Abstract
Drawing on a key issue raised in the paper by Scardigno and Mininni (2021), this commentary explores the question of historical research in psychiatry. Firstly, the importance of historical research is highlighted for both psychiatry as a medical discipline, and for descriptive psychopathology, the language of psychiatry. Of significance has been the construction of psychiatry as a hybrid discipline formed through the deep participation of both the natural and the social sciences. This in turn brings to light the fundamental difference in epistemological basis to psychiatry and medicine, with ensuing consequences for our understanding of mental disorders and for the development of further research methodology. Likewise conceptually hybrid, the special role carried by mental symptoms in psychiatry places them, as concepts, in the position of crucial research tools. Secondly, given some of the complexities raised in carrying out historical research in this area, the issue of how this should be approached is examined. The method proposed here is that of historical epistemology. This is an approach that focuses on concepts, on mapping their biographies in order to clarify their structures, their roles, their discontinuities, their relationships and interactions with other concepts and so on. Given the central role of concepts in psychiatry and descriptive psychopathology, this approach to their study is most likely to provide valid and meaningful results.
Highlights
Drawing on a key issue raised in the paper by Scardigno and Mininni (2021), this commentary explores the question of historical research in psychiatry
There is the question of why carry out historical research in this area; what is the purpose in doing this? Secondly, how should this be carried out, or what methods are most appropriate in order to yield epistemically valid and meaningful results?
The question I want to address here is not about why do historical research in general, but rather what is it about psychiatry, that makes historical research an important area of enquiry (Berrios 1994)? Before tackling this, it is important to make a distinction that is vital to addressing this question
Summary
It is important to make a distinction that is vital to addressing this question. The question I want to address here is not about why do historical research in general, but rather what is it about psychiatry, that makes historical research an important area of enquiry (Berrios 1994)? This concerns the differentiation between psychiatry and descriptive psychopathology. Descriptive psychopathology on the other hand is the language of psychiatry, and refers to the terms and concepts that have been constructed to describe, capture and organise the mental and behavioural phenomena that constitute mental disorders (Berrios 1996). I briefly examine each from the perspective of this first question
Sign-in/Register to view highlights & summary Sign-in/Register to access full text options 
Free) 
Talk to us
Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have
Schedule a call
