[NetBehaviour] La Cura: Possibilities?
xdxd.vs.xdxd at gmail.com
Fri Jun 3 18:20:28 CEST 2016
and, for me, it all also resonates with the fact that it is very naive to
imagine that you fall sick alone.
When you become sick of a complex thing as cancer your friends and
relatives become diseased, too, because their lives change, they are
shattered. And so do your students, because you can't teach to them. And so
do your colleagues, because you can't work with them. And so does your
employer, because you don't go to work. And so does your grocer, because
you don't buy your groceries in his store anymore. And so do all the
citizens, because you are relying on the national health service (if there
is one), which they support with taxes.
When you become diseased everyone does, in manifestations of the disease
which are physical, psychological, financial, economic, practical,
environmental, administrative, bureaucratic, cultural, etc
In the same way, it is very naive to even imagine that you can be "cured"
alone, or that you are the only one which needs to be cured, or that the
act of "curing" goes only one way, or that it makes sense to "cure" a few
crazy cells and leave everything else as it is.
And these and other considerations drive the main differences between the
words "therapy" and "cure", the latter meaning "to take care of".
The "cure" needs to be natively trans-disciplinary and transgressive: it
has to recognise borders in order to move them.
This also resonates with all the issues which relate to the domain of
complexity, like economy, poverty, pollution, education, energy, labour and
many others, obviously including health.
This is why the festival in Bologna in July for La Cura has the tagline:
"complex, connected, indisciplined"
On Tue, May 31, 2016 at 8:58 PM, Edward Picot <edward at edwardpicot.com>
> Salvatore -
> This is really inspiring and fascinating.
> The fact that being diagnosed with a serious illness is a dehumanising
> thing, and that people begin to see you in terms of what you've got rather
> than who you are, is a familiar observation in medicine. But I think you've
> broken new ground in identifying the way that your illness effectively
> belongs to a bunch of experts rather than yourself - you're the one that's
> 'got' it, yet you don't seem to own it - and this appropriation is
> reinforced by the way it's translated into a different language - the
> technical language of medicine, which is unfamiliar and disorienting to
> 'ordinary' people - and then reinforced again, in modern medicine, by the
> way that your data is wrapped up in proprietorial software, so that you
> can't get hold of it and do your own thing with it unless you happen to
> have quite a lot of technical knowhow.
> Then on top of this, the different schools or philosophies of medicine -
> 'evidence-based' Western medicine, Homeopathic medicine, Chinese medicine,
> etc. - generally tend to be mutually exclusive, which means that normally
> the patient, once he or she is committed to one particular school, is
> effectively cut off from access to any of the other schools. So what you've
> done, in taking back possession of your own data, throwing it open to a
> much wider community and using that as a means of developing a completely
> personalised health plan incorporating elements from lots of different
> traditions, is a very rare and experimental thing.
> Good for you!
> - Edward
> NetBehaviour mailing list
> NetBehaviour at netbehaviour.org
*[**MUTATION**]* *Art is Open Source *- http://www.artisopensource.net
*[**CITIES**]* *Human Ecosystems Ltd* - http://human-ecosystems.com
*[**NEAR FUTURE DESIGN**]* *Nefula Ltd* - http://www.nefula.com
*[**RIGHTS**]* *Ubiquitous Commons *- http://www.ubiquitouscommons.org
Professor of Near Future and Transmedia Design at ISIA Design Florence:
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
More information about the NetBehaviour