심리치료와 재생 스토아주의: 치료적 감정 개념에 관한 비판적 고찰 (Psychotherapy and Recycled Stoicism: A Critical Inquiry into Therapeutic Conceptions of Emotion)

서지정보

· 발행기관 : 영미문학연구회
· 수록지 정보 : 안과밖:영미문학연구 / 40호 / 278 ~ 309페이지
· 저자명 : 김성호

초록

The current vogue of stoicism owes much to the success of CBT (Cognitive Behavioural Therapy), especially in the U.K. CBT has its own version of stoicism. This is characterized by a narrow focus on the cognitivist, decisionist and individualist conception of emotion that twists or plays down the original Stoic cosmology as well as its politics. In CBT stoicism, emotions are supposed to be either positive or negative; accessible to consciousness and open to technical controls; reducible to pure quantities to be measured in numerical terms in “emotion labs.” The cognitivist components of this assumption are significantly at variance with the physiologist and affective approaches to emotion in psychology, while in their “universalist” strain, stand in sharp contrast to the “social-constructivist” alternatives in anthropology.
Even more radically, the CBT-stoic conception is opposed to modern literary perspectives on affects, where the focus has increasingly shifted to “feelings,” or something fluid, complex, and counter-cognitive. After all, it is not “good emotions” (eupatheia) but feelings of this kind that may actually work for affective health.

영어초록

The current vogue of stoicism owes much to the success of CBT (Cognitive Behavioural Therapy), especially in the U.K. CBT has its own version of stoicism. This is characterized by a narrow focus on the cognitivist, decisionist and individualist conception of emotion that twists or plays down the original Stoic cosmology as well as its politics. In CBT stoicism, emotions are supposed to be either positive or negative; accessible to consciousness and open to technical controls; reducible to pure quantities to be measured in numerical terms in “emotion labs.” The cognitivist components of this assumption are significantly at variance with the physiologist and affective approaches to emotion in psychology, while in their “universalist” strain, stand in sharp contrast to the “social-constructivist” alternatives in anthropology.
Even more radically, the CBT-stoic conception is opposed to modern literary perspectives on affects, where the focus has increasingly shifted to “feelings,” or something fluid, complex, and counter-cognitive. After all, it is not “good emotions” (eupatheia) but feelings of this kind that may actually work for affective health.

참고자료

· 없음