In a message dated 98-03-12 18:15:51 EST, you write:
> the marvellous progress of psychpharmacology
I'd like to take issue with this term. It is not at all clear that
"progress" has been made in psychopharmacology or if it has that it is at all
"marvelous". The only thing that is clear to me is that a path has been chosen
that has marginalized most other paths that could be taken. This brings about
a position of power that can indeed appear marvelous and progressive since all
other possible paths have withered away. And let us keep in mind that the very
ill are the smallest consumers of psychopharmacologic agents. The new vast
customer base is what used to be called the "worried well" or "neurotic"
population. Until I see phenomenologically based studies comparing head to
head Prozac, existential psychotherapy, spiritual recovery and other
modalities of relief of distress, I see the progress you speak of as one big
joke, self-contained, self-defining and self-validatiing. Or as Kuhn would
call it, just "normal science".
Yours,
Phil S.
> the marvellous progress of psychpharmacology
I'd like to take issue with this term. It is not at all clear that
"progress" has been made in psychopharmacology or if it has that it is at all
"marvelous". The only thing that is clear to me is that a path has been chosen
that has marginalized most other paths that could be taken. This brings about
a position of power that can indeed appear marvelous and progressive since all
other possible paths have withered away. And let us keep in mind that the very
ill are the smallest consumers of psychopharmacologic agents. The new vast
customer base is what used to be called the "worried well" or "neurotic"
population. Until I see phenomenologically based studies comparing head to
head Prozac, existential psychotherapy, spiritual recovery and other
modalities of relief of distress, I see the progress you speak of as one big
joke, self-contained, self-defining and self-validatiing. Or as Kuhn would
call it, just "normal science".
Yours,
Phil S.