排序方式： 共有5条查询结果，搜索用时 125 毫秒
1
1.
Michel Minard 《L'évolution Psychiatrique》2017,82(1):39-62
Objective
Very often, the brain and the mind are objects of controversy in the world of psychiatry. The history of American psychiatry is instructive in this respect. From an early date, the United States embraced psychoanalysis, invented behaviorism, promoted biological psychiatry, used biometry and produced a highly successful classification of mental disorders. The objective of this paper is the study of this history.Method
The paper proposes a detailed study of the theories, practices and ideological debates in the field of American psychiatry since the 18th century, and of federal mental health policies.Results
Psychiatry in the United States has distinctive features linked to the concept of manifest destiny, Protestantism and pragmatism, to the manner in which the nation was constructed (slavery, conquest of the West, economic liberalism) and to the ceaseless wars, from the War of Independence to the Middle Eastern wars, not forgetting the Civil War and two World Wars. As the nation succeeded in integrating its immigrants, it also assimilated their different cultures and their discoveries in the field psychiatry. Many theories and practices that later diffused by globalization were instigated by the nation, among others the DSMs, part of the cultural, scientific, economic and political development of the nation. Lay people were early protagonists in the constructive shifts, conflicts and anti-psychiatry tendencies.Discussion
This paper examines the growing success of psychoanalysis in the 1950s and the causes behind its loss of influence in the 1970s. It does not attribute this loss to the DSM-III, but to the psychoanalysts themselves. It sets out to demonstrate that the DSM-III and later DSMs did not result in a paradigm shift in the meaning of Thomas Kuhn.Conclusion
The history of American psychiatry proves that there is little chance of seeing an end to the conflicts between advocates of the brain, still poorly understood, and upholders of the mind, often poorly defined, as long as our knowledge in the field of mental disorders remains as slim as it is today. 相似文献2.
Maladaptive daydreaming (MD) is an excessive and vivid fantasy activity that interferes with individual's normal functioning and can result in severe distress. Research has shown that MD is a clinical condition associated with a number of personal, interpersonal and behavioral problems. Therefore, a need exists to differentiate MD from other mental activities that involve an excessive or otherwise problematic use of fantasy. These include, among others, daydreaming, mind wandering, dissociative absorption, fantasy proneness, sluggish cognitive tempo, lucid dreaming, and autistic fantasy. In this article, we examine the commonalities and differences between MD and these mental activities, to promote a better understanding of the MD phenomena and their specificity, and to foster the quality of its assessment in clinical settings. A clinical case study is employed to elucidate our analysis and to demonstrate the differential diagnosis of MD. 相似文献
3.
Erik R Kandel 《L'évolution Psychiatrique》2002,67(1):12
In an attempt to place psychiatric thinking and the training of future psychiatrists more centrally into the context of modern biology, the author outlines the beginnings of a new intellectual framework for psychiatry that derives from current biological thinking about the relationship of mind to brain. The purpose of this framework is twofold. First, it is designed to emphasize that the professional requirements for future psychiatrists will demand a greater knowledge of the structure and functioning of the brain than is currently available in most training programs. Second, it is designed to illustrate that the unique domain which psychiatry occupies within academic medicine, the analysis of the interaction between social and biological determinants of behavior, can best be studied by also having a full understanding of the biological components of behavior. 相似文献
4.
Patrick Merot 《L'évolution Psychiatrique》2008,73(1):79
The religions asserted, in diverse forms, the existence of an immaterial soul which contains the principle of the existence of the subject and which can outlive it. So, the western imagination was imbued for a long time with the Christian conception of the soul. The psychoanalysis was interested in the religious phenomena to try to understand it and also to find in it ways of exploration of the psychic functioning. It considers that the faith in the existence of the soul attests the desire of immortality of the human being. It shows the expectation of the return of the dead, a return which is feared as much as desired. These faiths remains profoundly rooted in the unconscious in forms which can be transformed and which want only to express themselves. Having regard to certain contemporary debates, it maybe necessary to remind that the psychoanalysis is materialism. The psychoanalysis chooses to be interested only in the dimension of the word to investigate the psychic functioning and allow the change. 相似文献
5.
R. Brunod 《Annales médico-psychologiques》2006,164(1):34-38
In his book, Descartes' error, Antonio R. Damasio attributes the separation of mind and body in Western medicine to Descartes' writings from the 17th century. According to the author, this separation may have hindered the development of disciplines such as neuropsychology and psychosomatics for several centuries. Careful reading of Descartes' work does not confirm these assertions and even provides contradictory evidence. Contrary to Damasio's assertion, Descartes locates pain as “a perception that refers us back to our body”. Throughout his work, he confirms his belief in an intricate mind-body relationship, as indicated by such remarks as: “… Indeed, all these feelings of hunger, thirst, pain, etc., are nothing more than certain confused ways of thinking that originate in, and depend upon the union and, what appears to be an intermingling of the mind with the body”. In a similar fashion, in his treatise on Passions of the Soul, Descartes devotes several chapters to what is presently referred to as psychosomatics. He even describes what is currently known as breath holding spells (white form) in the infant, under the following title: Why some Children turn pale instead of crying? Descartes' followers pursued their research in the same direction. In the same vein, Nicolas Malebranche studied “Of the link between ideas from the mind and traces from in brain”, which completely fits our current definition of neuropsychology, with of course a chapter devoted to the subject “Of memory”. He goes as far as suspecting the existence of the nerve impulse by differentiating it from its anatomical basis and shows an interest in “The communication which exists between the mother's brain and the child's”. The reasons for such a misunderstanding of Cartesian thinking probably reside in the confusion Damasio makes between two terms, mind and soul, which he uses interchangeably, whereas Descartes viewed them as very discrete entities. The first term relates by its very nature to brain functioning and is relevant to neurosciences, while the second term, which is radically distinct from the substratum, allows one to exert the free choices of human thinking, as emphasized by Socrates in Platon's Phedon (or about the soul). The same confusion is responsible for Damasio's interpretation of the famous “I think, therefore I am” in the Discours de la méthode (Discourse on method) as an assertion of the existence of thought outside of any organic support, which is not what Descartes meant. Through this assertion, Descartes was trying to extract knowledge from the irrational world to which it had belonged up until then, and to anchor it into rational evidence and logical reasoning. This is what scientists are still trying to do today. It is therefore clear that nothing in Descartes' work goes against the principles of modern neuropsychology; in fact it is quite the opposite. It remains to be seen whether the confusion between mind and soul is of little importance, outside of a few polemists like us, or whether it raises the issue of the limits of the field of investigation of neuropsychological sciences. Can our thinking be reduced to cognitive activities or can these favor the expression of something else? 相似文献
1