Customer Reviews

Psychiatry: The Science of Lies

5 star:		(5)
4 star:		(3)
3 star:		(0)
2 star:		(0)
1 star:		(1)

 

 

In this short, lean and eloquent brief of a book rich in historical analysis and lucid in deductive reasoning, Thomas Szasz makes the case that the professionals in the mental health field are "au fond" experts in pretending to be experts. He writes, "Being an expert in mental illness is like being an expert about ghosts and unicorns."

Mr. Szasz proves how the concept of mental illness is void of content. (In biological illness, there is some damage or lesion to the cell. In "psychological illness," there is only a diagnosis, nothing else.)

Mr. Szasz shows how real science, physical science, methodically and clinically works to resolve illnesses and he shows, by contrast, how the so-called behavioral sciences "treat" a so-called "mentally ill" individual merely by giving the "patient" a diagnosis.

Mr. Szasz names names and reveals their charlatanry and theatrical hocus-pocus, from Charcot and Freud to so-called psychotherapists of the present.

This book allows the reader to look afresh at what constitutes personal responsibility and feel refreshed from the burdens of a state-supported circus.

Szasz provides a fascinating, brilliantly researched look at the historic origins of psychiatry's efforts to invent a medical role for itself. Examining the letters and papers of Freud, Charcot and many other late 19th century psychopathologists, up to the present, Szasz makes compelling arguments that psychiatry has been reassigning social nonconformity to the role of disease.

Individuals whose behaviors were once considered sinful, unconventional, or otherwise unwanted, can now be forced to undergo a "cure." In its role as "doctor," psychiatry functions to exert social control and dominance over its "patients--" many of whom are coerced and destroyed by what psychiatry pretends will heal them.

In a blackly humorous way, by its own standards of mental illness, psychiatry has arguably become a disease in itself. Its practitioners are marked by symptoms of grandiosity, narcissism, and excessive controlling behaviors to the point of psychotic obsession and delusions of power over other lives. One suspects that beneath the grandiosity lies an essential mediocrity and an overwhelming need to reduce others to a lowest common denominator, so as to assert the superiority of the psychiatrists, and thus overcome their own innate insecurities at having been so ordinary. To compensate for this insecurity, they punish what is different, and plow seeds of self doubt into the consciousness of their targets.

No doubt about it -- Dr. Szasz is a national treasure.

I first was introduced to his myth of mental illness thesis while taking a medical ethics course in college a long time ago. The therapeutic state claimed the right to practice slavery under the aegis of helping individuals overcome behaviors that it had classified - rather conveniently -- as "diseases."

Long time fans will not find much in this book that is new, but it is the perfect volume for giving to open minded people who might never have thought about psychiatry or the pervasive power it wields in so many areas of life now. Too often, criticisms of this pristine fraud are assumed to be Scientologists, but Szasz first published his theory in 1961 and as his latest work shows, there were plenty of perceptive people who had figured out the lie that is psychiatry in the 19th century, when the field was first revving up.

Szasz briefly reiterates the problem of "mental illness," noting its deficit in being able to describe, verify, treat or identify the underlying somatic causes for "bad behavior" using science. Psychiatrists rely heavily on shabby metaphors in their diagnostic ruminations. The author's logic is short, sweet and delivered with an irreverent humor that is truly inimitable. The glum should pass this book by.

Psychiatry is a form of pseudologism in which patient and doctor sometimes collaborate to make a big lie. If you want to be diagnosed with depression, you - a would be patient - simply have to learn what words, phrases and mannerisms to ape in front of the doctor in order to achieve an end, be it prescription drugs, official declaration of mental incapacity by virtue of "disease" or, for the adventurous, commitment to a mental hospital. The doctor then plays along with the given cues to make the aspiration an objective scientific fact. There are no genetic tests, there are no brain scans. Or, in the rare case they are given, they cannot pinpoint the source for unconventional behavior. In short, no true diagnostic procedure ever has to be performed that can correlate what a person's behavior is - faked or otherwise -- with any somatic component in their system.

