Hostname: page-component-78c5997874-ndw9j Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-05T11:33:19.974Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Boorse et les antipsychiatres : même combat?

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  05 July 2019

ANNE-MARIE GAGNÉ-JULIEN
ANNE-MARIE GAGNÉ-JULIEN*
Affiliation:
Université du Québec à Montréal
*
*[email protected]
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

Dans le débat portant sur la définition de la santé mentale, trois grandes approches peuvent être distinguées : l’approche normativiste (Szasz, Sarbin), l’approche naturaliste (Boorse) et l’approche hybride (Wakefield). Cet article vise à nuancer cette classification en clarifiant en quel sens Boorse, le représentant de l’approche naturaliste, peut être rangé dans cette catégorie. La conception de Boorse est beaucoup plus critique à l’égard de l’entreprise psychiatrique que ce qui est habituellement admis et les similarités entre Boorse et l’approche normativiste, quant à elles, sont beaucoup plus importantes.

In the debate over the definition of ‘mental health,’ three different approaches are generally distinguished: the normativist approach (Szasz, Sarbin), the hybrid approach (Wakefield) and the naturalistic approach (Boorse). This paper qualifies this classification by clarifying the sense in which Christopher Boorse defends a naturalistic approach vis-à-vis the central concepts of psychiatry. This paper also clarifies in what way Boorse is opposed to the normativist approach advocated by some authors of the anti-psychiatric movement, such as Szasz.

Type
Canadian Philosophical Association 2018 Prize Winning Papers / Gagnants des prix de l’essai 2018 de l’Association canadienne de philosophie
Information
Dialogue: Canadian Philosophical Review / Revue canadienne de philosophie , Volume 58 , Issue 2 , June 2019 , pp. 197 - 214
Copyright
Copyright © Canadian Philosophical Association 2019 

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

Références bibliographiques

Agich, George J. 1983 «Disease and Value: A Rejection of the Value-Neutrality Thesis», Theoretical Medicine, vol. 4, no 1, p. 27–41.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Boorse, Christopher 1975 «On the Distinction Between Disease and Illness», Philosophy & Public Affairs, vol. 5, no 1, p. 49–68.Google Scholar
Boorse, Christopher 1976 «What a Theory of Mental Health Should Be», Journal for the Theory of Social Behaviour, vol. 6, no 1, p. 61–84.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Boorse, Christopher 1977 «Health as a Theoretical Concept», Philosophy of Science, vol. 44, no 4, p. 542–573.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Boorse, Christopher 1982 «Homosexuality Reclassified», Hastings Center Report, vol. 12, no 3, p. 42–44.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Boorse, Christopher 1997 «A Rebuttal on Health», Humber, dans James M. et Almeder, Robert F., dir., What Is Disease? Atlanta (GA), Humana Press, p. 1–134.Google Scholar
Boorse, Christopher 2014 «A Second Rebuttal on Health», Journal of Medicine and Philosophy, vol. 39, no 6, p. 683–724.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Bracken, Pat et Thomas, Philip 2010 «From Szasz to Foucault: On the Role of Critical Psychiatry», Philosophy, Psychiatry, & Psychology, vol. 17, no 3, p. 219–228.Google Scholar
Cooper, Rachel 2005 Classifying Madness, Dordrecht, Springer.Google Scholar
Demazeux, Steeve 2015 «The Function Debate and the Concept of Mental Disorder», Huneman, dans Philippe, Lambert, Gérard et Silberstein, Marc, dir., Classification, Disease and Evidence, Dordrecht, Springer, p. 63–91.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
DeVito, Scott 2000 «On the Value-neutrality of the Concepts of Health and Disease: Unto the Breach Again», The Journal of Medicine and Philosophy, vol. 25, no 5, p. 539–567.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Double, Duncan B. 2006 «Historical Perspective on Anti-Psychiatry», Double, dans D.B., dir., Critical Psychiatry: The Limit of Madness, Londres, Palgrave Macmillan, p. 19–39.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Ereshefsky, Marc 2009 «Defining ‘Health’ and ‘Disease’», Studies in History and Philosophy of Science Part C: Studies in History and Philosophy of Biological and Biomedical Sciences, vol. 40, no 3, p. 221–227.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Fulford, Bill 2001 «‘What Is (Mental) Disease?’: An Open Letter to Christopher Boorse», Journal of Medical Ethics, vol. 27, no 2, p. 80–85.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Giroux, Élodie, dir. 2016 Naturalism in the Philosophy of Health: Issues and Implications, Suisse, Springer International Publishing.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Kingma, Elselijn 2007 «What Is it to Be Healthy?» Analysis, vol. 67, no 2, p. 128–133.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Kingma, Elselijn 2014 «Naturalism about Health and Disease: Adding Nuance for Progress», The Journal of Medicine and Philosophy, vol. 39, no 6, p. 590–608.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Lemoine, Maël et Giroux, Élodie 2016 «Is Boorse’s Biostatistical Theory of Health Naturalistic?», Giroux, dans Élodie, dir., Naturalism in the Philosophy of Health, Suisse, Springer International Publishing, p. 19–38.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Mayes, Rick et Horwitz, Allan V. 2005 «DSM-III and the Revolution in the Classification of Mental Illness», Journal of the History of the Behavioral Sciences, vol. 41, no 3, p. 249–267.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Nordenfelt, Lennart 1987 On the Nature of Health: An Action-Theoretic Approach, Dordrecht, Reidel.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Pickering, Neil 2006 The Metaphor of Mental Illness, New York (NY), Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Perring, Christian 2011 «Mental Illness» dans Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy, http://plato.stanford.edu/entries/mental-illness/, consultée le 11 novembre 2018.Google Scholar
Sarbin, Theodore R. 1967 «On the Futility of the Proposition that Some People be Labeled “Mentally Ill”», Journal of Consulting Psychology, vol. 31, no 5, p. 447–453.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Sedgwick, Peter 1982 Psycho Politics: Laing, Foucault, Goffman, Szasz and the Future of Mass Psychiatry, Cambridge, Harper & Row.Google Scholar
Simon, Jeremy 2007 «Beyond Naturalism and Normativism: Reconceiving the ‘Disease’ Debate», Philosophical Papers, vol. 36, no 3, p. 343–370.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Scheibe, Karl E. et Barrett, Frank J. 2016 «Sarbin’s Way: Overcoming Mentalism and Mechanism in Psychology», Theory & Psychology, vol. 26, no 4, p. 516–539.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Szasz, Thomas S. 1960 «The Myth of Mental Illness», American Psychologist, vol. 15, no 2, p. 113–118.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Szasz, Thomas S. 1974 The Myth of Mental Illness: Foundations of a Theory of Personal Conduct [1961], revised edition, New York (NY), Harper Perennial.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Varga, Somogy 2011 «Defining Mental Disorder. Exploring the ‘Natural Function’ Approach», Philosophy, Ethics, and Humanities in Medicine, vol. 6, no 1, p. 1–10.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Vatz, Richard E. et Weinberg, Lee S. 1994 «The Rhetorical Paradigm in Psychiatric History: Thomas Szasz and the Myth of Mental Illness», Micale, dans Mark S. et Porter, Roy, dir., Discovering the History of Psychiatry, New York (NY), Oxford University Press, p. 311–333.Google Scholar
Wakefield, Jerome C. 1992 «The Concept of Mental Disorder: On the Boundary Between Biological Facts and Social Values», American Psychologist, vol. 47, no 3, p. 373–388.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed