Between truth and hope: on Parkinson’s disease, neurotransplantation and the production of the ‘self’

Abstract

In this article, we argue that contemporary biomedicine is shaped by two, seemingly incommensurable, organizational logics, the ‘regime of truth’ and the ‘regime of hope’. We articulate their features by drawing on debates sparked by the recent clinical trial of a new approach to the treatment of Parkinson’s Disease. We also argue that the ‘self’ is configured in the very same process whereby these two organizational logics interlock and become mutually dependent, so that the ‘self’ might be said to be the effect of a ‘parasitic’ relationship between the regimes of ‘truth’ and ‘hope’. We then bring these two arguments to bear on the contrasting views of the relationship between embodiment and political subjectivity articulated by Michel Foucault and Giorgio Agamben, on the one hand, and Paul Rabinow and Nikolas Rose, on the other hand.

The trouble with brain imaging: Hope, uncertainty and ambivalence in the neuroscience of autism

“…Of course, the study of mental disorder has often been structured by a sense of therapeutic hope for the future (Moreira and Palladino, 2005). For the more complex neurodevelopmental disorders, this hope has recently become embedded in the search for brain-based biomarkers particularly -and in the emergence of neuroscientific technologies that might mark these out (Raff, 2009).…”

Little bottles and the promise of probiotics

“…We begin by placing our research within recent literature documenting an apparent shift in the epistemological basis of modern bioscience away from rationalistic authority towards a much greater emphasis on investment in less certain but hopeful futures (Brown, 2006;Moreira and Palladino, 2005;Novas, 2006). Various empirical examples may be cited to demonstrate bioscience interest in hopeful technologies and techniques -predictive medicine, nanotechnology, transgenics.…”

“…In regimes of hope not only the messages are different, but also crucially, aspects of subjectivity. Moreira and Palladino (2005) consider how orienting to a regime of hope also views and constitutes patients as more invested in securing a different and positive future for themselves, whilst appeals to 'truth' leave no space or time for its deferral.…”

“…A 'parasitic' relationship may be seen to exist between hope and truth, in developing innovative medical technologies and techniques, as 'hope' provides a foundation for (and may be also seen to be performative of) investing efforts in order to secure the 'truth' that something good will come out of the research. The two articulating knowledges/regimes of hope and truth are seen to be in flux in biosciences: but more specifically it is the articulation of the relationship between them that is in flux (Moreira et al, 2005).…”

“…A regime of truth orients towards fabricating 'proofs' and knowledge robustness, whilst the regime of hope is concerned with the fabrication of expectations and future possibilities (Brown and Michael, 2002;Moreira et al, 2005 (Moreira et al, 2005: 67). A 'parasitic' relationship may be seen to exist between hope and truth, in developing innovative medical technologies and techniques, as 'hope' provides a foundation for (and may be also seen to be performative of) investing efforts in order to secure the 'truth' that something good will come out of the research.…”