Attestation
and Psychotherapy: Ricoeur and Kaufmann on Attestation with reference
to the work of Judith Herman and Viktor Frankl.
Edward.
S. Gardner
Heaton
Hypnosis and Psychotherapy Practice, Newcastle upon Tyne, United
Kingdom.
Keywords:
Attestation, Testimony, Psychotherapy, Trauma, Post Traumatic
Stress, Paul Ricoeur, Sebastian Kaufmann, Judith. L. Herman, Viktor.
E. Frankl. Logotherapy, Phenomenology, Hermeneutics.
'By
relating a life of which I am not the author as to existence, I make
myself its co-author as to it meaning.' Ricoeur. 1992:162)
In
this brief paper I would like to draw attention to the concept of
attestation or testimony as developed in modern European philosophy
and its significance for the theory and practice of psychotherapy.
Paul
Ricoeur (1913-2005) was an existential – phenomenological
philosopher with a vast range of philosophical interests. In his
later work he elaborated a phenomenological and narrative account of
self identity and meaning. In his Gifford Lectures published in 1992
as Oneself as Another Ricoeur
elaborates
the notion of attestation or
testimony as an aspect of self identity. In these brief reflections I
wish to relate the philosophical notion of attestation to the
practice of psychotherapy. Apart from the work of Ricoeur I have
found instructive the work of Sebastian Kaufmann (2010) The
Attestation of the Self as a Bridge between Hermeneutics and Ontology
in the Philosophy of Paul Ricoeur.
To
attest means to bear witness or to testify. In this sense the word
attestation is commonly used as a juridical term in jurisprudence and
in matters of trial and judgement. However, Ricoeur broadens the use
of the term and applies it in a phenomenological manner to describe
an essential aspect which denotes the human experience of selfhood,
of being and having a self in the world.
Since
Descartes there have been two extremes which have been used to
describe self identity. On the one hand the Cartesian tradition
attempted to ground the self as an absolute certainty founded on the
thinking Cogito as the basis of being and knowledge. On the
other hand and at the other extreme is the Nietzschean scepticism
which denies any ground or stability to personal identity and
selfhood. Ricoeur through the application of phenomenological
description situates the self between these two philosophical
extremes.
For
Ricoeur selfhood is intimately related to the capacity and activity
of attestation in which the self bears witness and testimony to
itself in the world. It is through attestation that the self is
constituted and disclosed in living. The self – ipseity is a
phenomenal reality where by the attesting self is the power to say,
to do, to have a self identity and to be a subject who is responsible
for action in the world. Attestation also reveals itself in the
experience of credence, trust and 'the assurance of being oneself
(as) acting and suffering.' (Ricoeur:1992:22) The experience of the
self given in attestation is the self assurance and confidence in the
self's way of existing in the world.
Attestation,
on bearing self witness and testimony is properly understood in terms
of an hermeneutic of testimony. Testimony or witness presumes that
the attesting subject has a privileged access to the experience of
the world. As Kaufmann states, 'the self becomes a self only through
the attestation of its own self.' (2010:6) For Ricoeur the
demonstration of the existing self is not simply a matter of
empirical verification. This empirical verification would be an
example of what Ricoeur calls idem – identity as in the
continuity of the same self through time. Ipseity or selfhood
is manifest in testimony and attestation. On giving witness of
oneself to another the self interprets its place in the world by the
meaningful participation in action and events. In attestation we are
not simply dealing with an epistemological operation since the
attesting self involves a practical engagement with the world, the
self becomes a matter akin to practical reason.
As
Kaufmann highlights Ricoeur links attestation to the sense of
assurance, of being affirmed and assured as an acting and suffering
person in the world. Here acting denotes the voluntary and engaged
decisional capacities of the self whereas the suffering self denotes
the involuntary or passive aspects of existence, of the world, the
body as operating upon the self as an objective power. Kaufmann
points out that in the Ricoeurian analysis the assurance of the self
allows a relation to otherness whether it be the identity of others
as persons, as the body as ones own or even the experience of
conscience as other than oneself. Here testimony has moved well
beyond the account that is developed as a concept in jurisprudence.