Schizophrenia, the blue ribbon of crazy, has had more physical explanations given over the past century than Carters has pills. Yet Nancy Andreason, head priestess of the schizo diagnosticians, confesses that she wished someone would finally nail down the real physical culprit so that the metaphor could at least become a verifiable scientific fact. If history is any indication, she shouldn't be too expectant about this likelihood. The gamut from blood platelets to malformed brains has been passed off as the physical pathological agent and each in turn has been discarded for lack of scientific evidence. One author has shown that the rate of spontaneous remission for schizophrenics is 50% or more, certainly a widespread, repeating miracle for such a debilitating disease. A clever and determined person could easily get himself diagnosed as a schizophrenic in order to get admitted to an asylum (two subjects in the book, both psychiatrists, do this very thing). To accomplish the same deception for something like melanoma is out of the question since it can't be faked.

In other, not so happy instances, psychiatry is a legal tool that can be used by quacks to deprive individuals of their liberty. The latter has become far more overt on a social level and is treated at great lengths in Szasz's Pharmacracy.

The current volume devotes much of its attention to Freud, the great patriarch of psychoanalysis. Readers are treated to Herr Doktor's own reflections on his motivations and inspirations for entering the nascent field as a young pup newly minted with a medical degree.

A poor empiricist with no prospects for practicing real medicine in Vienna, a city overrun with doctors, 29 year old Freud became tired of living in his parents' basement, pining for some miraculous revelation that would lead him from obscurity into the halls of great thinkers. Fortunately, he found his muse in the French physician Charcot. Although credited with many important scientific discoveries in medicine, Charcot turned his attention to the area of psychopathology, gaining in the process a reputation as a brilliant pioneer and becoming the object of worship of a smitten Freud.

Szasz relays the adulatory language of Freud towards his new mentor in order to show that ego, vanity and outright human weakness are the key ingredients of early psychoanalysis. The weird cultish devotion of so many "followers" for the gurus like Freud are evidence that something quite other than pure science informed the interests of its early apostles.

Like religion, psychiatry rests on the cult of personality and dogma. When psychiatrists talk about themselves or their area of expertise, they use words normally reserved for belief, faith and hope. Someone might think reasonably that the field outgrew its early limitations, maturing in the process into a real science. (Remember that before there was chemistry, there was alchemy.) Yet as the author shows, the field has remained dominated by hucksters. The latter part of the book discusses some of these figures, including a much-praised "dean" of modern psychology who replayed the Rosenhans experiment. Rosenhans was an early 20th century shrink who fooled a mental asylum into believing that he was a schizophrenic. He chronicled his "experiment" and became something of a very minor celebrity for his efforts; yet strangely, the prestige of psychiatry only continued to grow. Filled with all the solipsism that only a female can carry, she was unable to provide any data or documentations for her experiment. Other examples abound in the pages here, all funny but sad. The field is just as loopy now as it was when Charot and Freud were around.

Few Americans will ever know how influential Thomas Szasz has been in discrediting a field that has done incalculable damage to people over many decades. Today, psychiatry is in decline, enrollments in its schools are dropping and its overall reputation is only slightly higher than phrenology's. It deserves to be pushed to the rubbish pile.

This work is a hard critique to Freud from the beginning of his writings until his death, as well an analysis of Charcot's life and work.
The so-called pseudopatient study by Rosenham is described here with a profound analysis on the subject.
The author exposes the lies of psychiatry starting from an anlysis of hysteria -malingering which Szasz called impersonation of the sick role by a healthy person- the imitation of a real disease by the so-called patient - and neurosis.
The author considers the professionals in the mental health field as impostors. This book shows the truth of psychiatry and the falsehood of this " science of lies and frauds ".

Dr. Szasz makes a case that psychiatrist have tried to make a science out of the study of mental illness and failed. Dr. Szasz has been attacking the profession for 30 years or more. This short book can probably be looked at as his final effort to show why the profession should not be considered a science. He directs his attack at those claiming mental illness and those in the psychiatic profession who legitimatize their 'illnesses'.

I ordered this book after having just finished Anatomy of An Epidemic: Magic Bullets, Psychiatric Drugs, and the Astonishing Rise of Mental Illness in America by Robert Whitaker. This is another attack on psychiatrists along with their collusion with the pharmaceutical industry.

Psychiatrist would not want you to read either book.

Thomas Szasz has been fighting psychiatry since 1960. He has structured this battle campaign as a set piece confrontation. My sense is that he is fighting the enemy as it appeared a few decades ago. Though I agree with all of his points, they seem unnecessarily labored, and there are some seemingly obvious modern wrinkles which are omitted from the discussion.

