chipmunk1
Senior Member
- Messages
- 765
They are referring to Cartesian dualism. (theoretical separation of mind and body)
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dualism_(philosophy_of_mind)
Monism :
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Monism
Its a rich irony considering the fact that White et al consistently ignore all biological evidence and like to ascribe literally everything to behavioural/psych explanations
it's an old psychobabble trick. the concept of "mind" is vague and confusing and can not be studied directly. You can claim what you want and then hide behind nebulous concepts and word games.
You accuse the others of having an outdated dualistic model to distract from the fact that your model is irrelevant and outdated.
The biopsychosocial model was the response of a trained psychoanalyst(Engel) to the demands that psychiatry become a science and a real medical speciality.(1977)
They did not want to change and get rid of their superstitions(Psychoanalysis) and came up with the biopsychosocial model to explain why a purely physical view of illness would not be sufficient to understand and explain illness. They claimed that everything in the body interacted and that would include non-physical factors like character, emotions, social relationships etc.
Since the mind interacts with the body and vice-versa you can say that you have a non-dualistic model. Non-dualistic could include your thoughts causing cancer, AIDS all what you want. It could be totally removed from reality and still be non-dualistic.
Check out the original article from Engel.
http://www.lumsa.it/sites/default/files/UTENTI/u668/PSIC_HANDICAP_Engel 1977_modello_biopsicosociale.pdf
At a recent conference on psychiatric
education, many psychiatrists seemed to
be saying to medicine, “Please take us
back and we will never again deviate
from the ‘medical model.’ ” For, as one
critical psychiatrist put it, “Psychiatry
has become a hodgepodge of unscientific
opinions, assorted philosophies and
‘schools of thought,’ mixed metaphors,
role diffusion, propaganda, and politick-
ing for ‘mental health’ and other esoteric
goals” (1). In contrast, the rest of medi-
cine appears neat and tidy. it has a firm
base in the biological sciences, enor-
mous technologic resources at its com—
mand, and a record of astonishing
achievement in elucidating mechanisms
of disease and devising new treatments.
It would seem that psychiatry would do
well to emulate its sister medical dis~
ciplines by finally embracing once and
for all the medical model of disease.
Now what Engel replies
But I do not accept such a premise.
Rather, I contend that all medicine is in
crisis and, further, that medicine’s crisis
derives from the same basic fault as psy~
chiatry’s, namely, adherence to a model
of disease no longer adequate for the sci-
entific tasks and social responsibilities of
either medicine or psychiatry
Last edited: