Actions, causes, and psychiatry: a reply to Szasz

Journal of Medical Ethics 28 (2):120-123 (2002)
  Copy   BIBTEX

Abstract

In a recent paper, it was argued forcefully by Thomas Szasz that it is crucial to the scientific credibility of psychiatry that it abandon talk of the behaviour of the mentally “ill” in terms of causes: such behaviour is not caused by their condition—it simply has reasons, which are discounted by the medical model. It is argued in this paper that Szasz's theory is incomplete for two reasons: first, in assuming that reasons are radically different from causes, it cannot account for the possibility that “sane” behaviour might be just as much caused as “insane”; and second, it tacitly assumes that the origin of behaviour always lies with the agent—a view that arguably is an accident of grammar. Hence while there is no mental illness, this is because there is nothing that could be ill—and this means that there is no such thing as mental “health” either

Other Versions

No versions found

Links

PhilArchive



    Upload a copy of this work     Papers currently archived: 101,219

External links

Setup an account with your affiliations in order to access resources via your University's proxy server

Through your library

Analytics

Added to PP
2010-08-24

Downloads
41 (#549,457)

6 months
10 (#418,198)

Historical graph of downloads
How can I increase my downloads?

Author's Profile

Iain Brassington
University of Manchester

Citations of this work

Medicine as an essentially contested concept.C. McKnight - 2003 - Journal of Medical Ethics 29 (4):261-262.

Add more citations

References found in this work

Actions, Reasons, and Causes.Donald Davidson - 1963 - Journal of Philosophy 60 (23):685.
Mental illness: psychiatry's phlogiston.Thomas Szasz - 2001 - Journal of Medical Ethics 27 (5):297-301.
The Divided Self.S. N. Patten - 1919 - The Monist 29 (2):223-237.

Add more references