...
首页> 外文期刊>History of the human sciences >Historical resonances of the DSM-5 dispute: American exceptionalism or Eurocentrism?
【24h】

Historical resonances of the DSM-5 dispute: American exceptionalism or Eurocentrism?

机译:DSM-5争议的历史共鸣:美国例外主义还是欧洲中心主义?

获取原文
获取原文并翻译 | 示例
   

获取外文期刊封面封底 >>

       

摘要

This article begins with arguments evident at the time of writing about the 5~(th) revision of the Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of the American Psychiatric Association. The historical lineages of those arguments are international and not limited to the USA (the current focus in the DSM-5 controversy). The concern with psychiatric diagnosis both internationally and in the USA came to the fore at the end of the Second World War with the construction of the American Psychiatric Association’s Diagnostic and Statistical Manual (DSM-I) and the World Health Organization’s classification of ‘Diseases, Injuries and Causes of Death’ (ICD-6). However, the linkage between categories of morbidity, assumptions about natural biological categories and treatment specificity with ‘magic bullets’ emerged in the middle of the 19~(th) century in physical medicine. This article explores the legitimacy of current psychiatric diagnoses in the light of that international, not national, history of medical knowledge. In conclusion it explores judgements about current cultural imperialism (at times made about US psychiatry) and an older picture of Eurocentrism, which is now being refracted in more recent globalizing knowledge-claims about mental disorder.
机译:本文以撰写《美国精神病学协会诊断与统计手册》第5版的明显论点开始。这些论点的历史血统是国际性的,不仅限于美国(DSM-5争议的当前焦点)。第二次世界大战结束时,随着美国精神病学协会的《诊断和统计手册》(DSM-I)的建立以及世界卫生组织对“疾病,伤害和死亡原因”(ICD-6)。但是,发病率类别,关于自然生物学类别的假设以及“魔术子弹”的治疗特异性之间的联系在19世纪中叶出现在物理医学中。本文根据国际而不是国家的医学知识历史来探讨当前精神病学诊断的合法性。总之,它探索了对当前文化帝国主义的判断(有时是对美国精神病学的判断)以及对欧洲中心主义的较早描述,而欧洲中心主义的历史则在最近有关精神障碍的全球化知识主张中得到了体现。

著录项

相似文献

  • 外文文献
  • 中文文献
获取原文

客服邮箱:kefu@zhangqiaokeyan.com

京公网安备:11010802029741号 ICP备案号:京ICP备15016152号-6 六维联合信息科技 (北京) 有限公司©版权所有
  • 客服微信

  • 服务号