The need for new ontologies in psychiatry

Philosophical Explorations 20 (2):146-159 (2017)
  Copy   BIBTEX

Abstract

Although researchers in psychiatry have been trying for decades to elucidate the pathophysiology underlying mental disorders, relatively little progress has been made. One explanation for this failure is that diagnostic categories in psychiatry are unlikely to track underlying neurological mechanisms. Because of this, the US National Institutes of Mental Health has recently developed a novel ontology to guide research in biological psychiatry: the Research Domain Criteria. In this paper, I argue that while RDoC may lead to better neuroscientific explanations for mental disorders, it is unlikely that this new knowledge will then lead to an improved diagnostic system. I therefore suggest that researchers in psychiatry should work toward the development of two new ontologies: one for research and one for clinical practice.

Links

PhilArchive



    Upload a copy of this work     Papers currently archived: 91,571

External links

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

Through your library

Similar books and articles

The Importance of Pluralism in Psychiatry.Elly Vintiadis - forthcoming - In Maria Kanellopoulou-Botti & Fereniki Panagopoulou (eds.), Βιοηθικοί Προβληματισμοί ΙΙ (Bioethical Reflections II). Athens: Papazisis.
Externalist Psychiatry.Will Davies - 2016 - Analysis 76 (3):290-296.
Critical psychiatry: the limits of madness.D. B. Double (ed.) - 2006 - New York: Palgrave-Macmillan.
The missing self in scientific psychiatry.Şerife Tekin - 2019 - Synthese 196 (6):2197-2215.
Psychiatry in dissent: controversial issues in thought and practice.Anthony W. Clare - 1976 - Philadelphia: Institute for the Study of Human Issues.

Analytics

Added to PP
2017-05-07

Downloads
61 (#262,172)

6 months
6 (#509,139)

Historical graph of downloads
How can I increase my downloads?

Author's Profile

Robyn Bluhm
Michigan State University