Another excellent discussion! The British criticals are some of the most uncritical people around (in the virtuous sense of the word critical). At this point, I cannot take anyone seriously who still maintains that real category = biological essence. This is basically a fringe view in philosophy of science and philosophy of medicine. A ton of work has been done on natural kinds without essence (e.g. homeostatic property clusters) and diagnoses as practical kinds in medicine, in addition to developments like enactivism and embodied cognition. [I had interviewed Timimi as part of my Conversations in Critical Psychiatry series as well.]
Thank you so much for this post - it came at just the right time for me as I have been struggling to articulate a lot of this stuff for a while and you really hit the nail on the head (and weirdly I have also recently been reading up about Kantian perspectives on what is 'real' so WOAH crazy coincidence!). It was particularly useful hearing how you parse all the various lenses through which you view your anxiety - my own thinking about ADHD has passed through so many different stages, many of which even directly contradict each other, that I'm often left feeling like I don't even know what I think (and then feeling really lost as a result, because we're all expected to have An Opinion™️ about everything and to never acknowledge any ambiguity or uncertainty). It's a good reminder that a lens is a tool, not a definite answer, and that different situations require different tools.
"Teaching your grandmother to suck eggs" - interesting! I was told (by my actual grandmother) that it came about from when people used to have large and/or impressive eggshells as curios, and you needed to remove the yolk from them so they didn't curdle. You'd make a small hole in either end, stick a pin in to break up the yolk, and then blow (not suck) the contents out. Your grandmother knew how to do this, and the point was that you (a callow youth) were trying to teach your grandmother to do something she knew perfectly well how to do (blowing eggs), only you were teaching her the wrong method, because of your callow-youth-type foolishness.
It's so interesting to read about this 'so close but so far' perspective. This whole biomarker fixation is so bizarre to me. Even something as 'simple' to define as hair color wouldn't exist without cultural constructs: how dark brown is something before it's black? How light before blond! Who makes that call? Do dopamine receptor gene variants not count as biomarkers, but eumelanin variants do? Maybe he doesn't believe hair colors are real either, but to flip a semantic table and arrive at "the words are the real problem" feels like cherry picking the effects of culture so that you could write a book, because it's almost impossible to believe he just...can't see why it's all been necessary? But I have heard that privilege is a hell of a drug
I've just browsed your previous ADHD critical studies article on Medium and a version of the Critical ADHD Studies syllabus. You've cited Timimi is cited sevaral times. Did your opinion change about their work or is it not critical 'enough' and only critical of the neuroscientific background? I'm asking because I try to decide whether it is wortwhile to immerse myself into their previous work.
My opinion changed! I’m working on redoing that syllabus actually, but as a series of videos instead. I would still agree with some of Timimi’s critiques of psychiatry but I think he goes too far in totally writing off mental illness and neurodivergence as just mislabeled “normal” human stuff, bc that dismisses the structure of ableism in society (and also contributes to it, since it encourages even further denial of disability). I would always encourage you to read widely though and see what you think!
I appreciate your use of lenses and models to further understanding. The usual code-switching prevents communication and gets concretized. Polarization has made finding shared values and definitions background noise. Opposition to or defense of the status quo becomes everything. It may be cliche but I have seen the arts bring people together. There are stories of resilience that touch us all. Other stories are used to oppress us.
From Why Has Critical Psychiatry Run Out of Steam?:
"The creation of knowledge is a delicate, collective process. It requires avenues of criticism, uptake of criticism, public standards, and tempered equality. It requires a diversity of fallible standpoints. Let critique make room for the voices of patients, for the ambiguities of neuroscience, for the textures of culture, for the uncertainties of practice, and for the wisdom of clinicians."
I find you to be a genius
Another excellent discussion! The British criticals are some of the most uncritical people around (in the virtuous sense of the word critical). At this point, I cannot take anyone seriously who still maintains that real category = biological essence. This is basically a fringe view in philosophy of science and philosophy of medicine. A ton of work has been done on natural kinds without essence (e.g. homeostatic property clusters) and diagnoses as practical kinds in medicine, in addition to developments like enactivism and embodied cognition. [I had interviewed Timimi as part of my Conversations in Critical Psychiatry series as well.]
P.S. Why Has Critical Psychiatry Run Out of Steam? https://www.psychiatrymargins.com/p/why-has-critical-psychiatry-run-out
Thank you so much for this post - it came at just the right time for me as I have been struggling to articulate a lot of this stuff for a while and you really hit the nail on the head (and weirdly I have also recently been reading up about Kantian perspectives on what is 'real' so WOAH crazy coincidence!). It was particularly useful hearing how you parse all the various lenses through which you view your anxiety - my own thinking about ADHD has passed through so many different stages, many of which even directly contradict each other, that I'm often left feeling like I don't even know what I think (and then feeling really lost as a result, because we're all expected to have An Opinion™️ about everything and to never acknowledge any ambiguity or uncertainty). It's a good reminder that a lens is a tool, not a definite answer, and that different situations require different tools.
"Teaching your grandmother to suck eggs" - interesting! I was told (by my actual grandmother) that it came about from when people used to have large and/or impressive eggshells as curios, and you needed to remove the yolk from them so they didn't curdle. You'd make a small hole in either end, stick a pin in to break up the yolk, and then blow (not suck) the contents out. Your grandmother knew how to do this, and the point was that you (a callow youth) were trying to teach your grandmother to do something she knew perfectly well how to do (blowing eggs), only you were teaching her the wrong method, because of your callow-youth-type foolishness.
It's so interesting to read about this 'so close but so far' perspective. This whole biomarker fixation is so bizarre to me. Even something as 'simple' to define as hair color wouldn't exist without cultural constructs: how dark brown is something before it's black? How light before blond! Who makes that call? Do dopamine receptor gene variants not count as biomarkers, but eumelanin variants do? Maybe he doesn't believe hair colors are real either, but to flip a semantic table and arrive at "the words are the real problem" feels like cherry picking the effects of culture so that you could write a book, because it's almost impossible to believe he just...can't see why it's all been necessary? But I have heard that privilege is a hell of a drug
I've just browsed your previous ADHD critical studies article on Medium and a version of the Critical ADHD Studies syllabus. You've cited Timimi is cited sevaral times. Did your opinion change about their work or is it not critical 'enough' and only critical of the neuroscientific background? I'm asking because I try to decide whether it is wortwhile to immerse myself into their previous work.
My opinion changed! I’m working on redoing that syllabus actually, but as a series of videos instead. I would still agree with some of Timimi’s critiques of psychiatry but I think he goes too far in totally writing off mental illness and neurodivergence as just mislabeled “normal” human stuff, bc that dismisses the structure of ableism in society (and also contributes to it, since it encourages even further denial of disability). I would always encourage you to read widely though and see what you think!
I appreciate your use of lenses and models to further understanding. The usual code-switching prevents communication and gets concretized. Polarization has made finding shared values and definitions background noise. Opposition to or defense of the status quo becomes everything. It may be cliche but I have seen the arts bring people together. There are stories of resilience that touch us all. Other stories are used to oppress us.
From Why Has Critical Psychiatry Run Out of Steam?:
"The creation of knowledge is a delicate, collective process. It requires avenues of criticism, uptake of criticism, public standards, and tempered equality. It requires a diversity of fallible standpoints. Let critique make room for the voices of patients, for the ambiguities of neuroscience, for the textures of culture, for the uncertainties of practice, and for the wisdom of clinicians."