Philosophy Now Forum

"From the scientific standpoint, it is difficult to find a precedent in medicine for what is beginning to happen in psychiatry. The intellectual basis of this field is shifting from one discipline, based on subjective 'mental' phenomena, to another, neuroscience. Indeed, today’s developing science-based understanding of mental illness very likely will revolutionize prevention and treatment and bring real and lasting relief to millions of people worldwide." National Institute of Mental Health, in an issue of Scientific American

In other words, psychology is not recognized as a science therefore, there is no evidence that it helps people.

According to the above, it would not be unreasonable to assume in a couple of decades, evidence based medical discipline will have replaced psychology and even though it will continue to exist, its credibility will be ranked alongside for example, astrology or fortune-tellers who give character readings.

Is this being overly cynical about the role of psychotherapy, especially when equated to astrology or fortune-telling, does psychotherapy have to be cut and dried, black and white, science based, to have significant weight in the treatment of mental illness.

The neuroscientists might get back to us once they have liberated themselves from divorce, suicide, alchoholism etc. Let them saw on each other's brains until they get it right.

reasonvemotion wrote:"From the scientific standpoint, it is difficult to find a precedent in medicine for what is beginning to happen in psychiatry. The intellectual basis of this field is shifting from one discipline, based on subjective 'mental' phenomena, to another, neuroscience. Indeed, today’s developing science-based understanding of mental illness very likely will revolutionize prevention and treatment and bring real and lasting relief to millions of people worldwide." National Institute of Mental Health, in an issue of Scientific American

In other words, psychology is not recognized as a science therefore, there is no evidence that it helps people.

According to the above, it would not be unreasonable to assume in a couple of decades, evidence based medical discipline will have replaced psychology and even though it will continue to exist, its credibility will be ranked alongside for example, astrology or fortune-tellers who give character readings.

Is this being overly cynical about the role of psychotherapy, especially when equated to astrology or fortune-telling, does psychotherapy have to be cut and dried, black and white, science based, to have significant weight in the treatment of mental illness.

If you'd ask me, I'd say that we should have a form of "psychology" that's not as destructive as the form that's being promoted in our societies. We need to go back to having a more organic approach to the Mind; incorporating some Philosophical perspectives into it, like that of Stoicism or Buddhism, to help people with stress and help people with disorders. My other idea is that we should also prescribe meditation; organic herbs such as camomile and maybe cannabis, etc. that helps calm the mind; anything that can actually give people solutions to their problems and not just mask them with prescription drugs.

reasonvemotion wrote:"From the scientific standpoint, it is difficult to find a precedent in medicine for what is beginning to happen in psychiatry. The intellectual basis of this field is shifting from one discipline, based on subjective 'mental' phenomena, to another, neuroscience. Indeed, today’s developing science-based understanding of mental illness very likely will revolutionize prevention and treatment and bring real and lasting relief to millions of people worldwide." National Institute of Mental Health, in an issue of Scientific American

In other words, psychology is not recognized as a science therefore, there is no evidence that it helps people.

According to the above, it would not be unreasonable to assume in a couple of decades, evidence based medical discipline will have replaced psychology and even though it will continue to exist, its credibility will be ranked alongside for example, astrology or fortune-tellers who give character readings.

Is this being overly cynical about the role of psychotherapy, especially when equated to astrology or fortune-telling, does psychotherapy have to be cut and dried, black and white, science based, to have significant weight in the treatment of mental illness.

Well for as long as I live, it shall be psychotherapy in which I trust, as men can take their drugs, and scalpels and stick them where the sun doesn't shine. I do however support medicines as contained in the earths natural organic compounds through animal and plant life, as that's why they are here in the first place, we are not separate, in fact there is one life on planet earth, it's the symbiosis, the totality of the biosphere, and contained within in is all we truly need, what ever ails us.

reasonvemotion wrote:In other words, psychology is not recognized as a science therefore, there is no evidence that it helps people.

I think you confuse 2 things.

The everyday shrink isn't a scientist, just aswell that the everyday user of a tablet or a cellphone isn't a scientist, but it is scientists that has created both psychology and our technology gadjets.

I think you're right RvE,
Psychiatry is going to be the future and Psychology binned as the advances in the various fields of pharmacology, molecular biology, genetics, neuroscience, computing and prosthetics are going to allow us to change as we wish. Philosophy will still be about tho' I guess.

Arising_uk

Philosophy will still be about tho' I guess.

Not according to the book The Grand Design, Stephen Hawking believes philosophy is dead, it has not kept up with modern developments in science, particularly physics, therefore
scientists have become the bearers of the torch of discovery in our quest for knowledge.”

A medical Dr is not a Scientist any more than a shrink is, diagnosis and treatment is an art allbeit one backed up with some chemistry, biology and physics.

Not according to the book The Grand Design, Stephen Hawking believes philosophy is dead, it has not kept up with modern developments in science, particularly physics, therefore
scientists have become the bearers of the torch of discovery in our quest for knowledge.”

Dead no, populated by luddites who appear to be straight out of the 19th century as far as their understanding of science goes, maybe.

I mean seriously how can you still be banging on about determinism when every science stopped using such eroneous models about 100 years ago and has been abandoning them by the bucket load ever since. It's kinda embarrassing to watch a supposedly educated person bang on about how we have free will with determinism, when there's no remote reason to believe determinism exists at any physical scale. And then there are the, science must be criticised crowd that are so post modern and au fait, who seem to be attacking an institution that never existed which is also straight out of the past. Oh just get a hammer already and go smash some cotton mills or something, keep yourself occupied while science does its stuff.

reasonvemotion wrote:...
Not according to the book The Grand Design, Stephen Hawking believes philosophy is dead, it has not kept up with modern developments in science, particularly physics, therefore
scientists have become the bearers of the torch of discovery in our quest for knowledge.”

Depends upon which knowledge is being talked about and what you consider an explanation. If its about the physical world and ontology then I guess he's right. If its about epistemology then I guess it depends upon what one considers a suitable explanation for something, i.e. will a how answer be enough. So even with the advances in psychiatry that appear to be upon the cards I think existential questions will still arise, ethics will still be around and phenomenology may even thrive in such a world, and logic will always be around.