Broken hearts or broken bonds: Love and death in historical perspective.

Abstract

Recent decades have been marked by a steadily increasing emphasis on neural determinants of behavior. Concerns with socio-cultural processes have simultaneously been diminished. Given the significance of this shift toward a cortical explanation of human behavior-in terms of both the direction of research in psychology and the implications of this research for social practices and policy-critical reflection is essential. In particular, when significant conceptual flaws are brought into focus, we find good reason to reconsider the significance of sociocultural process. And, when we take into account major vistas of neuropsychological research, the conclusion becomes evident that not only is human action unintelligible in terms of neural activity, but the brain primarily functions in the service of cultural process. To be sure, cortical functioning may both enable and limit human activity. However, given the enormous variation in human conduct, and the dependency of such conduct on the generation of cultural meaning, the most promising conclusion, both for research and for societal practice, is to view the brain chiefly as an instrument for achieving socially originated ends. This is not to argue against inquiry into brain functioning, but to be more judicious about the domains of its utility, and critical in terms of what it offers for understanding human action.

African Americans in Bereavement: Grief as a Function of Ethnicity

“…Grieving people the world over cry (Rosenblatt, Walsh, & Jackson, 1976), and they often experience depression and anxiety (Stroebe & Stroebe, 1976) as well as a host of other physical and psychological symptoms that may be debilitating or even life threatening (e.g., Burnett, Middleton, Raphael, & Martinek, 1997;Parkes, 1996). Although such symptomatology is often assumed to be universal, the experience and expression of grief may vary widely between individuals and across different cultural groups (Stroebe, Gergen, Gergen, & Stroebe, 1992). Researchers such as Rosenblatt (1988), Walter (1999), Neimeyer, Prigerson, and Davies (2002) maintain that grief is itself a social construction and vast differences exist between societies relative to how grief is shaped.…”

Living beyond the Unanticipated Sudden Death of a Partner: A Phenomenological Study

“…All of the partici p ants !n this research pro j ect believe that the community is out of touch with the reality of what they have experienced, a view that i s supported by curr ent theories of grief end bereavement ( Hyrkas, Kaunonen, & Paunonen, 1997;Steen, 1998;M. S\roebe, 2002,,M. Stroebe, Gergen, Gergen, & Stroebe, 1992Walter, 1996;Wayment & Vierthaler, 2002;Zlsook & Shuchter, 1985; Zonnebelt-Smeen g e & Vries, 1998 ) .…”

The pervasive dead

“…Stroebe et al's (1992) explanation of continuing bonds in terms of a postmodern cultural turn, or Kellaher and Worpole's (2010) explanation of memorialisation remote from the physical remains in terms of changes in disposal practices, have some validity, but fail to acknowledge -let alone explain -the body-spiritmourner system as an integrated system. Second, the evidence cited in this article comes mainly from empirical British studies.…”

“…Sloane (2018) argues that the American lawn cemetery effected a similar removal. Stroebe, Gergen, Gergen, and Stroebe (1992) distinguished two very different twentieth-century understandings of bereavement. The romantic view holds that love is eternal, transcending the grave; bonds of love continue, whether through memory or caring for the dead, for example by tending their grave (Francis, Kellaher, & Neophytou, 2005).…”