Psychosis and psychedelics: Historical entanglements and contemporary contrasts.
Experiences of psychedelics and psychosis were deeply entangled in scientific practices in the mid-20th century, from uses of psychedelic drugs that could model psychosis, to detailed phenomenological comparisons of endogenous and drug-induced madness. After the moral panic of the 1960s shut down ps...
| Published in: | Transcultural Psychiatry Vol. 59; no. 5; pp. 592 - 610 |
|---|---|
| Main Author: | |
| Format: | Journal Article |
| Published: |
Sage Publications, Ltd.
Oct2022
|
| Online Access: | View this record in EBSCOhost |
| fields | @attributes: recordID: 1 pdfLink: plink: https://search.ebscohost.com/login.aspx?direct=true&db=ccm&AN=160184149&site=ehost-live header: @attributes: shortDbName: ccm uiTerm: 160184149 longDbName: CINAHL Complete uiTag: AN controlInfo: bkinfo: dissinfo: jinfo: jid: 13634615 3FX jtl: Transcultural Psychiatry issn: 13634615 maglogo: Y pubinfo: dt: Oct2022 vid: 59 iid: 5 pid: 2171 pub: Sage Publications, Ltd. artinfo: ui: 160184149 159853303 10.1177/13634615221129116 160184149 ppf: 592 ppct: 18 formats: tig: atl: Psychosis and psychedelics: Historical entanglements and contemporary contrasts. aug: au: Friesen, Phoebe affil: Biomedical Ethics Unit, Department of Social Studies of Medicine, 5620 McGill University, Montreal, QC, Canada sug: subj: Psychotic Disorders Drug Therapy Hallucinogens Therapeutic Use Research, Medical Attitude to Medical Treatment Compassion Support, Psychosocial Medical Practice, Evidence-Based ab: Experiences of psychedelics and psychosis were deeply entangled in scientific practices in the mid-20th century, from uses of psychedelic drugs that could model psychosis, to detailed phenomenological comparisons of endogenous and drug-induced madness. After the moral panic of the 1960s shut down psychedelic research, however, these two phenomena became disentangled. In the decades following, the science of psychosis transformed, shedding the language of psychoanalysis, and adopting the new scientific veneer of psychiatry. Today, as psychedelic science re-emerges, the research programs surrounding psychosis and psychedelics now stand in stark contrast. Here, I look closely at how these research programs respond to questions related to what is worth measuring, what is worth investigating, and how we ought to respond to these experiences. This comparison reveals radically different assumptions and values that guide each research paradigm and shape clinical practice. While psychedelic research often includes scales that seek to capture experiences of mysticism, meaningfulness, and ego dissolution, research related to psychosis focuses on the measurement of pathological symptoms and functioning. Research into psychosis primarily seeks universal and reductionist causal explanations and interventions, while psychedelic research embraces the importance of set and setting in shaping unique experiences. Responses to psychedelic crisis involve warmth, compassion, and support, while responses to psychotic experiences often involve restraint, seclusion, and weapons. I argue that these differences contain important lessons for psychiatry. However, as psychedelic research struggles to meet regulatory requirements and fit within the paradigm of evidence-based medicine, these differences may quickly dissolve. pubtype: Academic Journal doctype: Journal Article ougenre: Article language: English refInfo: holdings: @attributes: islocal: N |
|---|