Castiglioni Marco, Laudisa Federico
Department of Human Sciences "R. Massa", University of Milano-Bicocca Milan, Italy.
Front Psychol. 2015 Jan 5;5:1517. doi: 10.3389/fpsyg.2014.01517. eCollection 2014.
The aim of this paper is to argue that a strictly reductionist approach to psychiatry represents a theoretical and clinical obstacle to a fruitful synthesis between neurobiological and sociocultural aspects of the sciences of mind. We examine the theoretical and practical motivations underlying this approach, by analyzing the case of depressive disorders, as defined in the fifth edition of the Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders (DSM), and the related removal of the "bereavement exclusion clause." We first explore the claim that DSM is atheoretical, observing that, far from being atheoretical, DSM adopts an implicit, biologically inspired view of the mind; we show that such a view leads to a sort of circularity in the definition of depressive disorders, in which psychopharmacology seems to play a key role. We then turn to further problems deriving from this position, analyzing the issue of placebo effects in the treatment of depressive disorders and the philosophical question of normative preconditions for psychopathological diagnosis. Finally, we address the issue of subjectivity, which, together with the related aspect of the subject's relational context, appears to be crucial to any scientific theorizing about mental disorders, despite DSM's attempt to exclude it. Our defense of a non-reductionist view of mental disorders, however, does not imply that we endorse any sort of metaphysical dualism, or anti-diagnostic or anti-psychiatric positions. On the contrary, we argue that the adoption of a reductionist position actually undermines the theoretical and clinical accuracy in explaining depressive disorders.
本文旨在论证,精神病学中严格的还原论方法对心灵科学的神经生物学和社会文化层面之间富有成效的综合构成了理论和临床障碍。我们通过分析《精神疾病诊断与统计手册》(DSM)第五版中定义的抑郁症案例以及相关的“丧亲排除条款”的删除,来审视这种方法背后的理论和实践动机。我们首先探讨DSM是无理论性的这一观点,观察到DSM远非无理论性,而是采用了一种隐含的、受生物学启发的心灵观;我们表明,这种观点在抑郁症的定义中导致了一种循环,其中精神药理学似乎起着关键作用。然后,我们转向源于这一立场的进一步问题,分析抑郁症治疗中的安慰剂效应问题以及精神病理学诊断的规范性前提的哲学问题。最后,我们讨论主观性问题,尽管DSM试图排除它,但主观性连同主体关系背景的相关方面,似乎对任何关于精神障碍的科学理论化都至关重要。然而,我们对精神障碍非还原论观点的辩护并不意味着我们支持任何形式的形而上学二元论、反诊断或反精神病学立场。相反,我们认为采用还原论立场实际上会削弱解释抑郁症的理论和临床准确性。