Supremacy of the individual and crisis of the collective?

Abstract

There are different ways of approaching a topic, especially if it includes multiple aspects, imbricated dimensions and, in addition, gives rise to consensus in the most diverse media. Two of those ways deserve attention here. One can, in effect, carefully describe the proposed topic, specify its characteristics, comment on its incidents, in summary confirm that it is a tangible reality. Forgetting, however, that all reading is interpretive, even when it is intended literally ... It can, on the other hand, overcome the stage of the description, interrogate the notions used, identify budgets, draw prospects. Do not grant at the outset that the subject is evident and that its terms go of his: condition sine qua non to try to know exactly what is being talked about and what exactly it is to intervene. Such is the point of view of the present article. We hope to show, after of our journey, that what initially appears as a problem to to solve consists in fact of a symptom to be interpreted. If there is a problem, do not It is the one that is supposed. Such displacement favors clinical work, less in the social and medico-social domain.