What do you think?
Rate this book
The Concepts of Psychiatry: A Pluralistic Approach to the Mind and Mental Illness
Because most psychiatric illnesses are complex phenomena, no single method or approach is sufficient to explain them or the experiences of persons who suffer from them. In The Concepts of Psychiatry S. Nassir Ghaemi, M.D. argues that the discipline of psychiatry can therefore be understood best from a pluralistic perspective. Grounding his approach in the works of Paul McHugh, Phillip Slavney, Leston Havens, and others, Ghaemi incorporates a more explicitly philosophical discussion of the strengths of a pluralistic model and the weaknesses of other approaches, such as biological or psychoanalytic theories, the biopsychosocial model, or eclecticism. Ghaemi's methodology is on the one hand, he applies philosophical ideas, such as utilitarian versus duty-based ethical models, to psychiatric practice. On the other hand, he subjects clinical psychiatric phenomena, such as psychosis or the Kraepelin nosology, to a conceptual analysis that is philosophically informed. This book will be of interest to professionals and students in psychiatry, as well as psychologists, social workers, philosophers, and general readers who are interested in understanding the field of psychiatry and its practices at a conceptual level.
- GenresPsychologyPsychiatry
368 pages, Hardcover
First published September 29, 2003
14 people are currently reading
137 people want to read
About the author
S. Nassir Ghaemi
17 books82 followersNassir Ghaemi MD MPH is an academic psychiatrist specializing in mood illnesses, depression and bipolar illness, and Editor of a monthly newsletter, The Psychiatry Letter (www.psychiatryletter.org).
He is Professor of Psychiatry at Tufts Medical Center in Boston, where he directs the Mood Disorders Program. He is a also a Clinical Lecturer at Harvard Medical School, and teaches at the Cambridge Health Alliance.
In the past, he trained and worked mostly in the Boston area, mainly in Harvard-affiliated hospitals (McLean Hospital, Massachusetts General Hospital, and Cambridge Hospital). He has also worked at George Washington University, and Emory University. His medical degree is from the Medical College of Virginia/Virginia Commonwealth University.
His clinical work and research has focused on depression and manic-depressive illness. In this work, he has published over 200 scientific articles, over 50 scientific book chapters, and he has written or edited over half a dozen books. He is an Associate Editor of Acta Psychiatrica Scandinavica, and is a Distinguished Fellow of the American Psychiatric Association.
After his medical training, he obtained an MA in philosophy from Tufts University in 2001, and a MPH from the Harvard School of Public Health in 2004.
Born in Tehran, Iran, he immigrated to the US at the age of 5 with his family and was raised in McLean, Virginia by his father Kamal Ghaemi MD, a neurosurgeon and neurologist, and his mother Guity Kamali Ghaemi, an art historian. A graduate of McLean High School (1984), he received a BA in history from George Mason University (Fairfax, Virginia, 1986).
He is an active writer, and besides his books, newsletter, and scientific articles, he writes a column for Medscape.
He is Professor of Psychiatry at Tufts Medical Center in Boston, where he directs the Mood Disorders Program. He is a also a Clinical Lecturer at Harvard Medical School, and teaches at the Cambridge Health Alliance.
In the past, he trained and worked mostly in the Boston area, mainly in Harvard-affiliated hospitals (McLean Hospital, Massachusetts General Hospital, and Cambridge Hospital). He has also worked at George Washington University, and Emory University. His medical degree is from the Medical College of Virginia/Virginia Commonwealth University.
His clinical work and research has focused on depression and manic-depressive illness. In this work, he has published over 200 scientific articles, over 50 scientific book chapters, and he has written or edited over half a dozen books. He is an Associate Editor of Acta Psychiatrica Scandinavica, and is a Distinguished Fellow of the American Psychiatric Association.
After his medical training, he obtained an MA in philosophy from Tufts University in 2001, and a MPH from the Harvard School of Public Health in 2004.
Born in Tehran, Iran, he immigrated to the US at the age of 5 with his family and was raised in McLean, Virginia by his father Kamal Ghaemi MD, a neurosurgeon and neurologist, and his mother Guity Kamali Ghaemi, an art historian. A graduate of McLean High School (1984), he received a BA in history from George Mason University (Fairfax, Virginia, 1986).
He is an active writer, and besides his books, newsletter, and scientific articles, he writes a column for Medscape.
