• Actualités
• » Annonce

Conférence

Le professeur (émérite) Ivan Leudar de l’université de Manchester, spécialiste de psychologie historique et analytique de l’université de Manchester, chercheur associé au Centre d’Etudes des Mouvements Sociaux, donnera un cycle de trois conférences consacrées à la notion qu’il développe actuellement de  « l’immédiateté structurée » (structured immediacy). 

Un présupposé du paradigme cognitif est que le développement de l'esprit (à la fois ontologique et historique) consiste à se libérer de la tyrannie du monde physique ici et maintenant et à vivre, en effet, dans les représentations. La principale préoccupation des trois séminaires sera de corriger ce présupposé en examinant comment, à travers leurs activités, les gens donnent une portée à ce qu’ils traversent de sorte que les activités qu’ils réalisent acquièrent des significations qu'elles n'auraient pas eues autrement.
Les trois séminaires examineront des cas spécifiques et variés de ce phénomène banal et omniprésent. Nous aborderons des situations empruntées à la psychothérapie, aux conflits politiques, à l’expérience de faire face à des hallucinations, et à l’ouvrage de Henry James Le sens du passé. Les trois séances de ce séminaire tourneront autour du concept de «l'immédiateté structurée» (que j'ai mis au point avec mes collègues Wes Sharrock et Jiri Nekvapil.) Je m’appuierai sur les travaux d'Austin (1961, 1962), Anscombe (1957) et Garfinkel et al, 1981 ) pour rendre compte du fait que les interactions sociales se produisent dans l’''ici et maintenant'' tout en étant également situées dans la vie des participants et des dispositions sociales au sens large - et les deux ne doivent pas être séparées.

Les conférences seront en anglais/Les questions pourront être posées en français.

Les 29 mars, 04 et 11 avril 2012, en salle 576, 198 av. de France 75013, de 14h à 16h

Notes on structured immediacy

IvanLeudar, The University of Manchester 

Seminars for IMM/EHESS

Seminar 1: What can R.G. Collingwood do for psychology
today?

The historian and philosopher Robin Collingwood was a vocal critic of psychology with natural science aspirations.  He argued that its methods were not adequate to its phenomena and that a properly done psychology had to be a historical science.  I will go through Collingwood’s criticisms of psychology in detail. I will consider   their reception in psychology at the time, and argue that we can learn something from this polemic even today.  I will conclude that the phenomena psychologists should study are indeed historical but I will also conclude that Collingwood’s idea of doing history does not quite help us to understand how the everyday historicity of mundane human conduct is accomplished. I will contrast his idea of how history should be done as a science with what people do as ‘practical historians’.

Seminar 2: How to be a practical historian.

The second talk investigates how the past is woven into settings of activities, so that those activities acquire a historical aspect.   I will draw on several studies in this exposition.  (One is the analysis of Henry James’ formulation of ‘the sense of the past’, another concerns how political adversaries make the past relevant and consequential in their conflicts and yet another looks at how people deal with auditory hallucinations which intrude the traumatic past into the present.) I document what - in these very diverse circumstances - people do as ‘practical historians’ (a term borrowed from Garfinkel et al, 1981).  Two related methods are obvious. One is to situate contemporary events relative to historical antecedents, alongside other contextual particulars, and by doing this provide these events with history-contingent meanings. The other is to attempt to constrain how contemporary events will be understood historically in their future. I will discuss these observations using the concept of ‘structured immediacy’ that points to how environment - historical and otherwise - enters immediate settings of talk as a source of meaning.

 

Seminar 3: Psychotherapy as a ‘‘structured immediacy’’

In the third seminar, I will explore the work of a group of child psychoanalytical psychotherapists with children entering school.  I will focus on how they transform the classroom into a place where therapeutic intervention is possible and explore the ways in which the therapists’ training and experience (their “therapeutic orientation”) are made relevant and consequential in their interactions with children. I will argue that such “therapeutic orientation” needs to be taken on board by analysts of interaction if they are to grasp the relevant sense of therapeutic activities carried out in and through talk. I will discuss how the therapists establish and use micro-historical links between therapeutic sessions and with the outside.

These three seminars are based on the following papers (but go well beyond them):

Sharrock, W. and Leudar, I. (2002). The indeterminacy in the past.  History of Human, Sciences, 15, 95-115.

Leudar, I., Sharrock, W., Hayes, J. and Truckle, S. (2008). Therapy as a “structured immediacy”. Journal of Pragmatics, 40, 863-885.

Leudar, I., Sharrock, W., Truckle, S., Colombino, T., Hayes, J. and Booth, K.  (2008). Conversation of  emotions: on transforming play into psychoanalytic psychotherapy.  In  Perakyla, A., Antaki, C., Vehvilanen,
S., and Leudar, I. (Eds.) (2008).  Conversation analysis and Psychotherapy, Cambridge: CUP.

Leudar, I. (2009).  What can R.G. Collingwood do for psychology today? Ethnographic Studies, 11,39-60.

Ivan Leudar and Jiří Nekvapil.  (2010). Practical historians and adversaries:  9/11 revisited   Discourse and Society, 22, 66-85.