Jaspers ve Kraepelin: Psikiyatri Tarihindeki Bir İhtilafın Yeniden Değerlendirilmesi

Öz

Felsefeye yaptığı katkılarla tanınan Karl Jaspers, entelektüel kariyerinin erken dönemlerinde psikopatoloji üzerine yürüttüğü çalışmalarla bilinmektedir. Jaspers psikopatolojiye dair fikirlerini ve yöntemini ileri sürmezden önce, kendine kadar gelmiş olan görüşleri titiz biçimde incelemiş, bu görüşlerden bazılarını benimsemiş, bazılarını ise bilimsel olduğu kadar felsefi anlamda da eleştirmiştir. Bu makale, söz konusu eleştirilerden birini, Jaspers’in Emil Kraepelin eleştirisini ele almaktadır. Jaspers, Kraepelin’i iki temel noktada eleştirmiştir. İlk eleştiri zihinsel hastalıkların sınıflandırılması ya da diğer bir ifadeyle psikiyatri nozolojisi ile ilgilidir. Jaspers’e göre Kraepelin’in nozolojisi son derece keskin, mutlak ve katı bir sınıflandırmadır. İkinci eleştiri ise beyin odaklı psikiyatri araştırmaları ile ilgilidir. Jaspers’e göre Kraepelin zihinsel hastalıkların nedenlerini beyinde lokalize etme yöntemini benimseyen somatik görüşe fazlasıyla bağlı kalmıştır. Diğer taraftan, Kraepelin’in kendi ifadelerine bakıldığında, bu türden bir düşünceyi savunmadığı görülmektedir. Kraepelin, Jaspers’in kendisini temsil ettiği gibi, ne son derece biçimsel bir nozolojiyi, ne de beyin odaklı araştırmaların indirgemeci tutumunu benimsemiştir. Bu anlamda Jaspers’in Kraepelin tasviri ile Kraepelin’in gerçek diyebileceğimiz yüzü arasında önemli farklılıklar bulunmaktadır. Makalede Jaspers’in Kraepelin tasvirinin neden uygun bir biçimde Kraepelin’i yansıtmadığı ele alınacak ve sonuç bölümünde bu hatalı tasvire sebebiyet vermiş olduğu iki ihtimal üzerinde durulacaktır.

Anahtar Kelimeler

• Bilim Tarihi
• Bilim Felsefesi
• Psikiyatri Tarihi
• Psikiyatri Felsefesi
• Karl Jaspers
• Emil Kraepelin.

Jaspers and Kraepelin: Re-evaluating a Controversy in the History of Psychiatry

Öz

Karl Jaspers, known for his contributions to philosophy, was also recognized in his early intellectual career for his studies in psychopathology. Before proposing his ideas and methods for psychopathology, Jaspers examined existing views in the field, adopted some, and critiqued others both scientifically and philosophically. This article focuses on one such critique—Jaspers’ criticism of Emil Kraepelin. Jaspers criticized Kraepelin on two main points. The first concerns the classification of mental illness, i.e., psychiatric nosology. According to Jaspers, Kraepelin’s nosology was excessively sharp, absolute, and rigid. The second criticism relates to brain-focused research in psychiatry. According to Jaspers, Kraepelin adhered too strongly to a somatic view, seeking to localize mental illnesses in specific brain regions. However, a close reading of Kraepelin’s own writings suggests otherwise. Kraepelin did not, in fact, advocate a strictly formal nosology or a reductionist, brain-centered view of psychiatry as Jaspers claimed. In this sense, there are significant differences between the real Kraepelin, and the version presented by Jaspers. This paper will explore why Jaspers’ portrayal of Kraepelin fails to accurately reflect the historical Kraepelin. It will also consider two possible explanations for this misrepresentation.

Anahtar Kelimeler

• Philosophy of Science
• History of Psychiatry
• Philosophy of Psychiatry
• Karl Jaspers
• Emil Kraepelin.