The attesting self is to be found in the words, works, actions,
speech and engagement in which the self can elaborate itself in the
world and in relation to others.
It
is important to note as Kaufmann points out that in the testimony or
attestation of the self this does not mean that the attesting self
can not also be subject to uncertainty, question, error, suspicion or
inaccuracy. Yet we are not dealing with doubt in the Cartesian sense,
the radical doubt of Descartes which secures the absolute claim of
the Cogito. Rather, Ricoeur speaks of doubt and uncertainty in
relation to a lack of the sense of assurance in self attestation
which can be disclosive of a crisis in identity. Attestation is not
simply the witnessing of facts, events and instances but has a
broader connotation of the encounter with the meaning of human
experience in a global sense.
Kaufmann
further elaborates on the hermeneutical situation in which
attestation occurs. In giving an account of a philosophical
anthropology it is clear attestation or witness occurs within a
phenomenology of human capability or capacity. A phenomenology of
capability entails a descriptive account of the person who as a self
is capable of speaking, doing, acting, telling a story and being
imputed as the originator of action by others but to name a few
aspects of human capability. The human person is capable of witness
and testimony. In attestation the self exhibits credence, trust,
assurance and affirmation which is the self which exists in self
esteem and regard, a self existing in relation to others in their own
attestation, a solicitude between oneself and another.
Two
Phenomenological Forms of Attestation in Psychotherapy: Judith. L.
Herman and Viktor. E. Frankl
Judith.
L. Herman on Testimony in Recovery from Trauma.
In
an historical perspective work on the therapeutic uses of testimony
derives from the experience of political repression, torture and
trauma in particular the political violence which occurred in the
totalitarian regimes of Latin America during the 1970's. Cienfuegos
and Monelli (1983) were among the first to describe the use of
testimony in therapy in the light of the violent repression which was
widespread under the the dictatorship of General Pinochet in Chile.
The
American psychiatrist Judith L Herman has in her research promoted
the use of testimony and attestation as a method which can be used
with those recovering from traumatic experience. Herman outlines
three stages in working therapeutically with those who have being
subject to trauma and the subsequent psychological sequalae. I will
briefly outline the first two stages and offer a more detailed
account of the third stage in trauma recovery.
The
first stage of recovery involves establishing a safe space for the
survivor which is of an absolute priority in order to establish the
effectiveness of any other therapeutic work which is to follow. This
stage may take days to weeks even years due to the nature,
chronicity, duration and early onset of abuse. Issues such as a
persons environment, lifestyle and current personal safety may well
be of issue at the primary stage. Here an adequate assessment of a
persons social situation including financial security, physical
security and integrity need to be addressed. For example persons
subject to political repression may have lost their homes, countries
and families thus such situations need to be addressed in order for
recovery to be promoted. If basic human needs such as housing, a
secure income, clothing and food are an issue then these needs to be
worked with in the first instance.
Having
established a basic form of psycho-social stability, security and a
therapeutic alliance therapeutic work can move on to the second stage
of recovery. The client then can move on to the telling of the
traumatic narrative in detail if the client so wishes. The traumatic
narrative can be reconstructed in the context of the survivors life
story. Here the empowerment of the client becomes a focus of the
therapeutic work and 'the therapist plays a role of a witness and
ally, in whose presence the survivor can speak of the unspeakable.'
Moreover,
the therapist does not occupy a neutral or non-judgemental position
in relation to the client but is rather a witness and ally to the
clients suffering and trauma. From this account of self witness or
attestation the client can move beyond the fragmentation of traumatic
memories. In the process of truth telling and witness the client can
occupy a safe space which aids recovery. Clearly, this process is
much more detailed and complex in terms of the clients experience and
in the therapeutic work of the therapist.