Ratings & Reviews
Friends & Following
Create a free account to discover what your friends think of this book!
Community Reviews
Displaying 1 - 9 of 9 reviews
November 10, 2010
This is a very worthwhile study of the uses and abuses of science in mental health and medicine in general, as well as of the role of philosophy in determining mental health approaches. Some of the philosophical efforts have weak spots, but on the whole, this is worth reading for an understanding of the limits of mental health treatment; the limits of science, the importance of discipline in choosing and following treatment modalities, and the problems with blindly asserting one's membership in the biopsychosocial model of analysis and treatment. It is easy enough for lay readers, and lay readers would definitely benefit.
July 10, 2023
I cannot recommend this highly enough. Wish I read it years ago. Ghaemi writes a nuanced, concise but rich guide around issues arising in psychiatry. It is dated before the DSM V was published, but there aren't any issues he tackles that aren't just as relevant today. It is refreshing to read a psychiatrist so immersed in philosophical literature. I particularly liked his use of Islamic philosophy (an area where I have limited knowledge) in discussing mental phenomena. He argues for a pluralist view on the understanding and treatment of mental illness, and against essentialism. With this he holds that we aren't looking for the correct answers, but for the best methods whilst rejecting dogmatism from both the "biological" and "psychoanalytic" schools. He utilises the philosophical foundations given by Karl Jasper's and the American Pragmatists to aid his explanations. This is a work of pure brilliance and should be top of the reading list for anyone with an interest in mental illness.
October 20, 2020
I learned a great deal from reading this, though his writing is uneven and his treatment of topics is, at times, too brief and all over the place. His use of block quotes was intense and could have used a good edit.
That said, the overall argument about the value of pluralism and clarity of practice for psychiatrists/mental health clinicians was helpful. From a social work perspective, his critique of the biopsychosocial model was evocative and worthwhile.
That said, the overall argument about the value of pluralism and clarity of practice for psychiatrists/mental health clinicians was helpful. From a social work perspective, his critique of the biopsychosocial model was evocative and worthwhile.
December 9, 2016
Powerful, dense, thoughtful, uneven, inspiring. This book is an impressive accomplishment for Ghaemi--always thought-provoking and challenging. I wrestled with some of the concepts--I got defensive--I cheered--I skipped bits. But overall well worth reading.
October 31, 2025
Psychiatrist Nassir Ghaemi’s primary goal in this book is to provide an epistemological framework for psychiatry that balances realism with humility. He argues that psychiatry has historically swung between two extremes: dogmatism (the belief that a single theory can explain all of psychopathologies) and eclecticism (the belief that all approaches are equally valid and can therefore be combined at will).
Ghaemi grounds his pluralistic approach in the writings of Karl Jaspers, who held that human beings cannot be fully understood by any single method of knowledge. Multiple methods must therefore be at our disposal, although even an accumulation of methods will not allow us to fully comprehend any one individual. Jaspers distinguished between understanding (grasping an individual’s subjective experience) and explanation (identifying empirical, causal processes).
Practically speaking, this means that psychiatry should employ the scientific method when appropriate — e.g., for understanding biological diseases such as schizophrenia and bipolar disorder. And it should use psychological and existential methods to comprehend human subjectivity and conditions like grief and neurosis. In some cases, both kinds of understanding are necessary. Our task is to discern which method best fits the phenomenon at hand.
He cites Lestor Havens as a modern pluralist psychiatrist. Havens wrote that there is one biological school of thought (the objective-descriptive) and three psychological schools (psychoanalytic, existential, and interpersonal). Ghaemi also cites Paul McHugh and Philip Slavney, who wrote about four different theoretical perspectives in psychiatry: disease (what the patient has), dimension (what the patient is), behavior (what the patient does), and life story (what the patient wants).
Ghaemi takes about 100 pages to say all this, and I found myself longing for more concision. Still, his perspicuous descriptions of different philosophies are impressive and can serve as a valuable reference point for later research. Even as I write this I find myself wanting to learn more about Charles Sanders Peirce. The book’s final chapters address the DSM — its necessity and its limits — and offer reflections on major mental illnesses and leading treatment approaches.
