Cited by 32Mental Health and PsychiatryCritical Realism in SociologyPhilosophy and History of Science

The failure of diagnostic psychiatry and some prospects of scientific progress offered by critical realism.

Pilgrim, David·2013·Journal of Critical Realism

Abstract

A brief overview is provided of sociological and historical critiques of Western psychiatry before focusing on pre-empirical, non-empirical and empirical aspects of psychiatric diagnosis. These are then discussed using the analytical devices of the ontic fallacy, the epistemic fallacy and generative mechanisms. It is concluded that mental disorders do not really exist but particular presenting problems of unintelligibility, interpersonal dysfunction and common human misery, in particular social contexts, recur in modern life and thus constitute real problems for those intimately implicated and for social order. These require new ways of understanding, beyond the option of deconstruction, which could displace categorical reasoning and be sensitive to causes, meanings and their situated social contexts. The paper concludes with an outline of an alternative future for research into mental health problems, which could be informed by critical realism.

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1179/1476743013z.0000000004

Cites

51 of 51 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Recomputing p-values needs the paper’s full text.

Claims the paper makes

This paper’s full text isn’t openly available, so its claims and self-check weren’t run. The registry and citation checks still apply.

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

  • Diagnoses in the field of mental health are claimed to be uncertain and fundamentally problematic, underscoring that they do not identify patients with common symptoms and etiologies who respond to specific treatments.

    “Diagnoses in the field of mental health are by different accounts claimed to be uncertain and fundamentally problematic (Bentall, 2006; Horn et al., 2007; Pilgrim, 2013), underscoring that they do not identify patients with common symptoms and etiologies who respond to specific treatments.”

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Pilgrim, D.
Affiliations
University of Liverpool (GB)
Corresponding author
Pilgrim, David
Venue
Journal of Critical Realism
Published
2013-07
Volume
12
Issue
3
Pages
336-358
ISSN
  • 1476-7430 (ISSN-L)
  • 1572-5138
OpenAlex
W2035619837
Cited by
32
References
51
Citations by year
2026: 2 · 2025: 5 · 2023: 3 · 2022: 3 · 2020: 1 · 2019: 2 · 2018: 3 · 2017: 4 · 2016: 3 · 2015: 2 · 2014: 3 · 2013: 1
FWCI
21.94
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed
Locations
Journal of Critical Realism (publishedVersion)
Topics
  • Social Sciences › Arts and Humanities › Philosophy › Mental Health and Psychiatry
  • Social Sciences › Sociology and Political Science › Critical Realism in Sociology
  • Social Sciences › Arts and Humanities › History and Philosophy of Science › Philosophy and History of Science
Keywords
critical realism, sociology of psychiatry, history of psychiatry, psychiatric diagnosis, epistemic fallacy, generative mechanisms, mental illness, social context of mental health, deconstruction, categorical reasoning

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review