PRIX IRENE – laudatio, Prix Irene awarding: Eliška Jírová, Martina Krynská, Helena Klímová, Václav Trojan, Pavel Battěk + Lukáš Přibyl
song for the laureate
dialogue of the present laureates, discussion with the audience: Věra Roubalová, Marie Marková
Speaker: Pavel Rychetský
Chair: Helena Klímová
Vibrant intellectual and social storming that gave in 18th and 19th centuries birth to the idea of legal state had to lead to its secondary phase in order to protect the newly born legal state concept, destroyed by totalitarian systems. An independent judicature became its absolute and ultimate guarantee. The development of legal thinking in post second world war Europe lead us from the formal perception of the legal state to a material one. The 20th century fates who put the madness of wars, unseen genocide, coups, and injustice and wrong-doings into our cradle could do nothing but watch tradition, religion, generally accepted although unwritten human conduct rules, and unformal moral authority disappear.
The decline of all non-normative systems carried the burden of decision making over to courts. Cases once resolved by a local policeman, church father, teacher, or the father of a family are being resolved by courts of all instances, including supreme or constitutional courts. Read more
Speaker: Cyil Höschl
chair: Marek Preiss
The lecture will outline the psychoanalytic (Sigmund Freud, Alfred Adler), the ethological (Konrad Lorenz) and sociobiological (John Price) view on the psychological sources of power and will draw on some of present ethical questions, which lie in the difficulties to solve dilemmas between the deontological (Immanuel Kant) and utilitarian (Max Weber) ethics, between which human decision-making is still "tilting". This process is in this sense an irreplaceable by "machines", what makes legislative difficulties, among other things, when putting fully automatic cars into operation.
Speaker: Robi Friedman
Chair: Denisa Schücková
Looking at the 'main organizing principles' of small and large groups, like Rejection and annihilation anxiety, wishes for Glory, aggression and longing, may help us to understand conscious and unconscious motivations of human society. The differences between small and large groups contribute further to a deeper understanding of central dynamics in society. The shaping of social processes will in the end be done by Large Groups and the ‘authority relations’ between followers and leaders. Having served as the President of the International Group Analytic Society and having been involved with communal and national conflicts, I will share my experiences and my understanding of authority, including the question of a more balanced relation towards authority in group analysis.
Speaker: Michael Šebek
Chair: Denisa Schücková
Although considerable ambivalence awoken among psychoanalysts in 1920 by Freud´s revision of drive theory (Beyond the Pleasure Principle) has in a sense lasted ever since, blatent and latent destructiveness and aggression on both individual and social levels does not do without theorizing. Destructiveness is symptomatic for totalitarian systems and is apparent both at their rise and brake-down. Both Winnicott and Erikson have in their reaction to fascism independent of each other contributed by interesting thoughts on human potentialities of how to emancipate from the totalitarian fixation. The propensity in the existing western culture toward the return of authoritarian organizations compels us to engage in their psychological and social origins.