Being Human Today: Art, Education and Mental Health in Conversation, Gert Biesta, Lisbet Skregelid and Tore Dag Bøe (eds) (2024)

This interview with Gert Biesta is part of an ongoing research initiative to explore the relationship between reality, social construction, and professional practices within the mental health field. Biesta’s work has been a critical source of inspiration for this project. Biesta’s work centers on the purpose and aims of education, emphasizing subjectification or the process of engaging with one’s own freedom and becoming a subject capable of navigating the world. Biesta argues for a world-centered rather than child-centered or curriculum-centered education. This is not only because education should provide students with the knowledge and skills necessary to act effectively in the world, but most importantly, because the world is where our existence as human beings takes place. Biesta thus engages with ethics and the connection between education and broader philosophical themes and challenges instrumental approaches in favor of seeing education as having intrinsic value for human growth and democratic citizenship. Although Biesta’s work is primarily concerned with educational questions, his ideas transcend education and can prove productive in other domains. In the interview, we extend the conversation to mental health, seeking areas where Biesta’s ideas resonate. In the concluding paragraph, the authors highlight the parallels between education and mental health, particularly their shared emphasis on subjectivity and the challenge of navigating reality. It is suggested that education and mental health intersect in their concern for “subjectness” and how individuals must relate to what the world demands of them.

I wrote this text when I participated in a PhD course, and felt this strange feeling of wanting to leave, wanting to speak up. But I had no idea about what I wanted to speak up about. In this text, I am exploring these feelings, trying to articulate what this exploration could bring to the table. I am using an autoethnographic approach, believing that “staying with the trouble,” as Donna Haraway puts it, can show us something new, and maybe something different, to how we understand our being in the world. Something that other great thinkers help me articulate. Like Haraway. Like Tony Adams, Alphonso Lingis, Gert Biesta, and Tore Dag Bøe. Among others. I think I am exploring and challenging our understanding of belonging to a field. Art field. Mental health field. Education field. Or any other fields that make a border between me, you. Them. Us. And how these categories can stand in the way of how we meet The Other, meet Ourselves. Are we in a field, or a part of the fields?

This article introduces the project Return to Reality: What Does the World Ask of Us? This project evolved from a concern that frameworks in mental health operate with knowledge as their primary mode in such a way that reality is lost from sight. This is not primarily an epistemological problem, but an ethical and existential one: ethical because a knowledge-mediated relation to the real can make us blind to the ethical imperatives found in encounters with reality; existential because to be a subject is to respond to what is real. The works of Gert Biesta are a key inspiration. We use Levinas’s, Lingis’s, and Arendt’s ideas to elaborate these concerns. A return to reality is needed; a shift from knowledge-based to reality-sensitive approaches. We relate these ideas to the Open Dialogue approach, with the key imperative of responding to the presence of those present, and to Reflecting team practices, which Tom Andersen describes as being guided by people’s bodily responses.

In this article, I explore the idea that there is a fundamental ethical aspect that precedes social constructionism. I suggest that within social constructionism we can identify a development from seeing knowledge as socially constructed ( epistemological social constructionism) to seeing not only knowledge, but also corporeal ways of being as socially constructed ( ontological social constructionism). As a next step, I propose incorporating what I refer to as ethical realism in social constructionist perspectives. In the encounter with the other human being, I argue that there is a real ethical impulse that precedes social constructionism and puts it in motion. This impulse is real in the sense that it is neither constructed within, nor is it dependent upon, any particular social–cultural–historical context. In this paper I consider the ethical aspects of human encounters that allow for a constructionist epistemology and ontology to emerge in the first place. I make use of ideas from Emmanuel Levinas and Jacques Rancière and consider how these thinkers are used in the work of Gert Biesta. The ideas are discussed in relation to findings from a previous study by the author and his colleagues exploring the experiences of adolescents taking part in mental health services.