Skip to main content
×
×
Home

Time to abandon the subjective–objective divide?

  • Allan Beveridge (a1)
Extract

“We don't see things as they are, we see things as we are” (Anaïs Nin, 1969)

In the mental state examination, a standard method of describing the clinical encounter is to contrast the patient's supposedly ‘subjective’ account with the doctor's ‘objective’ description. In this model, the doctor is granted a privileged position: the clinician's perspective is taken to be superior to that of the patient. The doctor's objective approach is considered neutral, scientific and representing the truth of the matter. In contrast, the patient's subjective report is regarded as unreliable, distorted and potentially false. The lowly status of the subjective perspective is further emphasised by the frequent use of the accompanying prefix, merely.

  • View HTML
    • Send article to Kindle

      To send this article to your Kindle, first ensure no-reply@cambridge.org is added to your Approved Personal Document E-mail List under your Personal Document Settings on the Manage Your Content and Devices page of your Amazon account. Then enter the ‘name’ part of your Kindle email address below. Find out more about sending to your Kindle. Find out more about sending to your Kindle.

      Note you can select to send to either the @free.kindle.com or @kindle.com variations. ‘@free.kindle.com’ emails are free but can only be sent to your device when it is connected to wi-fi. ‘@kindle.com’ emails can be delivered even when you are not connected to wi-fi, but note that service fees apply.

      Find out more about the Kindle Personal Document Service.

      Time to abandon the subjective–objective divide?
      Available formats
      ×
      Send article to Dropbox

      To send this article to your Dropbox account, please select one or more formats and confirm that you agree to abide by our usage policies. If this is the first time you use this feature, you will be asked to authorise Cambridge Core to connect with your <service> account. Find out more about sending content to Dropbox.

      Time to abandon the subjective–objective divide?
      Available formats
      ×
      Send article to Google Drive

      To send this article to your Google Drive account, please select one or more formats and confirm that you agree to abide by our usage policies. If this is the first time you use this feature, you will be asked to authorise Cambridge Core to connect with your <service> account. Find out more about sending content to Google Drive.

      Time to abandon the subjective–objective divide?
      Available formats
      ×
Copyright
This is an Open Access article, distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution (CC-BY) license (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/), which permits unrestricted re-use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited.
References
Hide All
Boyd, K. (2000) Disease, illness, sickness, health, healing and wholeness: exploiting some elusive concepts. Medical Humanities, 26, 917.
Charlton, B. (1990) A critique of biological psychiatry. Psychological Medicine, 20, 36.
Damasio, A. (1994) Descartes's Error. NewYork: Avon Books.
Downie, R. S. (1994) The Healing Art. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Eisenberg, L. (2000) Is psychiatry more mindful or brainier than it was a decade ago? British Journal of Psychiatry, 176, 15.
Evans, M. & Greaves, D. (1999) Exploring the medical humanities. BMJ, 319, 1216.
Fulford, W. (1999) Analytic philosophy, brain science, and the concept of disorder. In Psychiatric Ethics (eds Bloch, S., Chodoff, P. & Green, S.), pp. 161192. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Greenhalgh, T. (1998) Narrative based medicine in an evidence based world. In Narrative Based Medicine (eds Greenhalgh, T. & Hurwitz, B.), pp. 247265. London: BMJ Publishing Group.
Greenhalgh, T. & Hurwitz, B. (1998) Narrative Based Medicine. London: BMJ Publishing Group.
Havens, L. (1973) Approaches to the Mind. Boston: Little & Brown.
Heisenberg, W. (1958) The Physicist's Conception of Nature. London: Hutchinson.
Horgan, J. (1999) The Undiscovered Mind: How the Brain Defies Explanation. London: Weidenfeld & Nicolson.
Jaspers, K. (1963) General Psychopathology (trans. Hoenig, J. & Hamilton, M. W.). Manchester: Manchester University Press.
Kierkegaard, S. (1846) Concluding Unscientific Postscript to the “Philosophical Fragment” (trans. Swenson, D. F. & Lowrie, W.). Princeton: Princeton University Press.
Laing, R. D. (1985) Wisdom, Madness and Folly. London: Macmillan.
Lown, B. (1997) The Lost Art of Healing. Boston: Houghton Mifflin.
Matson, F. (1973) Without/Within. Behaviorism and Humanism. Monterey, CA: Brookes/Cole.
May, R., Angel, E. & Ellenberger, H. F. (1958) Existence. NewYork: Basic Books.
Nin, A. (1969) The Diary of Anaïs Nin 1939–1944. NewYork: Brace & World.
Polkinghorne, D. (1983) Methodology for the Human Sciences. NewYork: State University of NewYork Press.
Saunders, J. (2000) The practice of clinical medicine as an art and as a science. Medical Humanities, 26, 1822.
Smith, R. (1997) The Fontana History of the Human Sciences. London: Fontana.
Weatherall, D. (1994) The inhumanity of medicine. British Journal of Medicine, 309, 16711672.
Recommend this journal

Email your librarian or administrator to recommend adding this journal to your organisation's collection.

BJPsych Bulletin
  • ISSN: 0955-6036
  • EISSN: 1472-1473
  • URL: /core/journals/bjpsych-bulletin
Please enter your name
Please enter a valid email address
Who would you like to send this to? *
×

Metrics

Altmetric attention score

Full text views

Total number of HTML views: 0
Total number of PDF views: 0 *
Loading metrics...

Abstract views

Total abstract views: 0 *
Loading metrics...

* Views captured on Cambridge Core between <date>. This data will be updated every 24 hours.

Usage data cannot currently be displayed

Time to abandon the subjective–objective divide?

  • Allan Beveridge (a1)
Submit a response

eLetters

No eLetters have been published for this article.

×

Reply to: Submit a response


Your details


Conflicting interests

Do you have any conflicting interests? *