For
our purposes the third stage in the recovery and transformation of
trauma becomes more relevant in the discussion of bearing witness and
being an agent, the person who acts in self witness and attestation.
The resolutions which occur in the recovery from trauma involve
according to Herman a capability of the survivor to regain an
'appropriate sense of trust', trust in others, to be able to withhold
trust where not warranted, to experience autonomy in relation to self
and others, an understanding of personal boundaries, a renewed
capability for appropriate intimacy with friends and a lover and so
on. Basically, there occurs a new relationship and self identity
which recovers a fundamental trust and assurance that life is
purposeful and meaningful. For instance, Herman describes a more
creative capability to engage with a partner, children, friends or
the wider social community.
Herman
is clear to state that persons who have reached a stage whereby they
have achieved some form of resolution to their traumatic experience
are motivated to pursue their lives having achieved a peaceful and
safe way of living in the world. However, it is relevant to our
discussion of witness, testimony and attestation that Herman points
to those survivors who as part of their recovery from trauma move to
the arena of social activism and public witness outside of the
therapeutic dialogue between therapist and client. Herman does stress
that those who move into this area of social attestation are a
'significant minority,' who choose to engage in a wider societal
context. As Herman says 'these survivors recognize a political or
religious dimension in their misfortune, and discover that they can
transform the meaning of their personal tragedy by making it the
basis of social action.'
Moreover,
Herman movingly points out that eventhough 'there is no way to
compensate for an atrocity, there is a way to transcend it, by giving
it as a gift to others. The trauma is redeemed only when it becomes
the source of a survivor mission.'
Here
the notion of a phenomenology of human capabilities becomes
significant in that an engagement with social action as a form of
attestation involves the survivor as an empowered actor which entails
initiative, energy and resourcefulness which enhances the person in
their own capabilities. As Herman states 'participation in organized,
demanding social efforts calls upon the survivor's most mature and
adaptive coping strategies of patience, anticipation, altruism and
humour. It brings out the best in her; in return the survivor gains a
sense of connection with the best in other people. In this sense of
reciprocal connection, the survivor can transcend the boundaries of
her particular time and place.' This description parallels the
phenomenological description of attestation by Ricoeur and Kaufmann
in the sense that credence and assurance of the attesting self
relates to the solicitude of other human persons in the context of
the wider human social community.
The
solicitude found in social attestation and witness can have a
diversity of forms whether it be in reaching out to individuals,
intellectual pursuits, and legal or political work related to
preventing future injustices. 'Survivors understand that the natural
human response to horrible events is to put them out of mind. They
also understand that those who forget the past are often condemned to
repeat it. It is for this reason that public truth-telling is the
common denominator of all social action.'
The
process of social attestation is not a simple one, public action and
engagement by survivors involves a struggle to promote social
justice, the rule of law against the rule of force. In bearing
witness Herman states that the survivor 'must be secure in the
knowledge that simply in her willingness to tell the truth in public,
she has taken the action that perpetrators fear the most. Her
recovery is not based on the illusion that evil has been overcome,
but rather on the knowledge that it has not prevailed, and on the
hope that restorative love may still be found in the world.'
So
here Herman acknowledges that recovery from trauma can exist on both
a personal plane in the sense of the recovery of the individual
person who can move on from trauma to re-engage with the day to day
living of ordinary life. On the other plane, for some survivors
recovery moves beyond personal attestation and witness which occurs
in the therapeutic relationship to a public and social form of
attestation in the public arena. The social arena where testimony and
attestation is utilised by the survivor for the benefit of other
victims and for the wider civic community. In both cases of private
therapeutic attestation and then for some a more public form of
attestation there is the common experience of transcendence, of
moving beyond being a victim of trauma towards rediscovering what it
is to be a flourishing human being, perhaps albeit with healing
scars. Recovery for the survivor can mean that no matter what the
degrading power of evil had in the past that the survivor is a
witness, one who gives attestation in both protest and in attest to
the human hope and trust that life is worth living or as Herman
describes it 'that restorative love may still be found in the world.'
