martes, 9 de abril de 2013

Ambivalence about poverty

The ambivalence of our language allows us secretly confess that both eradicate poverty as we keep one day disappear.

The first article on poverty pathological concept I wrote this in 2006 and released today is numbered 1844.

My ideas are suppliers of psychology, economics, sociology, law, medicine (especially psychiatry), plus other lesser extent I understand.

In all my suppliers present linguistics. The phenomena of language are essential in the construction of ideas, theories, hypotheses, and especially in how we communicate to exchange views (reviews, comments, suggestions).

When we say in our language is good treatment for some ailment, we are saying two things:

a) it's good to be free of that disease (cure) and

b) which is good for the ailment is increasingly better (and worse every day patient).

The third element at play here linguistic concerns a rarely understood as saying the entire sentence, which reads: "The treatment is good for free from some ailment."

When it comes to the subject of articles in this blog that specializes in so for now I just call pathological poverty, something similar happens.

When politicians and economists develop theories and propose solutions to poverty, are saying the same, that is, they are trying

a) to eradicate the chronic shortage of low-income citizens, and yet they also say:

b) they are trying to improve poverty to never cease to exist.

In psychoanalysis we can not believe in the naive errors. For this art-scientific errors and discursive ambivalence are lapses, ie taking unconscious contents conscious state disguised mistake.

In short: we want while preserving eradicate poverty.

Nota: O texto original em espanhol (sem tradução do Google): La ambivalencia respecto a la pobreza.

(Este es el Artículo Nº 1.844)


No hay comentarios:

Publicar un comentario