DSM V as dystopian novel

[Ibid]

http://thenewinquiry.com/essays/book-of-lamentations/

A new dystopian novel in the classic mode takes the form of a dictionary of madness

A bit of fun...

---

Members don't see this ad.

 

[Fenster]

Article of Lexiphanicism more like. Also, vapid and nugatory.

 

[Nasrudin]

A bit of crap. Like something written about writing that students of literature who are not writers like to read. Because it makes them feel safe and superior while lacking the courage of art or the earnestness of science and medicine.

All the faults of the DSM. All it's invention in the absence of clarity. I will take over the envious wanking of the psycholiterati and their theories of mind.

 

[OldPsychDoc]

Well, I was going to delve into "Battlefield Earth" over my holiday break, but I think I'll take this on instead.

 

[notdeadyet]

A pet peeve of mine is folks who throw around 1984 and Brave New World as if they're interchangeable.

The author of this article maligns 1984 for having stereotypic villains and Brave New World as being more "subtle." The point of 1984 is that freedom of expression is stamped down by an authoritarian state, hence your villains. The point of Brave New World is that there doesn't need to be this villain, because people have sacrificed these freedoms without said villains. These novels are not of the same theme or scope and the author either hasn't read them both or missed the point.

Sorry, off my soapbox. Literature can die a quick death from folks not reading it, but it dies a slower death more painful to watch when folks gloss over it as mandatory high school reading and then use the works they don't understand as symbols that lose meaning in their misinterpretation. Given that this author can't get through two short novels insightfully, his opinions on the DSM become suspect.

 

[SmallBird]

This piece is rather hateful. It is easier to criticize a system and practise when you are not required to interact with it at all. I think its great that psychiatry seems to garner input from a broader range of commentators than other fields in medicine (including patient-authors and philosophers), but one feels people could try a little harder to imagine things from the perspective of those in the trenches.

 

[whopper]

There's a lot I don't like about the DSM-V, but this critique sounds to be a bit of a guy who doesn't really understand mental illness and having a sense of empowerment when bashing something.