The
Logotherapy of Viktor Frankl as a Form of
Attestation.
It
can be said that Logotherapy as developed by the psychiatrist Viktor
Frankl is an example of the significance of the concept of
attestation both in terms of a recounting of Frankl's own personal
life experience and the application of his experience and thinking
in the context of the therapeutic practice of Logotherapy. Although
Frankl does not explicitly use the notion of attestation, witness or
testimony as a category in his elaboration of psychotherapy
attestation could be described as central to the promotion of meaning
for healthy human existence and human flourishing. It is to be borne
in mind that the work Man's Search for Meaning was originally
published in the German as an account of a psychologist's experience
of the concentration camps. This is clear from the original German
title of the publication which was entitled Ein Psycholog erlebt
das Konzentrationslager. (1946)
In this sense the work becomes a
powerful form of attestation and witness to the horror and human
suffering which occurred in the concentration camps. Moreover, the
work becomes a form of attestation or witness to the purpose of
therapeutic meaning in the context of man-made mass death.
(Wyschogrod) A biographical account as
testimony in the context of
the death camps also becomes a locus for a description of purpose,
resistance, protest and meaning.
An
understanding of the concept of attestation could offer a valuable
and significant elaboration for Logotherapeutic ideas and therapeutic
practice. Much work could be done to explicate in detail some of the
therapeutic notions which were elaborated by Frankl. It is
significant that many of the anthropological themes in Franklian
thought also are present in philosophical anthropology and here the
phenomenology of human capabilities is of significance. The acting,
the suffering, the thinking, story telling person as described by
Ricoeur and Kaufmann could be fruitfully developed with an
interdisciplinary benefit for both philosophy, Logotherapy and in
psychotherapy.
Rather
than develop more theoretical considerations between Logotherapy
and the phenomenology of attestation I refer to a published speech by
Frankl where testimony is precisely personal and a matter of
remembrance in the public arena. In March of 1949 Frankl gave an
address to the Viennese Society of Physicians entitled In
Memoriam. The purpose of this
address before a learned medical society was to remember those
physicians who were victims of the Second World War. Here Frankl
attests to those physicians who perished. Frankl names those who died
as is befitting of an
occasion of remembrance.
Frankl
is well aware that witness and attestation is personal. He begins
with a quotation from the Psalms of David.....'What is man that you
are mindful of him.' as a question which the Psalmist asks of God.
Then he proceeds to give 'testimony to true physicians who could not
see others suffer, who could not let others suffer but knew how
to suffer themselves, who knew how to achieve the right kind of
suffering – courageous suffering.' (1967:107)
Frankl
himself who was a victim gives attestation to his friend Dr. Gisa
Gerbel who died shortly after entering the camp from typhoid
infection, to Dr Plautus, a doctor to the homeless and indigent from
the 16th
District of Vienna, whom
he calls the 'the Angel of Ottakring.' who was dispatched to his
death on his arrival and selection at the camp. Also is remembered
Dr. Lamberg a man 'of the old world' who even during the hardest of
slave work was interested in discussing philosophy and religion.
Frankl mentions these physicians irrespective of their
scientific status as he says:
'...I
speak of individuals, but I included all who died there. The few
stand for the many, because about the many one cannot write a
personal chronicle. However, they need no chronicle; they need no
monument. Each deed is it own monument, and more imperishable than a
monument that is merely the work of human hands. Because the deeds of
a man cannot be removed from the world; although past, it is not
irrecoverably lost in the past, but therein is irrevocably
preserved..' (1967:109)
Here
Frankl considers the irrecoverable nature of the the past which
cannot be recovered nor removed from the world. However, the past can
be irrevocably preserved, that is preserved we may say in testimony,
attestation and in naming the past in the attestations of the
present. In this sense memorial becomes witness and attestation to
the other.
