(NEW) Neri Pollastri (Italy)
Presentation language: English
Neri Pollastri (Italy).
He is involved in
philosophical practice since 1998 and he is practitioner as Philosophical
Consultant since 2000, both privately and in mental health centres of Public
Administration. On the matter he published Il pensiero e la vita (2004, 2th ed.
2020), Consulente filosofico cercasi (2007, 2th ed. 2020) L'uomo è ciò che
pensa (2008, with D. Miccione) and Il filosofo in azienda (2010, with P.
Cervari), and about forty articles (some available in English). He translated
in Italian Peter Raabe's Philosophical Counseling: Theory and Practice and coordinated
a "Philosophical Practice" books series, collecting works in Italian of
Achenbach, Lahav, Raabe, Schuster and many others. In 2002 he founded
Phronesis, the Italian Association for Philosophical Consultation, of which he
was President for six years and director of its review for fifteen years. He
has taught philosophical consultation in several Italian universities, he was
speaker at the ICPP in Copenhagen, Seville, Leusden, and he was one of the
organisers of the IX ICPP in Carloforte. Presently he leads the Istituto di
Consulenza Filosofica and has its
Professional Course for Philosophical Consultation, according Achenbach's
concept of Philosophische Praxis, different by the current idea of
philosophical counseling.
Knowing, to be free not to heal (Lecture)
During the twenty-three years in which I followed the international scene of Philosophical Practice, I was always observing a contrast between two very different kinds of philosophical practices:
those who aim to help guest (counselee) and cares about her/his well-being;
those who aim in a cooperative searching of knowledge and a cognitive gain (both for the guest and the philosopher).
Such a difference shows the distance between German "Philosophische Praxis", as defined by Gerd Achenbach and his followers, and American-Hispanic "philosophical counseling", developed in several different ways in many parts of the world. It also corresponds to Achenbach's distinction between "an alternative psychotherapy" and "an alternative to psychotherapy". Anyway, it has yet no sufficiently recognized and evaluated in its important consequences, both in theory and in practice. In particular, the lack of an explicit recognition of this difference is producing misunderstanding in international community regarding:
the identity of the practice;
the ways of carrying it out;
how judging its success or failure;
its efficacy;
the importance in it of psychological tools;
last but not least, the same sense of the concept of "practice" in its practicing.
My
contribute would offer some elements for reflecting on the theme, and even to
appeal for a proposal to the international community.