Michel Cermolacce, Katherine Despax, Raphaëlle Richieri, Jean Naudin
Abstract
Delusion is usually considered in DSM 5 as a false belief based on incorrect inference about external reality, but the issue of delusion raises crucial concerns, especially that of a possible (or absent) continuity between delusional and normal experiences, and the understanding of delusional experience. In the present study, we first aim to consider delusion from a perspectivist angle, according to the Multiple Reality Theory (MRT). In this model inherited from Alfred Schütz and recently addressed by Gallagher, we are not confronting one reality only, but several (such as the reality of everyday life, of imaginary life, of work, of delusion, etc.). In other terms, the MRT states that our own experience is not drawing its meaning from one reality identified astheouter reality but rather from a multiplicity of realities, each with their own logic and style. Two clinical cases illustrate how the Multiple Realities Theory (MRT) may help address the reality of delusion. Everyday reality and the reality of delusion may be articulated under a few conditions, such as compossibility [i.e., Double Book-Keeping (DBK), in Bleulerian terms] or flexibility. There are indeed possible bridges between them. Possible links with neuroscience or psychoanalysis are evoked. As the subject is confronting different realities, so do the objects among and toward which a subject is evolving. We call such objects Hybrid Objects (HO) due to their multiple belonging. They can operate as shifters, i.e., as some functional operators letting one switch from one reality to another. In the final section, we will emphasize how delusion flexibility, as a dynamic interaction between Multiple Realities, may offer psychotherapeutic possibilities within some reality shared with others, entailing relocation of the present subjects in regained access to some flexibility via Multiple Realities and perspectivism.
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 9. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 07 August 2023.
All research outputs
#4,266,316
of 25,863,888 outputs
Outputs from Frontiers in Psychology
#7,445
of 34,844 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#89,062
of 459,002 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Frontiers in Psychology
#168
of 541 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,863,888 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done well and is in the 83rd percentile: it's in the top 25% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 34,844 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 13.5. This one has done well, scoring higher than 78% of its peers.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 459,002 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has done well, scoring higher than 80% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 541 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 68% of its contemporaries.
