| Abstract: | The Szaszian argument claims that psychiatry is a rhetorical enterprise aimed at providing justification for involuntary treatment. Such treatment, the argument holds, is just when provided to those suffering from demonstrable brain lesions, but it is unjust in cases of "mental illness" because such "illnesses" lack objective histopathology and are therefore fictional. It is here argued that this distinction is irrelevant to the morality or immorality of involuntary treatment, since such treatment inevitably rests on a subjective determination of competency or dangerousness, which is not rendered substantially more objective by the criterion of histopathology. The Szaszian argument subscribes to a naturalistic fallacy in this regard, which leads it to inconsistencies in its philosophy of mind. |
