Home Rene Lourau Analisis Institucional (Biblioteca de Sociologia) (Spanish Stock Image. Analisis Institucional (Biblioteca de Sociologia) (Spanish Edition). QR code for Análisis institucional y socioanálisis. Title, Análisis institucional y socioanálisis. Contributor, René Lourau. Publisher, Nueva Imagen, Tercera, el cambio institucional ha sido no sólo continuo, sino inusualmente dicha teoría considera al individuo como la unidad básica de análisis y, por el otro, . “elemento objetivo del sistema jurídico” de Hauriou (Lourau, 9, 62).
|Published (Last):||16 January 2004|
|PDF File Size:||16.28 Mb|
|ePub File Size:||7.79 Mb|
|Price:||Free* [*Free Regsitration Required]|
The experience is not a mistake or an accomplishment and makes us think, exchange ideas, lead a collective movement to build other possibilities.
René Lourau – Wikipedia, la enciclopedia libre
With tears in her eyes, a children’s teacher reads in her field diary the scene that destabilized her: A creative dimension leads the diary and that, just before giving security, can scare.
The writing of a field diary from the perspective of institutional analysis is a collective practice, even when it is authorial. While the practices take the experiences into individual plans, the diary analyzes the relationships, questioning why the grandmother’s story deserves immediate credit and punitive effects on the mother.
The urgent character that characterizes the work of many establishments, given by rushed routines and the lack of conditions for more careful procedures, contrasts with the practice of thinking provoked by the insstitucional of the field diary.
It puts on the scene lourqu and everyone who in writing emerges as participants, summoning them to contribute to the analysis through their speeches, practices or the bonds that the problematizations create.
An important tool for carrying out analisiss implication analysis is the field diary, which operates as a narrative of day-to-day intervention, historicizing it, rescuing it, potentializing analksis, in other words, enabling analysis by the act of writing.
Under such a perspective it would be for the analyst to come to the fact, to recognize it, to register it, and then study it, as a body exposed in a laboratory. The sense of objectivity opposed to that of subjectivity is fundamental to discriminate all that the mind creates, of what the mind must grasp and evidence. That is, social fact has coercive functions on individual initiatives, because it is outside people’s consciousness, according to “a set of rules and determining what is right or wrong, allowed or prohibited”p.
Criticism carries an intention of correction and adaptation. By weaving practices and our look at them, that is, how we construct reality, an interrogation emerges to be worked out by shifting our experience of the patterns of truth and by opening ourselves to recognizing multiple prisms to deal with relationships.
Many scenes are not composed by speech, but by sensation, by feeling, by silence, by desire, and any element can participate. It is not a matter of recording successes, mistakes and deviations, in a proposal of self-criticism, but of thinking that every practice is a production to be thought of not as an inevitable act, nor an act to be corrected, but as an event that occurs in an enchainment of meanings.
Far from the determinism of judging such meanings, they are the ones that become the object of analysis and not the singular acts. The lived experience that composes the writing does not necessarily match the one that occurred originally, because the thinking and feeling in the moment in which a record is constructed allows to resign, in an analytical compass in which the author is not alone, but in a shared movement with all those who composed the scene and in the midst of their thoughts, feelings, values, conceptions, also put into question.
Amid the numerous considerations built up in a group education policies, pedagogical training, the established relationship with the class, the singularity that crosses the norms, the affective bonds, the differences in relation to the administrative procedures have been reworking the lived scene and bringing virtualities.
The author as a protagonist The writing of a field diary from the perspective of institutional analysis is a collective practice, even when it is authorial. Its wealth is not in teaching to do right or better, since the performance can always be another, since life is intensity and chance.
Interrogations are the right tool of a field diary, the good company in a formation by keeping alive the thinking and the research as professional practices that do not exhaust and do not cease to make learning.
The protagonism of the author of the diary is in the conduct of something that may have been understood as a particular situation, an action of a professional or a team, but it becomes a social event and historically referenced, even when loaded with singularities, because it was the analysis of their own implications.
The implication paradigm allows us to show the different forces present in the field of actuation, instrumentalizing the analysis of the place occupied by the specialist and, in this way, questions the verticalities of the logic that separates the subject that intervenes from the object of the intervention.
Truth does not precede instituciona, act of registering, it is not exposed to be recorded, but it is constructed in the encounter with what becomes a fact, producing an ontology of the present, a crossed look by the genealogical and ethical perspective.
For the latter, every act-fact is always reality in movement, being made and embodied by the analysis. An epistemological movement that questions not the fact as a given and unquestionable reality, but the historical conditions of production of true knowledge that will define what the fact is and which effects it has.
There was a problem providing the content you requested
Unlike the concept of “social fact” proposed by Durkheim, who grounds the positivist method, the field diary proposed by institutional analysis and in the light of Michel Foucault’s concept of event does not attribute any value to any episode, act and situation. For example, intervening in a tutelary council implies thinking about the actions that take place in the encounter with the different forces, relationships and beliefs that build this territory.
Therefore, it is possible to say that the writing of the diary is the analytical reading of practice, since writing allows events, which could be ignored, to take shape and have a meaning for the analysis.
All between and It never precedes our gaze, because it is the effect of it. For almost twenty years we have been supervising internships in three distinct fields: The field diary is a technical instrument that produces an intervention in the reality in question by problematizing both what is called analysis and how it should be done.
Even an act conducted personally is crossed by norms, affections, conditions, circumstances that take the professional practice off the heroic scene. It is up to the socioanalytic intervention to conduct the analysis process, making sure that the displacements detach themselves from the identity perspective.
In this way, it shows that in the midst of the truths considered absolute – the instituted – there are gaps, experiments that are not yet palpable, which causes znalisis These are regularities that inxtitucional the evolutionist perspective, articulating “the discontinuity of regularities, the chance of their transformations, the materiality of their conditions of existence” p.
When discussing the written and oral records of practices in the intervention fields during the internship supervisions, it is difficult for those who narrate their experiences to depart from the logic of judgment, since the debate that is built up in the collective may suggest that the performance in the presented event could have been in many other ways.
The writing of the diary makes it possible to think about the daily gesture, the need to listen to other voices and bring power of refusal to the already given as certain. Education without a previous shape? The volatility of chance frightens those who intend, with their knowledge or in the process insfitucional building their knowledge, to have certainty that the paths are rebuilt with the acuity of a researcher who will know how to read the clues.
The universal collapses and judgments give way to other ways of working.
Diário de campo: autor como protagonista
For this reason, Lourau affirms that the field diary in a socioanalytic intervention is not an intimate exercise, but a collective movement – less by the fingers that write the text and more by the ideas that compose it. For this purpose, it operates with its institcuional tools, among them the implication analysis and the field diary.
To follow the course of instituiconal analyses, we take a powerful auxiliary: Shifting such a view, Michel Foucault proposes to understand relationships as an event, whose sense will not be to coerce people independently of their way of thinking and being, but by defining the effect produced by the bodies in action.
In this abyss the diary projects us when converted into an apprenticeship committed to thinking and feeling. Socioanalytic intervention as an internship practice. Not that the will to domination is exhausted by working under the logic of the event, but it breaks the chains of a fact that is always objective, external, alien to the will of the people: However, it was in the diary’s writing that the predictable lost focus, disrupting the normalized places.