Thoughts ii re. 2026 Lancaster Philosophy of Psychiatry Work in Progress Workshop

For me, applying Hodges' model I tend to place philosophy and psychiatry (mind, thought, belief, truth, intention ...) within the humanistic part of the model. So, Ewa Grzeszczak and - Philosophy of psychiatry and the methodology of social ontology - stood out. This is helpful as Homeostatic Property Clusters (HPC) are a useful structure, spanning bio-mathematics. As suggested previously with 'equality', we can place the philosophical non-trivial question of kinds at the centre of Hodges' model and proceed (if possible?) from there.

The requirement for a holistic, integrative and pluralistic framework is there in literature. A stattement supported by Alessandra Civani's talk: 'What kind of concept is ‘incongruence’? I located a paper:

Enactive psychiatry - A pragmatic and pluralistic approach to mental health and disease

- (and now have a copy c/o and thanks to Alessandra) and am grateful to being pointed to de Haan:

An Enactive Approach to Psychiatry

 I will (must) return to these papers. That morning, I'd opined (as on 'X') how the -

• medical
• biomedical
• bio-psycho-social models - are insufficient in the 21st century.

There was a thematic feel to the presentations with Anna Golova - Self-illness ambiguity without a self-illness distinction - following nicely. The styling on the slides was an added bonus. I located an informative (co-authored) paper by Golova:

‘Is it me or my illness?’: self-illness ambiguity as a useful conceptual lens for psychiatry'

Part of the power of Hodges' model derives not so much from its duality; as its dual axes. The two axes can encompass and handle the relatedness between/within reductionism, holist perspectives, the self and otherness, illness and health (well-being).

An hours break brought us to an event which was very well attended, clearly open to the public:

6-7pm Prof Miriam Solomon – Royal Institute of Philosophy talk ‘Stigma as an actant in the history of psychiatry’

In setting out the talk's structure I liked Prof. Solomon's reference to the common, implicit "grime" theory of the dynamic of stigma, and "punching down" as a strategy for managing stigma. 'Grime' made me think of sense of smell, the grime in my father's work van, a diesel. Now so many memories are evoked with the merest whiff. More positively, the patina of physical and mental life also came to mind. You would - might think stigma has been dealt with by now, but of course we are socio-politically far from it.

There is a related podcast from 2025, which also covers Prof. Solomon's early studies. A previous paper was also noted in the slides:

Solomon, M. (2025). The Elusiveness of Hermeneutic Injustice in Psychiatric Categorizations. Social Epistemology, 39(2), 166–177. https://doi.org/10.1080/02691728.2024.2400068

 

Discussion of the DSM inevitably followed (and in the above podcast). In questions the 'reality' of severe mental illness, and suggestion of the acute challenge of managing the negative symptoms of psychoses.

 

I really have only scratched the surface of a marvellous event; and will look to extend this post, to take in the second day.