The Myth of Mental Illness: Foundations of a Theory of Personal Conduct

by Thomas S. Szasz

Genres: Psychology, Nonfiction

1 pages, Audio CD

Published March 1, 2021

Reviews

[Corey · Rating 5 out of 5]

It is concerning that this book isn’t touted as a standard in the medical and mental health communities. Author uses critical thinking and empirical evidence to demonstrate how clustering maladaptive behaviors and medicalizing them with a medical label is counterintuitive and creates further harm.

[Derek Kreider · Rating 3 out of 5]

I was very dismissive of this book based on the title, but the introduction captivated me and piqued my interest. I think there is a lot good that is said in here in regard to how mental illness is used as a tool by certain groups for political leverage or for an excuse to avoid responsibility. The discussion in one of the appendices of language and its use was particularly helpful. I loved his example of how the word explain in Hungarian has a root that essentially says “to say in Hungarian.” That was a helpful analogy.

This work reminded me of a documentary I saw about a town in Northern Europe that’s filled with the mentally/cognitively ill, and how they dignify them and treat them as equals with responsibility rather than as diseases to be cured. They just have divergent proclivities, weaknesses, AND strengths. Or of Jean Vanier’s homes around the world. Much mental illness may really be a label rather than something that should matter. It also reminds me of Foucault and good Discipline and Punish. Perhaps the mental system is used similarly to the prison system.

That being said, I’d really have to look into how far the author goes with this. From my anecdotal experience with some who have mental illness, there really is something going on that is different. But I have also seen therapy (talking and strategizing) to account for those difficulties really help. I think the author has a lot that’s good to consider, I just think you can take the good from this and extrapolate way too much.

[Joshua Reichard · Rating 2 out of 5]

Just read “Lies my therapist told me.”

[Lindsey · Rating 1 out of 5]

1* - Audio

Not sure how this popped up as a recommended read, but here we are. I ended up finishing it because I wanted to know where the quackery went, but uhm, yeah, he lost me early in the book.

[Rachel · Rating 3 out of 5]

This book is clearly dated and I was constantly reminded of that every time I heard the word "hysteria", which was a lot since this outdated diagnosis was used as a reference for the book's thesis. Such patients are also referred to as "malingerers", which is another old word, I think since I had to look it up. Perhaps these words had a different tone back when the book was published (1960ish?) but, for me, it was so off-putting. The tone of the book was that these patients were "fakers" or "children playing a role", which felt demeaning, but I had to keep reminding myself of the important sociological context of what was being said: in the sense that all human behavior is role-playing, we are all lying to each other--donning metaphysical masks to interact given scripts with each other. This might have been easier for me to do since it wasn't my first time hearing all this.

However, it was my first time hearing mental illness described as a metaphor, a way of conveying meaning through using the language of psychiatry. The symptoms of the illness, are symbolic behavior, a kind of nonverbal communication. This is obviously not like physical illness, which is not symbolic. At least not in a way that affects disease processes. Over time, continual communication of illness can become a role for people who constantly play it. Here, psychiatry serves as a form of social control of uncomfortable behaviors that have a moralistic tone with real consequences over people's agency.

In all, I'm glad I finished it. I still can't believe that such an old book could contain something I've never heard before. I'm impressed that it did but idk that I'd recommend it to just anyone who isn't familiar with the aforementioned context.

[Xander Negozio · Rating 4 out of 5]

This book claims we use the language of medicine to describe odd or challenging behavior based on social norms and political economy, rather than biological ills, which is undeniably true. The author updated the book with an acknowledgement that his opinion on mental illness has evolved since 1952, when it was published, but it remains incredibly useful nonetheless.
In medicine, diseases were discovered; in psychology, diseases had largely been invented, without empirical evidence of cause and effect.
Labeling people mentally ill lessens the social and political implications of their suffering, and the class differences in psychiatric treatments evidence that mental illness is a class construction rather than a consistent disease.
The book describes the ways certain neuroses can be viewed as a progression of situationally beneficial behavior rather than a regression of disabling behavior, depending on the situational demands of society, and repudiates any legal or ethical justifications for forcible or coercive psychiatric treatment.

[jessica · Rating 4 out of 5]

O livro inicia contando todo o surgimento do termo doença mental a partir dos psiquiatras que iniciaram os estudos de psicanálise e faz uma critica aos diagnósticos que são distribuídos e rotulam as pessoas com conflitos internos.
O autor argumenta que o termo doença é um estado físico, algo no organismo não está certo e a doença mental não necessariamente é algum fator em disfunção cerebral, mas sim algum problemas inerentes da vida.
Porém com o uso do termo doença mental, a medicalização sem tratamento psicológico ficou muito comum, as pessoas perderam a autonomia de algumas decisões quando se alega que ela possui uma doença mental e é incapaz de se responsabilizar por si mesmas.

Acredito que o autor fomentou um debate importante na área de saúde mental, concordo com muitos argumentos que ele traz, mas em alguns momentos achei ele muito radical e discordei de algumas afirmações mais extremistas.

[Blondi Barnet · Rating 1 out of 5]

Couldn’t finish it. I agree with his anti psychiatric stance but couldn’t get through the book due to dated language that makes it really hard to read. Interesting for some to see that development and the aetiology of this kind of thinking.

[Julie · Rating 1 out of 5]

Painful. There are some valid points and good information, but they’re so buried under incessant babble and repetition that all benefit is lost.