Skip to main content Accessibility help

We use cookies to distinguish you from other users and to provide you with a better experience on our websites. Close this message to accept cookies or find out how to manage your cookie settings.

Close cookie message
×
Hostname: page-component-55f67697df-sqlfs Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2025-05-08T11:02:59.946Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false

Chapter 4 - Why Classify in Psychiatry?: ‘Meddling Intellect’

from Part I - Towards Psychiatric Formulation

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  03 May 2025

Gareth S. Owen
Gareth S. Owen
Affiliation:
King's College London and South London and Maudsley NHS Foundation Trust
Get access

Summary

Presents classification debates in psychiatry historically as a struggle between the classic perspective, which seeks to classify, and the romantic perspective, which rebels against classification. Presents the DSM-III project as an achievement of the classic perspective, which resolved one crisis only to bring forth another.

Keywords

diagnosisPlatoDSM-IIIreliabilityvalidity
Type
Chapter
Information
Psychiatry and Human Nature
Classic and Romantic Perspectives
 , pp. 46 - 62
Publisher: Cambridge University Press
Print publication year: 2025

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

Book purchase

Temporarily unavailable

References

Wordsworth, W. The Tables Turned: The Poetry Foundation; 1798. www.poetryfoundation.org/poems/45557/the-tables-turned. Last accessed 30 June 2024.Google Scholar
Thompson, W. Electrical units of measurement. Popular Lectures and Addresses, Volume 1. 1, pp. 73–4. London: Macmillan and Co; 1889.Google Scholar
Plato, . Phaedrus. London: Penguin; 2005.Google Scholar
Plato, . The Laws. London: Penguin; 2004.Google Scholar
Foucault, M. Madness and Civilisation: A History of Insanity in the Age of Reason. London: Tavistock Publications; 1967.Google Scholar
Ziolkowski, T. German Romanticism and its Institutions. New Jersey: Princeton University Press; 1990.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Kant, I. Anthropology from a Pragmatic Point of View. Carbondale: Southern Illinois University Press; 1978.Google Scholar
Chesterton, GK. Orthodoxy. San Francisco: Ignatious Press; 1995.Google Scholar
Owen, GS, Cutting, J, David, AS. Are people with schizophrenia more logical than healthy volunteers? Br J Psychiatry. 2007;191:453–4.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Canguilhem, G. The Normal and the Pathological. New York: Zone Books; 1991.Google Scholar
Berrios, GE, Beer, D. The notion of unitary psychosis: A conceptual history. Hist Psychiatry. 1994;5(17):13–36.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Mayer-Gross, W, Slater, E, Roth, M. Clinical Psychiatry. London: Cassell and Company Ltd; 1960.Google Scholar
Kendler, KS, Munoz, RA, Murphy, G. The development of the Feighner criteria: A historical perspective. Am J Psychiatry. 2010;167(2):134–42.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Becker, H. Outsiders: Studies in the Sociology of Deviance. New York: Free Press; 1963.Google Scholar
Ghaemi, SN. The Rise and Fall of the Biopsychosocial Model: Reconciling Art and Science in Psychiatry. Baltimore: Johns Hopkins University Press; 2010.Google Scholar
McGlashan, TH. The Chestnut Lodge follow-up study: II. Long-term outcome of schizophrenia and the affective disorders. Arch Gen Psychiatry. 1984;41(6):586–601.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
van Voren, R. Political abuse of psychiatry: An historical overview. Schizophr Bull. 2010;36(1):33–5.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Appelbaum, PS. Almost a Revolution: Mental health law and the limits of change. New York: Oxford University Press; 1995.Google Scholar
Bromberg, W, Simon, F. The ‘Protest’ Psychosis: A Special Type of Reactive Psychosis. Arch Gen Psychiatry. 1968;19:155–60.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Wortis, J. Soviet Psychiatry. Baltimore: The Williams and Wilkins Company; 1950.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Cooper, J, Kendell, R, Gurland, B, Sharpe, L, Copeland, J, Simon, R. Psychiatric Diagnosis in New York and London. Maudsley monograph no. 20. London: Oxford University Press; 1972.Google Scholar
Bentall, RP. Madness Explained. London: Penguin; 2004.Google Scholar
Bridgman, PW. The Logic of Modern Physics. New York: Macmillan; 1927.Google Scholar
Hempel, C. Introduction to problems of taxonomy. In Zublin, J, editor. Field Studies in the Mental Disorders: Proceedings. New York: Grune & Stratton; 1961.Google Scholar
Feighner, JP, Robins, E, Guze, SB, Woodruff, RA, Jr., Winokur, G, Munoz, R. Diagnostic criteria for use in psychiatric research. Arch Gen Psychiatry. 1972;26(1):57–63.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Klerman, GL, Vaillant, GE, Spitzer, RL, Michels, R. A debate on DSM-III. Am J Psychiatry. 1984;141(4):539–53.Google ScholarPubMed
American Psychiatric Association. Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders, Third Edition (DSM-III). Washington DC: American Psychiatric Publishing; 1980.Google Scholar
Beck, AT, Ward, CH, Mendelson, M, Mock, JE, Erbaugh, JK. Reliability of psychiatric diagnoses: 2. A study of consistency of clinical judgments and ratings. Am J Psych. 1962;119(4):351–7.Google ScholarPubMed
Williams, JB. The multiaxial system of DSM-III: Where did it come from and where should it go?: I. Its origins and critiques. Arch Gen Psychiatry. 1985;42(2):175–80.Google Scholar
Decker, HS. The Making of DSM-III: a Diagnostic Manual’s Conquest of American Psychiatry. New York: Oxford University Press; 2013.Google Scholar
Robins, E, Guze, SB. Establishment of diagnostic validity in psychiatric illness: its application to schizophrenia. Am J Psychiatry. 1970;126(7):983–7.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Farmer, AE, McGuffin, P, Gottesman, II. Twin concordance for DSM-III schizophrenia. Scrutinizing the validity of the definition. Arch Gen Psychiatry. 1987;44(7):634–41.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Moffitt, TE, Caspi, A, Taylor, A, Kokaua, J, Milne, BJ, Polanczyk, G, et al. How common are common mental disorders? Evidence that lifetime prevalence rates are doubled by prospective versus retrospective ascertainment. Psychol Med. 2010;40(6):899–909.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Andreasen, NC. DSM and the death of phenomenology in America: An example of unintended consequences. Schizophr Bull. 2007;33(1):108–12.Google ScholarPubMed

Save book to Kindle

To save this book to your Kindle, first ensure [email protected] is added to your Approved Personal Document E-mail List under your Personal Document Settings on the Manage Your Content and Devices page of your Amazon account. Then enter the ‘name’ part of your Kindle email address below. Find out more about saving to your Kindle.

Note you can select to save to either the @free.kindle.com or @kindle.com variations. ‘@free.kindle.com’ emails are free but can only be saved to your device when it is connected to wi-fi. ‘@kindle.com’ emails can be delivered even when you are not connected to wi-fi, but note that service fees apply.

Find out more about the Kindle Personal Document Service.

Available formats
×

Save book to Dropbox

To save content items to your account, please confirm that you agree to abide by our usage policies. If this is the first time you use this feature, you will be asked to authorise Cambridge Core to connect with your account. Find out more about saving content to Dropbox.

Available formats
×

Save book to Google Drive

To save content items to your account, please confirm that you agree to abide by our usage policies. If this is the first time you use this feature, you will be asked to authorise Cambridge Core to connect with your account. Find out more about saving content to Google Drive.

Available formats
×