Browse

The subject of the book is the culture of crisis and controversy that exists in contemporary mental health research, following the publication of the fifth edition of the Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders (DSM-5) and the National Institute of Mental Health’s declaration of it as unfit for guiding research in psychiatry. The book explores both the nature and sources of the crisis as well as whether and, if so, how, it can be overcome. It brings together a collection of original articles that develop and apply various analytical ideas and strategies from the philosophy of science, and from other relevant areas of philosophy and science, with the aim of clarifying some aspects of the current crisis and the associated extraordinary science. The themes of the chapters include understanding the research domain of mental illness, clarifying the nature of the problems that constitute the current crisis, identifying key substantive and methodological assumptions concerning classification and research focused on the domain of mental illness, identifying ideas bearing on how best to respond to the current crisis with respect to the scientific research agenda, and constructively addressing the tension between pursuing a progressive scientific research program concerning mental illness and maintaining a place of prominence for individual persons and their contexts.

This book constructs a broad theory of scientific method, which speaks to the conduct of psychological research. This abductive theory of method (ATOM) portrays research as a bottom-up process comprising two broad phases: the detection of empirical phenomena, and the construction of explanatory theories in order to explain claims about the phenomena. ATOM functions as a broad framework theory within which a variety of more specific research methods can be located and employed. A coherent treatment of those methods is enhanced by placing them within the framework of ATOM. A subsidiary focus of this book is a concern with science education in relation to behavioral research methods. Constructive proposals are made for reforming the research methods curriculum.

In psychiatry, almost no one questions the legitimacy of asking whether a given psychiatric disorder is real. Similarly, in psychology, scholars debate the reality of such theoretical entities as general intelligence, superegos, and personality traits. And yet in both disciplines, little thought is given to what is meant by the rather abstract philosophical concept of “real.” Indeed, certain psychiatric disorders have passed from real to imaginary (as in the case of multiple personality disorder) and from imaginary to real (as in the case of post-traumatic stress disorder). Although metaphysical terms such as “real “ and “objective” are readily invoked in psychiatry and psychology, they are often obscure, lofty abstractions. In this book, Peter Zachar argues that metaphysical concepts are important and useful conceptual tools, but should not be treated as all-purpose blunt instruments.From the perspective of a scientifically inspired pragmatism, Zachar explores the essentialist bias, diagnostic literalism, and the concepts of natural kind and social construct. He also proposes a new model for the domain of psychiatric disorders, the imperfect community model, which avoids both relativism and essentialism. He uses this model to understand such recent controversies as the elimination of the bereavement exclusion for depression and the attempt to eliminate narcissistic personality disorder from the DSM-5.