Clusters, lines and webs—so does my patient have psychosis? reflections on the use of psychiatric conceptual frameworks from a clinical vantage point

Author:

Kovacs Tibor ZoltanORCID,Hill Reece William,Watson Stuart,Turkington Douglas

Abstract

AbstractMental health professionals working in hospitals or community clinics inevitably face the realisation that we possess imperfect conceptual means to understand mental disorders. In this paper the authors bring together ideas from the fields of Philosophy, Psychiatry, Cognitive Psychology and Linguistics to reflect on the ways we represent phenomena of high practical importance that we often take for granted, but are nevertheless difficult to define in ontological terms. The paper follows through the development of the concept of psychosis over the last two centuries in the interplay of three different conceptual orientations: the categorical, dimensional and network approaches. Each of these represent the available knowledge and dominant thinking styles of the era in which they emerged and take markedly different stances regarding the nature of mental phenomena. Without particular commitment to any ontological positions or models described, the authors invite the reader into a thinking process about the strengths and weaknesses of these models, and how they can be reconciled in multidisciplinary settings to benefit the process of patient care.

Publisher

Springer Science and Business Media LLC

Subject

History and Philosophy of Science,Health Policy,General Medicine,Issues, ethics and legal aspects

Reference68 articles.

1. World Health Organization. International statistical classification of diseases and related health problems. 11th ed. 2019.

2. Bacon F. (ed. by Devey J). Novum organum. New York: P.F. Collier & Son; 1902.

3. Haslam N. Kinds of kinds: A conceptual taxonomy of psychiatric categories. Philos Psychiatry Psychol. 2002;9(3):203–17.

4. Schwartz MA, Wiggins OP. Diagnosis and ideal types: a contribution to psychiatric classification. Compr Psychiatry. 1987;28(4):277–91.

5. Foucault M. Madness And Civilization: A History Of Insanity In The Age Of Reason. New York, NY: Vintage Books; 1988. p. c1965.

同舟云学术

1.学者识别学者识别

2.学术分析学术分析

3.人才评估人才评估

"同舟云学术"是以全球学者为主线,采集、加工和组织学术论文而形成的新型学术文献查询和分析系统,可以对全球学者进行文献检索和人才价值评估。用户可以通过关注某些学科领域的顶尖人物而持续追踪该领域的学科进展和研究前沿。经过近期的数据扩容,当前同舟云学术共收录了国内外主流学术期刊6万余种,收集的期刊论文及会议论文总量共计约1.5亿篇,并以每天添加12000余篇中外论文的速度递增。我们也可以为用户提供个性化、定制化的学者数据。欢迎来电咨询!咨询电话:010-8811{复制后删除}0370

www.globalauthorid.com

TOP

Copyright © 2019-2024 北京同舟云网络信息技术有限公司
京公网安备11010802033243号  京ICP备18003416号-3