SOC483Y1 Lecture Notes - Lecture 16: Medicalization, Mary Douglas

19 views5 pages
9 Nov 2012
School
Department
Course
SOC483Y1 Lecture 16 Feb 8, 2012
Reading:
- Rick Mayes and Allan Horwitz, DSM-III and the Revolution in the Classification of
Mental Illness,” Journal of the History of the Behavioral Sciences 41 (2005): 249-267.
Reading:
- Karen Cerulo, “Institutionalizing Right, Wrong, and Undecided,” chapter 4 in
Deciphering Violence (Routledge, 1998), pp. 77-110.
Cerulo
Order related to Mary Douglas, Levi-Strauss (classification system) and Geertz (first order)
Equate to Swidler- showing same tool kit method- believes she may thus assert invoking
certain cultural tools- invoked in settled environments why in settled times though?
Wuthnow piggy back determined by society’s moral order – moral stability and
dominating traditional tools
Problems with both models though when we use Cerulo
Swidler’s falls apart when war times – conventional sequence still follow
Wuthnow fall into problems when morality divided
Where do they break with tradition? when unsettled and morally inconsistent when
traditional narrative may be broken
RICK MAYES ALLAN HORWITZ DSM
- Only meaningful with individual analysis- micro
- Psychological disorder- failure to adapt
- Everyone has mental illness (neurotic) to major psychotic
- Illnesses not discrete
- Each symptom connected to deep psychological process
Problems overly scientific and over ambitious some issues with past DSM
- So DSM’s are concerned with classification orders
- Symptom based model let pharmaceuticals target certain illnesses
These readings let us revisit past readings
Institutional organization controlling on people with memos etc. confining cultural
toolkits
Unlock document

This preview shows pages 1-2 of the document.
Unlock all 5 pages and 3 million more documents.

Already have an account? Log in
- Reason these two together because 2 contemporary sociologists working from
different perspectives to give sense of the work that can be done in terms of ideas
that can be used for own papers
- Different subject matters and approaches
- Both are professors at Rutgers = where many right about cognition
- Both readings deal with institutions, classifications how we classify phenomenon
within the context of institutions so of course we see constraints of institutions
- What we see is certainly constraining institutions
- *institutions constrain due to pressures, we need to respond to those pressures
- (good for homesickness, professor exerting pressure on language efficiency)
This will be good for answering talk of love by Swidler- which may help in the way we
understand tool kits it one dichotomy that dichotomy between the individual (cultural
cognition- psychological individual cultural cognition) sold response is that it is hard to
separate them as it is that one has stuff on their mind alone from their own while some that
are products of social structure (universal) in terms of how brains work
- A lot of our cognitive make up especially what we are concerned with is cultural
and shared! cognitive schema vs. cultural schema- interdependent happenings
- Individual yet may be responding to institutions SWIDLER TALKS ABOUT THIS
- What is more personal or intimate than love romantic relationships a lot of the
schema people use to grapple with relationships (those interviewed are at a
different stage) are responding in ways to institutions, they will use different
narratives depending on the context, so model of Hollywood romantic relationship
to be drawn on to envision future romantic relationships vs. pastors or priest with
very different narrative to explain nature of love vs. counsellor influenced love
whether to stay with partner or break up
= these are all institutions that introduce pressures, constraints and different tools
for people to draw on and decide if person is for them or if they should leave
relationship
- Some institutions are more formal than others- ex. Journalistic field, psychiatry,
sociology student- easier to see patterns of schema in these institutions!
- Some may be conscious of writing formal sociology papers like in the way it is
generic vs. unconscious just do find code to determine conscious or unconscious
- More informal: counselling, Hollywood where we may pick up cues in a more
random way as it were and not within occupation it is harder to track down what
people are doing
- Goals are pressures- like getting a job, PhD, famous
Unlock document

This preview shows pages 1-2 of the document.
Unlock all 5 pages and 3 million more documents.

Already have an account? Log in

Document Summary

Rick mayes and allan horwitz, dsm-iii and the revolution in the classification of. Mental illness, journal of the history of the behavioral sciences 41 (2005): 249-267. Karen cerulo, institutionalizing right, wrong, and undecided, chapter 4 in. Order related to mary douglas, levi-strauss (classification system) and geertz (first order) Wuthnow piggy back determined by society"s moral order moral stability and dominating traditional tools. Problems with both models though when we use cerulo. Swidler"s falls apart when war times conventional sequence still follow. When unsettled and morally inconsistent when traditional narrative may be broken. Everyone has mental illness (neurotic) to major psychotic. Each symptom connected to deep psychological process. Problems overly scientific and over ambitious some issues with past dsm. So dsm"s are concerned with classification orders. Symptom based model let pharmaceuticals target certain illnesses. Institutional organization controlling on people with memos etc. confining cultural toolkits.

Get access

Grade+
$10 USD/m
Billed $120 USD annually
Homework Help
Class Notes
Textbook Notes
40 Verified Answers
Study Guides
Booster Classes
Class+
$8 USD/m
Billed $96 USD annually
Homework Help
Class Notes
Textbook Notes
30 Verified Answers
Study Guides
Booster Classes