June 3, 2012
(docu), with a bit of Hazlitt
This is a brief Nederlog that only lists a number of updates of documents relating to the DSM-5. As usual, my main source is Suzy Chapman's excellent site about the DSM-5:
Dx Revision Watch
First, the American Psychiatric Association (APA) - anyway an organization that produces propaganda and public relations prose rather than the science they pretend to be based on - hired a professional organization for lying and deceiving the public, excuse me: for public relations (earlier and more honestly known as 'propaganda', until the public caught on to the fact that propaganda tends to consist of lies):
Welcome to DSM-5 Facts (The APA’s new PR site)
The link is to Suzy Chapman's site, where you also find the links to the trained media-whores - sorry: professional liars - that the APA now is relying on to deceive the public.
As Ms Chapman also relates, Dr Allan Frances also noted the new psychiatric scientific technique - lying to the public, excuse me: propaganda, excuse me: public relations, was invented as a profession by a nephew of Freud - and indeed he responded adequately to it in The Huffington Post:
Public Relations Fictions Trying To Hide DSM 5 facts
It really is an adequate reaction, that mostly consists of a listing of the lies by the APA's rented professional liars, and Dr Frances' answers.
Incidentally, if these are the opening shots in a year long publicity battle about the merits of the APA and the DSM-5 I welcome it, especially with such opponents as public relations firms: If the APA rents the worst of the worst - I am sorry, PR-gentlemen and women: I think you are much more honorably employed as pimps and whores: I see much less merit in lying professionally for money than in fucking professionally for money, and feel you denied society the use of your real talents - it merits the sharpest satires.
Incidentally, those who want to follow Dr Frances' spirited attacks on the DSM-5 - and I have my intellectual disagreements with him, but I do like and admire persons with the courage to stand up and take an individual moral position against a strong and dangerous opponent - have here two links where his writings about the DSM-5 are collected:
- Dr Allen Frances in The Huffington Post
- Dr Allen Frances in Psychology Today
Then there are 'The six most essential questions in psychiatric diagnosis', which is a series of articles initiated by questions posed by Dr Frances in the Philosophy, Ethics, and Humanities in Medicine journal.
So far, I have treated only the first Question, with an introduction and a P.S. namely here:
- DSM-5: The six most essential questions in psychiatric
diagnosis - 0
- DSM-5: Question 1 of "The six most essential questions in
- DSM-5: P.S. to my answers to Question 1 about psychiatry
Note these are long and thorough discussions: The middle of these is over 500 Kb, but then it also contains all of the text of the original - that it slashes up quite convincingly, I think, mostly because I do not take sympathetically to a treatment of fundamental philosophical, epistemological, methodological and moral questions in terms of... baseball, as happens for the most part in this Question 1.
It is therefore some considerable relief to me that the other 5 questions are not discussed in terms of metaphors and terms loaned from elsewhere, and indeed what I've read of the rest is better, intellectually speaking, than the discussion of the first question.
At present I am engaged on my discussion of Question 2. Here are the references to three files on the website of Philosophy, Ethics, and Humanities in Medicine: - and note the first is a finished html-file, that also can be obtained in pdf from the site, while the other two presently only come in the shape of provisional pdfs:
- The six most essential questions in psychiatric diagnosis: a
pluralogue part 1: conceptual and definitional issues in
psychiatric diagnosis (Questions 1 and 2): Jan 13, 2012
- The six most essential questions in psychiatric diagnosis: A
pluralogue part 2: Issues of conservatism and pragmatism in
psychiatric diagnosis (Questions 3 and 4): Apr 18, 2012
- The six most essential questions in psychiatric diagnosis: a
pluralogue part 3: issues of utility and alternative approaches
in psychiatric diagnosis (Questions 5 and 6): May 23, 2012
The dates are the dates of publication of these items. A final fourth file will appear later.
Finally, having mentioned the site of 1 boring old man - in fact a pensioned US psychiatrist with sensible ideas and a lot of relevant knowledge:
- 1 Boring Old Man
I should say that he has written a considerable number of courageous, honest and interesting articles on the various DSMs and the present plight of the APA.
As I have said several times: There are sensible psychiatrists, and I am not at all against helping people with psychological problems, problems of life, or whatever one wants to call them - provided this is done honestly, on the basis of real rather than pseudo-science, and by people who have sufficient character or professional integrity to say that they do not understand the things they do not understand, indeed precisely as Hazlitt put it, long ago:
The origin of science is the desire to know causes; and the origin of all false science and imposture is in the desire to accept false causes rather than none; or, which is the same thing, in the unwillingness to accept our own ignorance.
-- William Hazlitt
To end on a subject I love rather than detest:
Hazlitt is one of the most amazing minds and writers I have ever read, and he wrote two excellent essays on the Freudian charlatan of his own time, the phrenologist Dr Spurzheim. Both essays are in his Plain Speaker, which in any case, together with the two volumes of his called Table Talk, contain the finest essays ever written in English, bar none. (*)
And dr. Spurzheim, who pretended to read one's character from the bumps on one's head, and who was as famous in the early 19th Century as was Freud in the early 20th Century, has many points in common with Freud and the fraudians of the DSM-5, while Hazlitt - 'The Prince of Polemicists', in Grayling's terms - takes him down beautifully.
In case you are curious: There is a considerable amount of William Hazlitt on my site, because he was a great writer, who does not get his due to this day, probably because he was a true radical, and one of the writers I consider also an excellent philosopher.
(*) I may be mistaken about 'two', e.g. because I read the
same essay in two different books with a 10 or 15 year
interval. In any case, The Plain Speaker contains one.
As to ME/CFS (that I prefer to call ME):
Short descriptions of the above:
1. Ten reasons why ME/CFS is a real disease by a professor of medicine of Harvard.
2. Long essay by a professor emeritus of medical chemistry about maltreatment of ME.
3. Explanation of what's happening around ME by an investigative journalist.
4. Report to Canadian Government on ME, by many medical experts.
5. Advice to psychiatrist by a psychiatrist who understa, but nds ME is an organic disease
6. English mathematical genius on one's responsibilities in the matter of one's beliefs:
7. A space-
and computer-scientist takes a look at psychology.
See also: ME -Documentation and ME - Resources
The last has many files, all on my site to keep them accessible.
|home - index - summaries - top - mail|