The first point he hammers home is that psychiatry and psychology are not sciences. The subject of their theories and theses, mental illness, is not something which can be measured by the tools of science. Although some maladies affecting the brain do have physiological bases, such as Alzheimer's, Lou Gehrig's disease, and epilepsy, they cease being considered mental illnesses once there physiological basis has been described. At that point are treatable by the therapies of true medicine such as drugs and surgery. The things that remain in the category of "mental illness," neurosis and hysteria and the like, have several things in common. First, the diagnosis is the same as the disease. Calling somebody a psychotic makes him a psychotic, because there is no underlying condition which can be found, proven or disproven.

Secondly, because there is no material substance to a supposed mental disease, the identification of diseases is arbitrary. The psychiatry business's Bible, the DSM or diagnostic and statistical manual changes the definitions of disease very frequently, as fads sweep in and out. Homosexuality was dropped once it became chic instead of a perversion, and attention deficit disorder and others came in.

Third, diagnosis and treatment are not objective. A psychiatrist needs to build a subjective relationship with the patient, one which often involves the practice of deceit, in order to come up with a diagnosis. On the contrary, a true medical condition such as diabetes may be misdiagnosed, but that does not affect the underlying physiological condition.

Fourth, in a true medical condition, the interests of the patient and the doctor are the same. They want to cure the condition. In a psychiatric relationship, they are often at odds. The psychiatrist is employed to keep the patient under control, institutionalized or whatever. Government and psychiatrists ally themselves to deprive people of freedom. Conversely, psychiatrists plead diminished capability to exculpate malingerers and the criminally guilty which leads to....

Psychiatry being a system which denies free will. It makes excuses for people. Szasz goes on at excessive length about the way in which psychiatry has excused malingerers, especially during war. It also is used systematically to excuse antisocial behavior in schools and many other settings. Richard Arum makes the case in "Judging School Discipline" that psychiatrists and lawyers have so destroyed discipline and order in schools that learning is often impossible, the problem being most acute among precisely those minority populations which are worst served by schools in the first place.

This is a good place to begin a catalog of the things one would expect Szasz to mention. The 1950s and 60s are, in my recollection, the high water mark of psychiatry. That is when psychobabble entered the common vocabulary. I have been called "anal-retentive" by all of my grown children, none of whom know what it means, and even after reading the definition I don't have much of a clue myself. Children's boorish behavior is excused as their right to express themselves, or "vent their feelings." In the final analysis, manners and the other civilized conventions which allow us to live together in harmony have gone by the wayside. All manner of behavior is now permitted. Szasz does not investigate psychiatry's obvious culpability in this.

Going on about psychiatry and popular culture, it would be worth a note about the incessant reference to psychiatry in movies starting about the 1950s, and as a recurrent theme in Woody Allen movies. It would be worth a mention that psychiatry is a very Jewish phenomenon starting with Sigmund Freud. Kevin Mac Donald posits that it is even used as a device by the Jewish community to tear at the fabric of the Christian community. It has certainly weakened Christian society, though in my view it is that equally damaging to the Jews themselves.

Szasz goes on at length about how psychiatry is used as a tool of oppression by the state. I believe that that is less true than it used to be in the United States, and he should say as much. He makes no mention of the Soviet Union which was certainly the biggest offender in this realm. Upon reflection, it occurred to me that in four years of living in Ukraine I have never heard mention of a psychiatrist. Googling the Ukrainian Psychiatric Association I find that it has only 800 members, about 0.6% of the figure for the US. An article I found says that most work for the government, dealing with drug and alcohol abuse. Written by psychiatrists, a quite expectedly decries the unavailability of treatment for people with mental health problems. Even if one reduces this to a simple lack of drug and alcohol counselors, I think it is a meaningful lacuna in the system. It seems extreme to me for Szasz to contend that people do not benefit from professional help in dealing with drugs and alcohol. There is a need in society for drug and alcohol counseling. Right now it is in the province of mental health experts, which seems as good a place as any. Although drugs probably should be decriminalized, there remains a need to help people who want to end their dependence on alcohol and illegal drugs. Or legal ones for that matter. It is true that the success rates are low, and results unpredictable, but I think that there is enough benefit to warrant having people working in the field.

