Centre for Population Health Sciences, College of Medicine and Veterinary Medicine, University of Edinburgh.
Sociol Health Illn. 2011 Mar;33(3):448-64. doi: 10.1111/j.1467-9566.2010.01286.x. Epub 2011 Feb 1.
Neuroscientific research into mental health commands generous funding, suggesting neuroscience is understood by a variety of actors and institutions as having significant potential to enhance the therapeutic practices of psychiatrists. This article interrogates this 'therapeutic promise' of neuroscience through the case study of the psychiatric condition personality disorder. Specifically, the focus is on the promissory discourse of clinicians specialising in the management of two variants of personality disorder--antisocial personality disorder and psychopathy--and researchers investigating the neurobiology of these constructs. The article discusses the respondents' ambivalent expectations regarding the therapeutic promise of brain research, and shows how these are structured by understandings of the ontology of personality disorder. In turn, these ambivalences direct our attention to practical issues surrounding the potential of neuroscience to translate into and enhance clinical practice, as well as theoretical concerns revolving around the place and role of the biological within contemporary neuroscience, psychiatry and psychology. In sum, the necessity of large material and symbolic investments in neuroscience should, perhaps, be reflected upon more critically, and analytic encounters with this discipline must keep in mind it's at times surprising commitment to the realms of the social and the psychological.
神经科学对心理健康的研究获得了大量资金，这表明神经科学被各种行为体和机构理解为具有显著提高精神科医生治疗实践的潜力。本文通过精神病学中人格障碍这一案例研究来探讨神经科学的这种“治疗承诺”。具体来说，重点关注专门管理两种人格障碍（反社会人格障碍和精神病态）的临床医生和研究人员对这些结构的神经生物学的承诺话语。本文讨论了受访者对大脑研究治疗承诺的矛盾期望，并展示了这些期望是如何由人格障碍本体论的理解所构建的。反过来，这些矛盾引起了我们对神经科学转化和增强临床实践的潜力所涉及的实际问题的关注，以及围绕生物在当代神经科学、精神病学和心理学中的地位和作用的理论问题的关注。总之，也许应该更批判性地反思对神经科学进行大量物质和符号投资的必要性，并且在与这门学科进行分析性接触时，必须牢记它有时对社会和心理领域的惊人承诺。
