中華心理衛生協會

 Purpose: In Taiwan, psychopathology is considered to be 1 of the 3 professional domains in clinical psychology. However, in educational training it is almost always equated with the DSM (Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorder). Equation of psychopathology with the DSM is recent. However, the DSM is not an unchallengeable system of knowledge, nor should it be treated as completely encompassing all forms of psychopathology in clinical psychology. Methods: We applied a critical-historical approach with a Foucauldian discourse analysis in order to critically reflect on the current status of psychopathology. Results: We first supplied a critical-historical description of the development of the DSM, and then used Foucault's (1980) concept of dispositif to examine how the DSM quickly occupied a core position in the practice of psychiatry, thereby affecting clinical work. On this foundation, we then discussed how clinical psychology should be positioned in the post DSM-III era with regard to the diagnosis and treatment of mental illness. We proposed a form of psychopathology that situates coming face-to-face with suffering at the core. Conclusions: We propose that a human-science oriented psychopathology is: (1) a psychopathology that comes face-to-face with suffering. It recognizes the ontological status of the suffering experience, its irreducibility and its personal uniqueness. Therefore, it is inherently human science oriented; (2) a psychopathology that also involves reversal of the priority of ethics and knowledge. It is therefore not a system of universal knowledge about mental illness, but a singular understanding of the suffering experience unfolded in the therapeutic relationship; (3) a return to the original meaning of the word psychopathology. It comes from the ＂I say＂ of the sufferer, in which the suffering of the soul is unfolded to the therapist.