There are many medical conditions which are diagnosed by mental-type testing and benefit from medication. There appear to be legitimate uses for marijuana, and there certainly are for opiates. Whatever bipolar disorder is - Szasz says it is a phantom - some people swear by lithium. Clinical studies show that psychoactive drugs such as Prozac seem to help certain conditions. Somebody should make sure they get it, and understand it. There are some conditions which are indisputably physical in nature, such as Alzheimer's, which should be diagnosed by somebody with a background in mental health rather than merely bodily health. There remains a need to be able to diagnose childhood conditions such as autism, Tourette's, and other situations which are treatable by drugs and other therapies. To categorically dismiss the whole field of mental health seems to me to be going overboard, even if one readily grants points one through four above.

Szasz has little use for religion, lumping it with phrenology, mesmerism, hypnosis and psychoanalysis as a sop to console men and women in face of the ordinary tribulations that come with being human. Like psychiatry, religion is not based on any empirically verifiable facts, only belief, or received superstition. I would invite him to think of it more deeply. As a scientist. The essence of evolutionary fitness is the ability of a population to reproduce itself. Religion was an important part of my Christian ancestors'belief system; it instructed them to be fruitful and multiply, and to treat each other civilly. It didn't always work, but in retrospect it worked a lot better than that which has replaced it, which is largely influenced by psychiatry. The same is true for Szasz' Jewish forebears. They certainly enjoyed more reproductive success, which equates to evolutionary fitness, when they had religion. Muslims make up about the most reproductively successful communities today. Whatever one may think about the substance of their beliefs, one must objectively grant that they are expanding in a way that is only a memory for Christians.

There is very little in the realm of human experience that lends itself to the kind of objective proofs one finds in mathematics or physics. We all harbor a large number of beliefs founded on unprovable a prioris. In other words, religion is not an aberration, but rather a reflection of the human condition. Moderns replace religion with beliefs in global warming, yoga, homeopathic medicines, astrology, Scientology, saving whales, the right to great sex, and a vast number of others which are likewise unsupported by evidence. Rather than reject unreason out of hand, I would ask that Szasz acknowledge that it is going to exist everywhere, and ask a more relevant question, which brands of unbelief are more beneficial to the infected. I would argue that religion is useful, and go with Szasz in arguing that psychiatry, its denial of free will and hence personal responsibility, is generally harmful.

The book's strength is its history of the field of mental health, especially his colorful descriptions of the personalities who founded the field: Charcot, Freud and their colleagues. He has located a wealth of early detractors who would be shocked at the respectability this pseudoscience has achieved.

I am a counseling student and read this book looking for another opinion besides what the DSM and "professionals" are telling me.

Szazs's book criticizes the history of psychiatry rather then mental illness itself. Mendacity is his primary assumption and the word that occurs most frequently throughout this book. Szazs seems to believe that if you can't see mental illness then it is not real and it must not be influencing that person's behavior (didn't people feel the same way about bacteria and virus?).

In earlier times humans believed that sickness was brought upon by God, demons, sin, or by the way that the sun was in the sky or what star was over your head. Psychiatry is in it's infancy and of course there are going to be abuse of power by people who desire it.

In the end Szazs makes a compelling argument for personal responsibility and freedom. We as human are always looking beyond ourselves and for another place to place responsibility for the choices that we and others makes. It is impossible for a person to ever become an expert on mental illness and people! It is strange how we seem to worship and adore those who have recovered from "illness".

My only real complaint and disappointment with the book was that it cited Wikipedia!

I like this book Thomas Szasz The Science of Lies.

Thomas Szasz explains that psychiatry is all about lies, and more lies!
Anna de Jonge
Patients Rights Advocate
65 Tawa Street
Hamilton New Zealand
Ph: + 64 7 843 5837

As has been the case for many years, Thomas Szasz continues in this book to further his career and support his life via attacks not only on the psychiatric profession but on the patients themselves. Throughout this book he states that people with mental illnesses are malingering (making up the symptoms) and that the psychiatrists are supporting that feigning of illness. He should be ashamed. These are patients who are leading the most difficult of lives, as are their families, and his only focus in life seems to be how he can denigrate them and make money at the same time.

In addition to this appalling lack of empathy, there is clearly an anger that pervades his writings and colors any possibility of balance in his writings. He writes in the same style as Fox reports their so-called news, which is actually continued unsubstantiated diatribes against parties who disagree with them. Szasz uses inflammatory language, crazily overblown correlations and associations, and an incredible lack of logic to make his logical conclusions. Further evidence of his poor writing comes from the "incessant" "use" of the "quotation" "marks" for "emphasis." Perhaps, rather than belittling psychiatric patients under the guise of saving them, he would do better to take a writing course as well as see a psychiatrist to learn a bit about empathy.