Micale M S
University of Manchester, United Kingdom.
J Nerv Ment Dis. 1996 Mar;184(3):146-52. doi: 10.1097/00005053-199603000-00002.
The influence that paradigms may exert on scientific research programs is well established. The effect of organizing cognitive models on the writing of disciplinary histories, however, is less familiar although equally decisive. This essay explores the effects of ideological and paradigmatic factors on the construction of historical accounts of psychological medicine. Particular attention is paid to the scholarly case study of psychoanalysis, which for half a century determined the theories, themes, and figures discussed in psychiatric historiography, as well as the interpretations of these subjects. The author observes similar examples of the paradigmatic structuring of psychiatric history writing before and after the psychoanalytic era and speculates on whether it will ever be possible for psychiatry to achieve a single, stable, and consensual historical narrative about itself.
范式可能对科学研究项目产生的影响已得到充分证实。然而,组织认知模型对学科历史写作的影响虽然同样具有决定性,但却鲜为人知。本文探讨了意识形态和范式因素对心理医学历史叙述构建的影响。特别关注了精神分析的学术案例研究,在长达半个世纪的时间里,它决定了精神病学史学中所讨论的理论、主题和人物,以及对这些主题的解读。作者观察到了精神分析时代前后精神病学历史写作范式构建的类似例子,并推测精神病学是否有可能形成一个关于自身的单一、稳定且一致的历史叙述。