Well, this particular image ...

Well, this particular image is inseparable from the shaping of its culture. I am always amazed by the fact that psychiatrists belonging to various schools, very often can not agree on what is the diagnosis of a number of quite diverse opinions, exhibited earlier counterparts individual patient, must be regarded as the most correct. I visited not one clinical conference where acrimonious disputes on this issue. And the representatives of one side is often argued that such a comprehensive diagnosis was "schizophrenic", and representatives of other equally stubbornly defended their right to stay on the diagnosis of "organic brain disease." I could not solve this problem as long as no acquaintance with the cultural work of V. Rudnev. In particular, I was interested in the definition given them a state in which resides the modern culture. This state was labeled as "postmodernism" (1). Of course, the author of "Dictionary of culture of the XX century" was not the discoverer of this phenomenon. He just made us think about why thinking of our contemporaries so inconsistent and morally vulnerable. Rudnev proposed scheme divided the development of our scientific world into three parts. The first part - that's what it was before the revolutionary transformation of science. The second part - the transformation itself (this includes quantum mechanics, cybernetics, psychoanalysis, avant-garde in the visual and literary arts, etc.). The third - a situation that emerged after these changes. The central tenet of postmodernism: "Everything is a text (interpretation), all points of view on any subject relative and, therefore, have an equal right to exist." Only then I understood why in psychology, the discipline, the closest of Psychiatry, there are so many theories: psychoanalytic direction quietly gets on with behavioral, Gestalt psychology - with existentialism. And if the representatives of the psychological sciences are able to recognize and accept this situation, why psychiatrists do not have the courage to do exactly the same step? Professionals dealing with the mental health of citizens, prevent, apparently, to come to this decision some ideological factor. Its origins are to be found in the repressive functions historically assigned to psychiatry. And such a context secretly turned any of its representatives, even the most mediocre, the judicial officer, which inevitably implies the existence of only one truth. It is this feature, in the words of Michel Foucault, "imposed a heavy burden on the history of psychiatry" (2). But are we entitled to assume that all mental disorder of cultural objects? This point of view, in particular, shares Karl Jaspers, the author of the famous monograph "General Psychopathology", published in 1913. "Investigation of psychopathological phenomena in society and history - writes a German psychiatrist - it is important to develop a realistic view of universal human reality, as it helps to make sure that the role of abnormal mental life in society as a whole, the historical development of mass phenomena in the history of culture in the lives of famous people ... "(3).