Coordination Funds

精神病学史就是一部区分正常和疯狂的历史。然而，这种差异正在逐渐缩小。一方面，随着精神病院的开设和囚犯的社会融合，疯狂正在成为日常常态；另一方面，醉酒、压力或注意力缺陷等反应模式和行为被病理性地处理。这种基本二分法的崩溃使现存的精神病学历史叙事的解释力重新受到质疑。这是拟议的研究小组的出发点和基本假设：它不试图追踪精神错乱概念的变化，而是关注在处理心理变化时正常和病理之间的差异的侵蚀。参加FOR的项目的总体目标是调动精神病学中迄今未被开发的趋势作为当代史的资源。这一目标将通过分散先前精神病学史的地形图来实现。贯穿既定主题的现象应成为重点：1.涉及精神病学家以外的其他专业群体的行为者星座；2.除传统机构及其传统替代方案外，包括经济和参与性理性的逻辑和空间，从而揭示其他生态和艺术干预；3.精神病学领域互动和谈判的做法和技巧的有条不紊的方法，包括媒体、沟通和分配策略的使用。通过对精神病学史的这种疏离，For的目的不仅是编目传统范畴的明显侵蚀，而且特别是勾勒出一段与交替关系的变化史，这对现有的史学提出了挑战。最终目的是在现代人类学的模型上勾勒出当代精神病学的历史，使目前的正常/疯狂的解释方案能够服从历史分析。为了包括民族学/人种学、历史/社会学、文化和文学的方法，研究小组由来自不同学科的学者组成。同时，将重点放在病史上，以便将精神病学、心理学和社会工作的参考学科纳入研究范围。

The history of psychiatry is a history of the difference between normality and madness. However, this difference is progressively eroding. On the one hand, with the opening of psychiatric institutions and the social integration of inmates, madness is becoming everyday normality; on the other hand, reaction patterns and behaviours such as intoxication, stress or attention deficit are pathologised. The collapse of this basic dichotomy calls the interpretative power of extant historical narratives of psychiatry back into question.This is the starting point and basic assumption of the proposed research group: It does not attempt to track changes in concepts of insanity, but focuses on the erosion of the difference between normal and pathological in dealing with psychic alterity. The overarching goal of the projects participating in the FOR is to mobilize hitherto underexplored tendencies in psychiatry as a resource for contemporary history.This goal will be achieved by a decentralisation of the previous topography of the history of psychiatry. Phenomena cutting through established themes shall come into focus: 1. Actor-constellations involving other professional groups than psychiatrists; 2. Logics and spaces that, besides the conventional institutions and their traditional alternatives, include economical and participatory rationalities, thus revealing other ecologies and artistic interventions; 3. Methodical approaches to practices and techniques of interaction and negotiation in the psychiatric field, including the use of media, strategies of communication and of appropriation. Through this decentring of the history of psychiatry, the FOR aims not merely at cataloguing the conspicuous erosion of traditional categories, but especially at outlining a history of change in the relations with alterity, which challenges the extant historiography. The final aim is to sketch a contemporary history of psychiatry on the model of an anthropology of the present, capable of making the present interpretative schemes of normality/madness amenable to historical analysis.In order to include ethnological/ethnographic, historical/sociological, cultural and literary approaches, the research group consists of scholars from different disciplines. At the same time, it keeps a focus on medical history in order to include the reference disciplines of psychiatry, psychology and social work in the research.