Despite his occasional verbosity, Ghaemi has written an important and clarifying work, one that many mental health professionals would benefit from reading. His critical realist perspective is exactly what the field needs. Many of us enter the profession as dogmatists, convinced that our favorite modality is the greatest thing since Windex (My Big Fat Greek Wedding reference), only to drift into postmodern relativism as we age. Ghaemi reminds us that the truth is sometimes this, sometimes that, and sometimes not exactly clear — and that our profession demands ongoing learning and discernment.
I found his discussion of the DSM especially eye-opening. In my own graduate training, I learned the basic DSM-5 categories but graduated without even a rudimentary understanding of its nosological foundations. (Okay, I learned so little that it wasn’t until reading this book that I even knew what the word “nosology” meant.) Ghaemi nicely explains the major advances brought about by DSM-III while highlighting some of its problems. In short, the DSM makes it possible for you and me to have a coherent conversation when discussing diagnoses, but most DSM diagnoses are not actual diseases, and mistaking them as such often leads to confusion and ineffective treatment.
Ghaemi grounds his pluralistic approach in the writings of Karl Jaspers, who held that human beings cannot be fully understood by any single method of knowledge. Multiple methods must therefore be at our disposal, although even an accumulation of methods will not allow us to fully comprehend any one individual. Jaspers distinguished between understanding (grasping an individual’s subjective experience) and explanation (identifying empirical, causal processes).
Practically speaking, this means that psychiatry should employ the scientific method when appropriate — e.g., for understanding biological diseases such as schizophrenia and bipolar disorder. And it should use psychological and existential methods to comprehend human subjectivity and conditions like grief and neurosis. In some cases, both kinds of understanding are necessary. Our task is to discern which method best fits the phenomenon at hand.
He cites Lestor Havens as a modern pluralist psychiatrist. Havens wrote that there is one biological school of thought (the objective-descriptive) and three psychological schools (psychoanalytic, existential, and interpersonal). Ghaemi also cites Paul McHugh and Philip Slavney, who wrote about four different theoretical perspectives in psychiatry: disease (what the patient has), dimension (what the patient is), behavior (what the patient does), and life story (what the patient wants).
Ghaemi takes about 100 pages to say all this, and I found myself longing for more concision. Still, his perspicuous descriptions of different philosophies are impressive and can serve as a valuable reference point for later research. Even as I write this I find myself wanting to learn more about Charles Sanders Peirce. The book’s final chapters address the DSM — its necessity and its limits — and offer reflections on major mental illnesses and leading treatment approaches.
Despite his occasional verbosity, Ghaemi has written an important and clarifying work, one that many mental health professionals would benefit from reading. His critical realist perspective is exactly what the field needs. Many of us enter the profession as dogmatists, convinced that our favorite modality is the greatest thing since Windex (My Big Fat Greek Wedding reference), only to drift into postmodern relativism as we age. Ghaemi reminds us that the truth is sometimes this, sometimes that, and sometimes not exactly clear — and that our profession demands ongoing learning and discernment.
I found his discussion of the DSM especially eye-opening. In my own graduate training, I learned the basic DSM-5 categories but graduated without even a rudimentary understanding of its nosological foundations. (Okay, I learned so little that it wasn’t until reading this book that I even knew what the word “nosology” meant.) Ghaemi nicely explains the major advances brought about by DSM-III while highlighting some of its problems. In short, the DSM makes it possible for you and me to have a coherent conversation when discussing diagnoses, but most DSM diagnoses are not actual diseases, and mistaking them as such often leads to confusion and ineffective treatment.
April 9, 2024
إنه من الكتب التي جعلتني أتصل بصديق من زمن بعيد لأحكي له عنه، فقد اتصل بصديقي الدكتور علي طارق في العراق الذي لم التقيه منذ ٢٠١٤ أي بالضبط منذ عشر سنين، وحين سألته المساعدة في تعريف (الوضعية المنطقية، القابلية للتكذيب، البراغماتية وعلاقتها بالظاهراتية، الدليل الاستقرائي والدليل الاستنباطي، الواقعية الجدلية لهيغل) وحين صار يشرح لي بسلاسة بلغة عربية بلكنة عراقية محببة تجمع الفصحى بالعامية تصاعدت الدموع لعيني فتغوشت الرؤية أمامي في غرفتي في مسقط في سلطنة عمان ليرجع خيالي لذاكرتي في العراق حين كنت أحياناً أسخر من الدكتور علي حين يبدأ يشرح لي مفاهيم فلسفية يتوجب علي أن اعرفها انا الطبيب النفسي، كنت اعتبر نفسي بلا حاجة لها، وكان هو الدكتور علي الطبيب الغير متخصص في الطب النفسي كان يلح عليّ بضرورة معرفتي بها وكنت اسخر منه. تصاعدت الدموع لعيني لاني لم اكن اعرف قيمته حين كنت بجانبه.
