Bibliographic record
Abstract
A humorous, fictional but academic conversation between two of psychiatry’s giants Sigmund Freud and Thomas Szasz. Or is it a dream? Through their animated dialogue and critique of each other’s theories is elicited a contrasting exploration of their conceptual differences. The canvas the origins of psychiatry, the medical-scientific approach to mental illness and the medicalization of the language of psychiatry, psychiatry as science vs. social construction of mental illness, hysteria, the causes of mental illness, patients’ social responsibility vs. illness, the unconscious mind, sublimation of individual freedom vs. metarules of society and coercion vs. treatment. The conversation demonstrates the sharp contrasts between the seminal works of both theorists; on the one hand Szasz’s The myth of mental illness: Foundations of a Theory of Personal Conduct and Freud’s Studies in hysteria(with Breuer) and Civilization and its discontents. The Dream: Freud and Szasz in Conversation by Douglas Waxman is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License. Based on a work at https://rdsjournal.org. Permissions beyond the scope of this license may be available at https://www.rds.hawaii.edu.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.021 | 0.023 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.005 | 0.005 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.023 | 0.078 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.020 | 0.038 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.014 |
| Research integrity | 0.012 | 0.013 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 0.001 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".