Nothing matters: the significance of the unidentifiable, the superficial and nonsense

ABSTRACT

Purpose: The aim of this study is to explore the ways in which “small things” may be of importance for people with mental health difficulties.

Method: Empirical material from three different studies was reanalysed through a phenomenological, dialogical, approach.

Results: We discovered some paradoxical aspects of small things: i.e., they could be about “something” that was difficult or even impossible to identify. The unidentifiable could be about bodily, sensual experiences that are superficial (i.e., belonging to the surface). The interaction with others highlighted as significant could be about doing something fun, talking nonsense or kidding around, and hence not at all about making sense of something—a kind of important nonsense. We summarize these aspects in three themes: the importance of the unidentifiable, the superficial and nonsense. These aspects can be regarded as small things—even “nothings”—that make it possible “to stay in the world”.

Conclusion: We elaborate on the findings in relation to the following: Gumbrecht’s critique of the prevailing hermeneutic world-view with its idea that “interpretation is humankind’s exclusive way of relating to the world”, Ingold’s idea that social life is lived in relations of “interfacility” and hence a turn to surfaces is needed for a “restoration of social life”, and Biesta’s idea of existence as “coming into the world in the presence of others”.

KEYWORDS:

• Mental health
• recovery
• qualitative research
• hermeneutics
• Ingold
• Gumbrecht
• Biesta

Acknowledgments

We want to thank Arnt Bendik Bøe for inspiration to see the relevance of Proust’s ideas to this paper. We thank Bård Bertelsen for reading the paper and providing useful comments And we thank Helen Kolb for help with translating interview quotes into English.

Disclosure statement

No potential conflict of interest was reported by the authors.

Notes

1. It should be noted that such reflections on recovery are also articulated in the recovery literature, as in Davidson, Tondora, and Ridgway (2010).

2. We understand the term “ordinary therapeutic rationality” in line with the instrumental and hermeneutic rationalities described above.

3. We indicate what part of the empirical material the various quotes and examples are drawn from. The codes B, T and L indicate the authors, respectively, followed by interview number.

4. All names in quotes from the interviews are pseudonyms.

5. This boy’s description of the practitioner is elaborated on by Bertelsen and Bøe (2016).

Additional information

Notes on contributors

Tore Dag Bøe

Tore Dag Bøe is an associate professor at the Department of Psychosocial Health at the University of Agder. He has many years of experiences from mental health services as a social worker and holds a Ph.D. about dialogical approaches to mental health. More information: https://www.researchgate.net/profile/Tore_Dag_Boe

Inger Beate Larsen

Inger Beate Larsen is educated as a psychiatric nurse with a major in Health Sciences and a Ph.D. from the University of Bergen. She has years of experiences from an acute psychiatric ward, and since 1994 she has been working in a scientific position at the University of Agder. From 2009 she has been the manager of the research group in mental health at the Department of Health- and Sport sciences. Currently she is employed as a Professor. More information: https://www.researchgate.net/profile/Inger_Beate_Larsen

Alain Topor

Alain Topor is adjunct professor at the University of Agder and docent at department of social work at Stockholm University. He has worked as a psychologist many years and studied as researcher the importance of social aspects & relations for recovery in mental health. More information: http://www.su.se/profiles/atopo-1.182813