هذا كتاب عرفني من جديد بكارل بوبر والوضعية المنطقية التي تعتمد على ان الحقيقة الخارجية هي ما يمكن ان نراها والاهتمام بالسلوك لاننا يمكن ان نقيسه، بان النظرية يجب ان تكون قابلة للتكذيب، كيف ان هذه المدرسة اعطتنا الالة، لكنها حولت الانسان الى الة.
كيف ان البراغماتية وكذلك الظاهراتية هل جواب على الوضعية المنطقية، فاي شيء نعيشه بالتجربة نتقبله وان التجربة يختلط فيها الحواس والانفعالات والذكريات.
هنا تبرز اهمية ياسبرز في تمييزه من بين منهج شرح الاسباب (اركلارن) ومنهم الفهم (فيرستيشن) وفيه الحدس
كيف أعاب ياسبرز على مدرسة التحليل النفسي انه لا يراعي حرية البشر والانبثاق وحرية الوجود
يضع ياسبرز الشرح في كفة، والوجود في كفة، وما بينهما يتوسطهما الفهم
تأثر ياسبرز بفلسفة التاريخ لفيلهايم ديلثي حين حاول الجواب على سؤال لماذا غزا نابليون روسيا. اقتصاد؟ سياسة؟ سبب شخصي؟ الفهم هو ان نضع انفسنا مكان نابليون لنفهم بعض جوانب شخصيته.
كتاب وضع الكثير من اسماء الاطباء النفسيين لدي في سياقهم وبين لي اهميتهم واستثمرت ذلك لاعمل على كل عالم منهم حلقة في قناتي في اليوتيوب (وجوه الطب النفسي).. قدم لي نقاش تورنتو ١٩٨٢ وغيرها من احداث مهمة في تاريخ الطب النفسي لم اكن واعيا لها
اعيب على الكتاب فقط عدم ذكره لبحوث (فريث) خصوصا حول الإرادة واتخاذ القرارات
ساعدني في فهم دوافع العلماء في بحوثهم
كتاب عظيم
هذا كتاب عرفني من جديد بكارل بوبر والوضعية المنطقية التي تعتمد على ان الحقيقة الخارجية هي ما يمكن ان نراها والاهتمام بالسلوك لاننا يمكن ان نقيسه، بان النظرية يجب ان تكون قابلة للتكذيب، كيف ان هذه المدرسة اعطتنا الالة، لكنها حولت الانسان الى الة.
كيف ان البراغماتية وكذلك الظاهراتية هل جواب على الوضعية المنطقية، فاي شيء نعيشه بالتجربة نتقبله وان التجربة يختلط فيها الحواس والانفعالات والذكريات.
هنا تبرز اهمية ياسبرز في تمييزه من بين منهج شرح الاسباب (اركلارن) ومنهم الفهم (فيرستيشن) وفيه الحدس
كيف أعاب ياسبرز على مدرسة التحليل النفسي انه لا يراعي حرية البشر والانبثاق وحرية الوجود
يضع ياسبرز الشرح في كفة، والوجود في كفة، وما بينهما يتوسطهما الفهم
تأثر ياسبرز بفلسفة التاريخ لفيلهايم ديلثي حين حاول الجواب على سؤال لماذا غزا نابليون روسيا. اقتصاد؟ سياسة؟ سبب شخصي؟ الفهم هو ان نضع انفسنا مكان نابليون لنفهم بعض جوانب شخصيته.
