3 ms·
This was a very interesting read, but I feel too groggy today to pull out an appropriate conclusion--especially since, in the author's own words, this was a use
by Eiriksmal 12y ago
This was a very interesting read, but I feel too groggy today to pull out an appropriate conclusion--especially since, in the author's own words, this was a useless study that did neither the patients, nor the scientific community, any good.
- Eiriksmal 12y agoLet me rephrase that: What impact on psychology did this study have? Is it solely noted today for influencing some laws protecting the subjects of psychological treatment/research, or did it end up benefiting the scientific community in some way?
- theoh 12y agoWhoa there. As a past inpatient of a psychiatric hospital, I can tell you that respecting the human rights of patients is the number one area of failure of the psychiatric "community". As such, increased respect for the human rights of patients is not to be sneezed at. As far as benefit to science is concerned, things don't look good on that front. Psychiatry is essentially a state-sponsored pseudoscience, concerned far more with normative behaviour and social control that with understanding mental illness. It's an unpleasant field to work in, with the result (I suspect) that only the stupid or unfortunate in the medical professions end up there. (Richard Bentall's books are a good place to start if you want a balanced, "evidence based" and intellectually rigorous perspective on the field.)