▲ | cluckindan 6 days ago | ||||||||||||||||
Relevant: https://ghaemi.substack.com/p/why-dsm-is-mostly-false > All psychopathology was about unconscious emotional conflicts, mainly dating to childhood; if the conflicts were normal or mild, they produced “neuroses”; if they were severe, they produced “psychoses.” > In addition to 14 validated diagnoses published in the RDC in 1978, a mere two years later DSM-III came out with 292 claimed diagnoses. There is no metaphysical possibility that 278 psychiatric diagnoses suddenly were discovered in two years. They were invented. | |||||||||||||||||
▲ | bbor 6 days ago | parent | next [-] | ||||||||||||||||
That's just a blatant misunderstanding of what diagnostic criteria are. They don't Actually ("ontologically") exist, they're Virtual constructs made for a purpose.
That is antithetical to the basic idea of a diagnosis. "You seem like an angry person" is not helpful for deciding which treatments to try.
Yes, that's the whole point of the book. I'm confident that it's covered in the intro. | |||||||||||||||||
| |||||||||||||||||
▲ | nitwit005 5 days ago | parent | prev [-] | ||||||||||||||||
All diagnoses are inherently made up. It's just humans lumping symptoms that appear similar into categories. If you want to communicate about patients, you need an agreed set of categories. What makes good categories is indeed what's most useful for the related profession(s). They're the ones who actually have to use them to communicate. |