كتاب وضع الكثير من اسماء الاطباء النفسيين لدي في سياقهم وبين لي اهميتهم واستثمرت ذلك لاعمل على كل عالم منهم حلقة في قناتي في اليوتيوب (وجوه الطب النفسي).. قدم لي نقاش تورنتو ١٩٨٢ وغيرها من احداث مهمة في تاريخ الطب النفسي لم اكن واعيا لها
اعيب على الكتاب فقط عدم ذكره لبحوث (فريث) خصوصا حول الإرادة واتخاذ القرارات
ساعدني في فهم دوافع العلماء في بحوثهم
كتاب عظيم
October 18, 2022
قرأت الكتاب مترجمًا من قبل د/يوسف الصمعان عن دار جداول
حقيقة الكتاب مثري أيما ثراء ويبحر بك في عالم مليء بالاسئلة الشائكة التي تكتنف عالم الطب النفسي وليس بالضرورة أن يقدم لتلك الأسئلة أجوبة شافية بل الأمر بمثابة تسليط الضوء على قضايا حساسة في الطب
النفسي
فبداية استهل المؤلف -بسعة إطلاع رهيبة- الجزء الأول من الكتاب في البعد النظري
ومثلًا لا حصرًا تحدث عن
١-علاقة هذا التخصص بالفلسفة وأبرز التوجهات الفلسفية المؤثرة فيه
٢- معضلات معينة تؤثر في ممارسة الطب النفسي كالدوغمائية والانتقائية
٣- أخلاقيات الطب النفسي (شبه مختصر)
٤- مقاربات أغريقية شرقية للموضوع كأن يستعرض التوجهات الدينية الشرقية مثل الصوفية في العلاج النفسي وما إلى ذلك
الجزء الثاني كتالي:
١- نقاشات حول أبزر المرض العقلي في حقيقة كونه مرض أم خرافة
٢- مشاكل تصنيف الأمراض العقلية
٣-تحدث عن الهوس والاكتئاب والنظريات حولهما
٤- علاقة الصيدلة والإحصاء بالطب النفسي
تجاوزت الجزء الثالث لكونه تخصصي بحت
الكتاب رائع للمهتمين في الطب النفسي /علم النفس/القانون/الفلسفة
أخيرا ترجمة الكتاب رائعة
حقيقة الكتاب مثري أيما ثراء ويبحر بك في عالم مليء بالاسئلة الشائكة التي تكتنف عالم الطب النفسي وليس بالضرورة أن يقدم لتلك الأسئلة أجوبة شافية بل الأمر بمثابة تسليط الضوء على قضايا حساسة في الطب
النفسي
فبداية استهل المؤلف -بسعة إطلاع رهيبة- الجزء الأول من الكتاب في البعد النظري
ومثلًا لا حصرًا تحدث عن
١-علاقة هذا التخصص بالفلسفة وأبرز التوجهات الفلسفية المؤثرة فيه
٢- معضلات معينة تؤثر في ممارسة الطب النفسي كالدوغمائية والانتقائية
٣- أخلاقيات الطب النفسي (شبه مختصر)
٤- مقاربات أغريقية شرقية للموضوع كأن يستعرض التوجهات الدينية الشرقية مثل الصوفية في العلاج النفسي وما إلى ذلك
الجزء الثاني كتالي:
١- نقاشات حول أبزر المرض العقلي في حقيقة كونه مرض أم خرافة
٢- مشاكل تصنيف الأمراض العقلية
٣-تحدث عن الهوس والاكتئاب والنظريات حولهما
٤- علاقة الصيدلة والإحصاء بالطب النفسي
تجاوزت الجزء الثالث لكونه تخصصي بحت
الكتاب رائع للمهتمين في الطب النفسي /علم النفس/القانون/الفلسفة
أخيرا ترجمة الكتاب رائعة
Read
September 30, 2025Ognuno vive con una teoria della mente, che sia esplicita o meno. Applicare filosofia della mente consente di separarsi dal dogmatismo, che esso sia biologico, psicoanalitico, biopsicosociale o altro.
- Every advance in factual knowledge means advance in method.
- Besides reducing attachments, relevant concepts for psychiatry include focusing on the present, recognizing the limits of reason, examining the role of intuitive knowledge, and realizing the benefits of a pluralistic attitude.
- We need illusions for our psychological health.
- Every advance in factual knowledge means advance in method.
- Besides reducing attachments, relevant concepts for psychiatry include focusing on the present, recognizing the limits of reason, examining the role of intuitive knowledge, and realizing the benefits of a pluralistic attitude.
- We need illusions for our psychological health.
September 13, 2015
Basic of Modern Psychopathology.
Displaying 1 - 9 of 9 reviews