| That's a cogent explanation. I can see where you're coming from, and I appreciate you taking the time to elaborate. > This problem is manageable in the physical sciences but it is totally unmanageable when studying the human condition. The problem is that people exist in a social context and that is formative regarding the brain. Therefore, if you are studying mental health of middle class Americans, you have no real expectation that the findings will be perfectly applicable to, say, the aborigines in Australia. That's reasonable. > This has some important ramifications. It means that the science can never tell us how culture fits into mental illness. The science has to start off with a assumptions about mental health and illness that are by definition cultural. These definitions and assumptions are not beyond question, and therefore the conclusions one can draw from the science is limited culturally, temporally, and geographically. I agree. Your more verbose argument is reasonable and sound, and yet I find it inconsistent with your original statement. Specifically : "the conclusions one can draw from the science is limited culturally, temporally, and geographically" vs. "mental illness is socially constructed" Perhaps I'm interpreting it too literally, but I can't find the evidence supporting that strong assertion. For instance, most of the literature I could find does agree that there is a biochemical basis for schizophrenia. The literature also agrees that how it manifests, including prognosis and rates of remission, differs across cultures. Thus, it seems reasonable to state that certain beliefs regarding mental health are social constructs - but if there is a physical basis for the expression of the disease I don't see how it can be said that it itself is socially constructed. For any interested, there's an interesting NYT piece on the subject[1] [1] http://www.nytimes.com/2010/01/10/magazine/10psyche-t.html?p... |
Basis != the phenomenon though. But try reading Julian Jaynes' "The Bicameral Mind" which will give you an idea into at least one possibility into how culture fits into it.
That there is a biological aspect to mental illness is beyond dispute. However that does not make it a biological phenomenon. There is probably a biological aspect to language too. That doesn't mean that language is biologically determined.