La institucionalización del pensamiento

Abstract

The matter of freedom of thought is not easy to deal with, especially when one considered the many signs that indicate that it may well be entirely illusion. The article deals with these matters, attempting to discern mechanisms that point to "bonds" holding back thought. Following Aulagnier, the need for primary violence as a means to enable thought is discussed, but also how secondary violence can completely obstruct future action. Laing's conception of meta-rules, which explain the appearance of secret themes in groups and families, can help to discern political from psychic repression, as discussed by Freud. The difference between the new emergence of that which is repressed in psychic and political terms is of interest. The group is presented as an arena where what is forbidden can at last be said, named. This leads to the matter of weather what has been politically repressed can be a prohibition of expression, rather than of perception and/or thought. In closing a children's story is used as the basis for a discussion of mechanisms responsible for the establishment of a prohibition for speech.