Book Review: General Psychiatry: Szasz under Fire: The Psychiatric Abolitionist Faces His Critics
Notice bibliographique
Résumé
General Psychiatry Szasz Under Fire: The Psychiatric Abolitionist Faces His Critics Jeffrey A Schaler, editor. Chicago (Ill): Open Court La Salle; 2004. 450 p. US $36.95. Reviewer rating: Good This book is edited by Jeffrey Schaler, a psychologist and associate professor of justice, law, and society at American University. The format is as follows: a states his or her position vis a vis Szasz and then he replies. Few authors of 12 chapters are psychiatrists or psychotherapistspsychoanalysts, with exception of RE Kendell and Ronald Pies. Most contributors have doctorates in philosophy or law, which colours content and sets tone. Several contributors seem to subscribe partly to some of Szasz' views, although they are less extreme in their propositions. The first chapter is an autobiographical sketch by Thomas Szasz, and herein we find crux: illness is a myth, and therefore it is foolish to look for causes or cures of imaginary ailments we call 'mental diseases.' Kendell builds on this, summarizing Szasz' claims that a condition is a disease only if a morphological abnormality is demonstrated (following Virchow criteria). It follows, then, that there is no medical, moral, or legal justification for involuntary psychiatric hospitalization or treatment. Szasz restates his belief that psychiatry and coercion are like conjoined twins and cannot be separated. KWM Fulford, a professor of philosophy and mental health, believes Szasz is skeptical rather than antipsychiatry, and by explaining what he calls value-based medicine, he hopes to show that Szasz does not lead to demise of psychiatry but, rather, to its strengthening. Szasz disagrees with much of Fulford's paper, and he states that value-based medicine and its twin, evidence-based medicine, are merely obfuscatory, self-approbating slogans. This pattern runs through practically every chapter. One critic at times agrees with part of Szasz' beliefs or thesis and yet, in a devastating counterattack, is severely criticized for his misinterpretations. Another author, Scott Percival, thinks Szasz is unnecessarily open to criticism because he lacks a strong epistemology and proposes that his perspective could be found in work of Karl Popper. Interestingly, Szasz, by way of answer, invites us to read his exchange of letters with Popper. Szasz also defends his position on suicide, clearly stating that he is opposed to suicide prevention because it refers to the practice of using coercive apparatus of state to deprive people of their liberty. …
Récupéré en direct depuis OpenAlex et désinversé. Les résumés ne sont pas conservés dans cette base de données : les index inversés représentent 8,6 Go des 9,3 Go de texte de la base, et le serveur dispose de 13 Go libres.
Comment cette classification a été obtenuedéplier
Prédiction distillée sur la base complète
Imitation des enseignantsNi prévalence calibrée, ni vérité terrain. Validation humaine à venir. Apprise à partir de 10 348 étiquettes directes de Codex et de 10 348 étiquettes directes de Gemma. Le mode candidate est l'union des têtes enseignantes seuillées; le consensus est leur intersection. Ces sorties portent le statut machine_predicted_unvalidated et ne sont ni des étiquettes humaines ni des étiquettes directes de modèles de pointe.
Scores Codex et Gemma par catégorie
| Catégorie | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Métarecherche | 0,001 | 0,000 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens strict) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens large) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Bibliométrie | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Études des sciences et des technologies | 0,004 | 0,001 |
| Communication savante | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Science ouverte | 0,001 | 0,000 |
| Intégrité de la recherche | 0,000 | 0,001 |
| Charge utile insuffisante (le modèle a refusé de juger) | 0,007 | 0,000 |
Scores machine (provisoires)
Les deux têtes enseignantes du modèle étudiant, lues sur ce travail. Un score ordonne la base pour la relecture; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie, et le statut de validation accompagne chaque rangée tel quel.
Scores de référence d'un modèle non mature (critères de maturité non atteints, 7 itérations). Un score ordonne; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · tel quel depuis la passe de notation : score_only signifie que le nombre peut ordonner les travaux, et qu'aucune étiquette de catégorie n'en découleClassification
machine, non validéePrédiction automatique; un appel candidat d’une seule tête enseignante, pas un consensus.
Le détail, modèle par modèle et score par score, se trouve en fin de page sous « Comment cette classification a été obtenue ».