Frankl
is quite clear that there were doctors in the camps who 'desecrated'
their commitment to medical ethics by experimenting on human persons.
However, he as a survivor of the camps uses an interesting
description that living through the camps 'was one big experiment –
a crucial experiment' (1967: 110) In this respect I shall quote
Frankl more extensively:
'Our
dead colleagues passed the test with honors. They proved to us that
even under the most deprived, the most humiliating conditions, man
can remain – man and true physician. What was honor to them who
gave this proof, should be a lesson to us. It should teach us what
man is, and what man can become.' (1967: 110)
Here
Frankl gives testimony to the experience of the sufferings of the
dead but also his own suffering.
'What
then is man? We have learned to know him.....We have learned to know
him in the camps, where everything unessential had been stripped from
man, where every thing which a person had – money, power, fame,
luck – disappeared: while only that remained which a man does not
“have” but which he must “be.” What remained was man himself,
who in the white heat of suffering and pain was melted down to the
essential, to the human himself.' (1967:110)
In
asking the anthropological question Frankl states ' he is a being who
continually decides what he is....thinking, this consciousness, this
(is)'the dignity of each individual human being.' (1967:110)
Conclusion:
In
this brief paper the relation between the philosophical notion of
attestation in Ricoeur and Kaufmann has been related to
psychotherapy, in particular in relation to the work of Judith Herman
and Viktor Frankl. It highlights that the concept of attestation can
be fruitful concept in the context of therapy and could be considered
for further detailed elaboration in future research and practice.
Sources:
Agger
I & Jensen. S, B. (1990) 'Testimony as ritual and Evidence in
psychotherapy for political refugees. J.Traumatic Stress.
3:115-130.
Cienfuegos.
A. J. & Monelli. C. (1983) 'The Testimony of Political Repression
as a Therapeutic Instrument.' Amer. J. Orthopsychiat.
53 (1), 43-51.
Frankl.
V.E. (1985) Man's Search for Meaning. USA: Washington Square
Press.
__________
(1967) Psycotherapy and Existentialism: Selected Papers on
Logotherapy. New York: Washington Square Press.
Hahn.
L. E. (ed) (1995) The Philosophy of Paul Ricoeur. USA: Open
Court.
Herman.
J.L. (1992) Trauma and Discovery. New York: Basic Books.
___________
(2002) Recovery from Psychological Trauma. Psychiatry and Clinical
Neurosciences, 52: S98-S103. DOI:
10.1046/j.1440-18191998.0520s5S145.x
Kaufmann,
Sebastian, (2010) "The Attestation of the Self as a Bridge
Between Hermeneutics and Ontology in the Philosophy of Paul Ricoeur"
Dissertations(2009-).Paper34.
http://epublications.marquette.edu/dissertations_mu/34
Lewis.J.
(1991) 'Paul Ricoeur's Hermeneutics of the Self and Jean Nabert's
Hermeneutics of Testimony.' Journal
of French and Francophone Philosophy. Vol.3. No 1. 20-28.
Mollica.
R. (1988) 'The Trauma Story: The psychiatric care of refugee
survivors of violence and torture.' In: Ochberg F (ed.), Post
Traumatic therapy and Victims of Violence. Brunner/Mazel, New
york, 1988; 295-314.
Raghuvanshi.
L. & Agger. I. (2008) Giving Voice – Using Testimony as a
Brief Therapy Intervention in Psychosocial Community Work for
Survivors of Torture and Organised Violence: Manual for Community
Workers and Human Rights Defenders. Uttar Pradesh,
India.
Ricoeur.
P. (2002) Oneself as Another. ET. Chicago: Chicago University
Press.
Wyschogrod.
E. (1985) Spirit in Ashes: Hegel, Heidegger, and Man-Made Mass
Death. New Haven: Yale University Press.
Edward
S Gardner
Heaton
Hypnosis and Psychotherapy Practice
Email:
ipnoetic@gmail.com
No comments:
Post a Comment
Note: only a member of this blog may post a comment.