It is increasingly recognized that neuroscience has not delivered the revolutionary clinical possibilities for psychiatry that had been promised. Explanations differ, however: some proponents emphasize the divide between biopsychosocial psychiatry and mechanistic neurology. Others rely on further basic experimental neuroscience as only the most elementary level of explanation will allow us to fully understand and treat mental disorders. From a clinical-neuropsychological perspective, I shall argue that both views are mistaken. Diagnosis and treatment of neurological diseases demands a biopsychosocial perspective similar to psychiatry. Acknowledging this might help to bring both disciplines together and improve clinical outcome.
It is increasingly recognized that neuroscience has not delivered the revolutionary clinical possibilities for psychiatry that had been promised. Explanations differ, however: some proponents emphasize the divide between biopsychosocial psychiatry and mechanistic neurology. Others rely on further basic experimental neuroscience as only the most elementary level of explanation will allow us to fully understand and treat mental disorders. From a clinical-neuropsychological perspective, I shall argue that both views are mistaken. Diagnosis and treatment of neurological diseases demands a biopsychosocial perspective similar to psychiatry. Acknowledging this might help to bring both disciplines together and improve clinical outcome.
INTRODUCTION BIOLOGICAL PSYCHIATRY: THE CALL OF MECHANISM (AND SOME PSEUDO-PROBLEMS) THE ROLE OF ‘BRAIN MECHANISMS’ IN CLINICAL NEURO(PSYCHO)LOGY CONCLUSION: TOWARDS AN INTEGRATIVE, BIOPSYCHOSOCIAL VIEW OF BOTH PSYCHIATRY AND NEUROLOGY
