My colleague Wolfgang Herles delivered a brilliant if critical presentation at the InterFace Forum (IF-Forum). It reminded me of two fields I used to be interested in
First and foremost, it was Wolfgang Herles who, in 1983, asked me to participate in a casting for a local news program of the Bayerisches Fernsehen. (It was they who later made me one of a team of moderators with Ramona Leiß and Sabrina Lallinger, later Frau Fox, both of whom later became quite famous). Secondly, he reminded me of my own works as a journalist on “Psycho History”.
Psycho history combines the disciplines psychology and history. Both the term and the scientific group would not exist without the American psychologist Lloyd de Mause (You find the German Institute for psycho history if you click on the link http://www.psychohistorie.de/).
As opposed to many other historians, the “Institut für Psychohistorie” assumes that historical change is not caused by technological and economical change. Instead, it gives the development of psychic structures as the reason.
It goes without saying that this is an affront against the classical historical sciences. Both their approach and their concept of man are at opposite ends from each other. But it might be all the more interesting to study this concept and wonder: what would have turned out differently if the main protagonists had had another psychic structure or had been born into other families?
And Wolfgang Herles naming his socio-political description of our current situation “Neurosis D” (which is also the title of his latest book that appeared on the market to celebrate the 60th anniversary of the BRD) is also apparently consistent with his theory of psycho-history.
Regarding both countries and people as something equipped with character, sensitivities and strong sides, you will find that your analysis and criticism, as well as attempts at solving problems will be different. For example, the government Schröder/Fischer would have been well advised not to name their reform legislation HARTZ. The very choice of the word makes the reader think of hard and unfair. What is in a name? – Well, a name is more than just sound. It can be a symbol and develop its own strength.
For the upcoming federal elections and the unavoidable campaign theatre, some interpretation of the psychological factor will certainly be quite enlightening. And if I may say so with your leave: they will be more amusing if not taken seriously.
Loading ...