Hoff Paul
Department of General and Social Psychiatry, University of Zurich, Zurich, Switzerland.
Int Rev Psychiatry. 2008 Dec;20(6):515-20. doi: 10.1080/09540260802564797.
Psychopathology is usually recognized as an important clinical and research tool in psychiatric textbooks. However, in the era of operationalized psychiatric diagnosis, therapeutic guidelines and strong neuroscientific impact on the self-understanding of psychiatry, its role became somewhat insecure in recent decades. And it has even been argued that psychopathology will sooner or later be fully replaced by neuroscientific concepts. This paper elucidates the theoretical (and, partly, historical) framework of this debate and argues for a modern understanding of psychopathology. This understanding will, on the one hand, be compatible with neurobiological and social sciences appoaches to mental illness, and, on the other hand, will not abandon psychopathology's demand to be an indispensable foundation of psychiatry.
在精神病学教科书中,精神病理学通常被视为一种重要的临床和研究工具。然而,在精神病诊断操作化的时代、治疗指南以及神经科学对精神病学自我认知的强大影响下,近几十年来其作用变得有些不稳固。甚至有人认为,精神病理学迟早会被神经科学概念完全取代。本文阐明了这场辩论的理论(以及部分历史)框架,并主张对精神病理学有现代的理解。这种理解一方面将与针对精神疾病的神经生物学和社会科学方法相兼容,另一方面不会放弃精神病理学作为精神病学不可或缺基础的要求。