foucault, Michel. O Nascimento da Clnica. Rio de Janeiro: Forense Universitria, 1994. Frege Gottlob. Lgica e Filosofia da Linguagem. So Paulo: Cultrix, 1978. Gadamer, Hans-Georg. Verdad y Mtodo: Fundamentos de Una Hermenutica Filosfica. Salamanca: Sguene, 1984. Hume, David. A Treatise of Human Nature. Oxford: Clarendon, 1989. Kant, Emmanuel. Crtica da Razo Pura. So Paulo: Abril Cultural, 1983. ----------. Lgica. Rio de Janeiro: Tempo Brasileiro, 1992. Locke, John. Ensayo Sobre el Entendimento Humano. Mxico, D.F.: Fondo de Cultura Econmica, 1986. Merleau-Ponty, Maurice. La Structure du Comportement. Paris: Presses Universitaires de France, 1972. ----------. O Olho e o Esprito. Rio de Janeiro: Grifo, 1969. Peirce, Charles Sanders. Escritos Coligidos. So Paulo: Abril cultural, 1983. Popper, Karl R. Conjecturas e Refutaes: Pensamento Cientfico. Braslia: Universidade de Braslia. 1982. Protgoras. Fragmentos y Testimonios. Buenos Aires: Aguilar. 1977.

58 Rabuske, Edvino A. Epistemologia das Cincias Humanas. Caxias do Sul: EDUCS, 1987. Russel, Bertrand. Significado e Verdade. Rio de Janeiro: Zahar, 1978. ______. Introduo Filosofia Matemtica. Rio de Janeiro: Zahar, 1981. Schopenhauer, Arthur. O Mundo Como Vontade e Representao. So Paulo: Ed. Brasil, 1940. Wittgenstein, Ludwig. Investigaes Filosficas. So Paulo: Abril Cultural, 1984. ---------. Tractatus Logico-Philosophicus. So Paulo: Nacional, 1968.

INFORMAES DA CAPA CLINICAL PHILOSOPHY The Clinical Philosophy is a project developed by Brazilian philosophers graduated from Philosophy Faculties avowed by MEC (Ministry of Education). The project consists of adjusting the academic philosophy to the clinic. Since 1980, the philosopher Lcio Packter has been researching and systematizing this work, which today disbands for many Brazilian States and reaches a great number of philosophers; most of them, university professors, specialists and masters in Philosophy. Around 1998, France, England, Germany and The United States will start their researches in Clinical Philosophy. This book is an introduction to these philosophers work, written to students of philosophy, medicine, psychoanalyses and human sciences in general. The Editors THE AUTHOR Lcio Packter is originally from Porto Alegre. Coming from a traditional family of doctors and surgeons, he started his studies at Collegio Marista, in Cricima, Santa Catarina, After that, he studied in schools in Rio de Janeiro and in Porto Alegre. He developed his research in Philosophy in many Faculties and Universities: PUC-RS, FAFIMC-RS, Faculdades Tuiuti (PR) and Faculdades Metropolitanas Unidas (SP). His University formation comprehends Philosophy, Psychology and Psychoanalyses, being postgraduated in the three areas. During the eighties, he researched about what later would become the Clinical Philosophy, traveling on studies to Portugal, Spain, France, Holland, England and Scotland, mainly. In 1994, he opened the Packter Institute, in Porto Alegre, an institution directed to the research, the clinic and to the formation of clinical philosophers. The Editors

You might also like