Professional Documents
Culture Documents
The question of whether mental health can be defined objectively is dependent on a number of
notions: whether objectivity exists; what mental health is to be considered; and whether there are
prejudices inlaid within psychology that affect the categorisation of illnesses. This essay will critique
the notion of objectivity through analysing tenets and adherents of the anti-psychiatry movement in
addition to relying on mainstream sources regarding mental health and mental illnesses, like the
Diagnostic and Statistical Manuel of Mental Disorders. Ultimately, this essay will argue that mental
First and foremost, the notion of objectivity must be explored and critiqued: what is objectivity? Are
fulfilled? Fundamentally, humans are subject, not objects. Because of this, situating objectivity in a
subject is a disingenuous task that elicits no results. Humans possess agency, autonomy, and an
individualised consciousness, which muddies the metaphorical waters when analysing symptoms of
health and illness. Of course, a more simplistic argument regarding objectivity is sourced from
existentialist and phenomenological though: a table is easily denotable, but exists not as a shared
thought. A table one person conceptualises could be very different to a table another person
conceptualises. Essentially, shared meaning is diffuse and divergent; no objective table exists.
Considered to be the father of psychology and founder of psychoanalysis, Sigmund Freud theorised a
number of conjectures that influenced the descendents of psychology, so to speak (143). Freuds
psychology was situated in the unconscious, a realm of anxiety and drives, and Freuds
psychoanalytic theories were developed in order to explore the unconscious so as to cure patients of
their psychological afflictions. While Freud is undeniably influential in psychology, his work remains
his codification of the Oedipus Complex, where women lack the phallus, which is the nexus of their
ill mental health. Furthermore, Freuds conceptualisation of the id, ego, and superego is rather dated,
with modern psychologists viewing the unconscious in less defined terms. If the father of psychology
can err in regards to the fundamentals of the human psyche, it then follows that further adherents of
By analysing Freud and his work, it becomes apparent that while Freuds theories were
historically correct at the time, the progression of psychology has shown that there were historical
prejudices at the very core of his work, thus potentially detracting from successful psychological
intervention for women. Another rather light-hearted argument against Freuds objectivity is the use
of cocaine to treat mental ailments, something that seems rather beyond the pale in modern practice.
Essentially, psychology itself is not an objective system of thought and practice; it then follows that
the research that comes from psychology is not necessarily objective. For instance, it is argued that
Borderline Personality Disorder is a feminised version of Post-Traumatic Stress Disorder, in that the
symptoms are similar and women represent 75% of people with BPD. Although psychology as a
school of discipline has progressed since the proto-sexist views of Freud, there is still a degree of
sexism that is reflective of the patriarchal mores that exist in other disciplines. Hopefully, as humanity
progresses, a more objective objectivity can be ascertained and implemented, but the historicity of
psychology as a discipline underpins just how divergent notions of mental health and mental illness
can be.
The anti-psychiatry movement is a radical tendency within clinical psychiatry that rose to
prominence in the 1960s... highly critical of conventional methods of psychotherapy and questioned
the very existence of mental illness (Macey 2001:17). Essentially, the anti-psychiatry movement
argued that Mental illness was viewed not as a disease, but as a social label attached to certain
individuals by an alienated society and the psychiatrists who were its agents (Macey 2001:17). This
counterculture approach to mental health focussed on the historical contingencies that could
potentially define certain illnesses, like schizophrenia for example. By studying the historical
gradations of a certain illness, the fundamental symptoms could be seen as eradicable results of
societal prejudice or class warfare. The anti-psychiatry movement was firmly rooted in the
counterculture of the 60s, which is, in and of itself, a reflection of its own societal expectations,
contingencies, and prejudices. While it does seem counterintuitive to argue that the underlying basis
of this essay is subject to individual prejudices and inaccuracies, it is indeed an affirmation that the
gatekeepers and custodians of mental health can in fact be deluged and misinformed by their own
The primary notion behind the anti-psychiatry movement is that psychiatry and psychology
are not historically devoid and subject to societal norms; rather, psychiatry and psychology intersect
with history, politics, and culture and that symptoms of mental illnesses are not necessarily situated
within an individual, but are responses to the society one lives in. Of course, this is not to say that a
bad breakup or poor financial situation cannot stimulate symptoms of mental illness; rather, the
conditions of society engender such responses by its very nature. If this premise is true, then different
cultures would have different notions of health and illness, similar to Foucaults premise about the
non-existence of homosexuality until the 19th century. While the actual expressions and symptoms
may be similar, if not the same, healthy modes of mentality are divergent in cultures, even
Michel Foucault, an seminal philosopher and historian, articulated a history of mental illness in works
like Folie et deraison (Madness and Civilisation), Naissance de la clinque (Birth of the Clinic), and
that analyse the historical notions that changed views on mental health, sexuality, and psychology and
psychiatry. Perhaps the most integral theory that Foucault posited was how madness was constructed:
socially constructed by a wide variety of discourses that give rise to collective attitudes or mentalities
defining insanity (134). For Foucault, mental illness is not necessarily innate, in that discursive
attitudes can establish modes of psychology that determines certain societal outliers as being
expressions of illness. Similar to certain mental illness, Foucault argued that homosexuality did not
exist until the 19th century; rather, same-sex relationships and activities occurred, but were known by
different names and encircled by different ideas (149). Analogously, the symptoms of schizophrenia,
for example, may have existed in 30AD but could have been considered the result of a demon or an
expression of prophecy. Essentially, symptoms A and B may be the same centuries apart, but the
Furthermore, Foucault postulates that knowledge is a form of power, allowing those with a
certain power-knowledge to articulate the parameters of speech, thought, and behaviour, similar to the
Marxist notion of base and superstructure. Essentially, Marx argues that those who control the
economic base can control the societal superstructure, like culture, religion, and morality. In this
sense, the gatekeepers of psychology can control the fluxes of knowledge, giving them a degree of
power over the realm of mental health and illness: Like the confessor or the priest, the psychoanalyst
or psychiatrist who asks his patient to say what he desires is establishing a relationship of power and
control (134). Therefore, those with power-knowledge, replete with their singular prejudices and
theories, determine what is healthy and what is deviant. Objectivity, then, is situated within those with
power-knowledge. In any Western society, power is generally situated in men, the middle-class, the
white, and the heterosexual. Objectivity is not at all objective, but the discursive notion of objectivity
is. Objectivity, in and of itself, is historically contingent and established by an exclusive group of
individuals.
Ultimately, objectivity as a concept or framework does not exist, shown through historical and
politics, culture, and history which eliminates objectivity allows for a broader and more
progressive view of mental health and mental illness. Whether concepts of mental health are slowly
methods, psychology and psychiatry can process statements and ideologies viewed as objective into
Rabinow, P, 1991, The Foucault Reader: An Introduction to Foucaults Thought, Penguin Books,
London.
Horrocks, C. & Jevtic, Z 2004, Foucault: A Graphic Guide, Gutenberg Press, Malta.
Gunderson, J.G. 2009, Borderline Personality Disorder: A Clinical Guide, American Psychiatric
Publishing, Arlington.