Kaynakça

1. Ackerknecht, E. H. (1943). Psychopathology, Primitive Medicine and Primitive Culture. Bulletin of the History of Medicine, 14(1), 30–67.
2. Berrios, G. E. (1992). Phenomenology, psychopathology and Jaspers: a conceptual history. History of Psychiatry, 3(11), 303–327. https://doi.org/10.1177/0957154x9200301103
3. Berrios, G. E. (2013). Jaspers and the first edition of ‘Allgemeine Psychopathologie’. British Journal of Psychiatry, 202(6), 433. https://doi.org/10.1192/bjp.bp.112.123646
4. Berrios, G. E., & Hauser, R. (1988). The early development of Kraepelin’s ideas on classification: a conceptual history. Psychological Medicine, 18(4), 813–821. https://doi.org/10.1017/S0033291700009740
5. Braceland, F. J. (1957). Kraepelin, his system and his influence. The American Journal of Psychiatry, 113(10), 871–876. https://doi.org/10.1176/ajp.113.10.871
6. Bromberg, W. (1975). From Shaman to Psychotherapist: A History of the Treatment of Mental Illness. Chicago, IL: Henry Regnery.
7. Broome, M. (2013). Jaspers and neuroscience. One century of Karl Jaspers’ general psychopathology (eds. G. Stanghellini & T. Fuchs, pp. 121–132). Oxford: Oxford University Press.
8. Decker, H. S. (2007). How Kraepelinian was Kraepelin? How Kraepelinian are the neo-Kraepelinians? — from Emil Kraepelin to DSM-III. History of Psychiatry, 18(3), 337–360. https://doi.org/10.1177/0957154X07078976

9. Diethelm, O. (1939). An Historical View of Somatic Treatment in Psychiatry. American Journal of Psychiatry, 95(5), 1165–1179. https://doi.org/10.1176/ajp.95.5.1165
10. Ebert, A. & Bär, K. (2010). Emil Kraepelin: A pioneer of scientific understanding of psychiatry and psychopharmacology. Indian Journal of Psychiatry, 52(2), 191–192, https://doi.org/10.4103/0019-5545.64591
11. Engstrom, E. J. & Kendler, K. S. (2015). Emil Kraepelin: Icon and Reality. American Journal of Psychiatry, 172(12), 1190–1196. https://doi.org/10.1176/appi.ajp.2015.15050665
12. Engstrom, E. J., Weber, M. M., & Burgmair, W. (2006). Emil Wilhelm Magnus Georg Kraepelin (1856–1926). American Journal of Psychiatry, 163(10), 1710. https://doi.org/10.1176/ajp.2006.163.10.1710
13. Erkoç, Ş. & Artvinli, F. (2023). Osmanlı-Türk psikiyatrisinde Kraepelin. Osmanlı Bilimi Araştırmaları, 24(2), 627–672. https://doi.org/10.26650/oba.1285039
14. Fuchs, T. (2014). Brain mythologies. Jaspers’ critique of reductionism from a current perspective. Karl Jaspers’ philosophy and psychopathology. (eds. T. Fuchs, T. Breyer, & C. Mundt, pp. 75–85). Heidelberg: Springer.
15. Ghaemi, S.N. (2009). Nosologomania: DSM & Karl Jaspers’ Critique of Kraepelin. Philosophy, Ethics, and Humanities in Medicine, 4(10). https://doi.org/10.1186/1747-5341-4-10
16. Hamilton, M. W. (1965). Karl Jaspers. British Journal of Psychiatric Social Work, 8(2), 46–49.
17. Haustgen, T. (2016). The languages of psychiatry, from Pinel to the DSM. PSN, Selected Articles, 4, 45–57.
18. Heckers, S. & Kendler, K. S. (2020). The evolution of Kraepelin's nosological principles. World Psychiatry, 19(3), 381–388. https://doi.org/10.1002/wps.20774
19. Hoff, P. (1998). Emil Kraepelin and forensic psychiatry. International journal of law and psychiatry, 21(4), 343–353. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0160-2527(98)00025-9
20. Jaspers, K. (1912/1968). The phenomenological approach in psychopathology. The British Journal of Psychiatry, 114(516), 1313–1323. https://doi.org/10.1192/bjp.114.516.1313
21. Jaspers, K. (1957). Philosophical autobiography. The philosophy of Karl Jaspers (ed. Paul A. Schilpp, pp. 3–94). New York: Tudor Publishing Company.
22. Jaspers, K. (1913/1963). General Psychopathology. (trans. by J. Hoenig & M. W. Hamilton). Chicago: University of Chicago Press,.
23. Kendler, K. S. & Engstrom, E. J. (2018). Criticisms of Kraepelin’s Psychiatric Nosology: 1896–1927. American Journal of Psychiatry, 175(4), 316–326. https://doi.org/10.1176/appi.ajp.2017.17070730
24. Kendler, K. S. (2020). Phillipe Pinel and the foundations of modern psychiatric nosology. Psychological Medicine, 50(16), 2667–2672. https://doi.org/10.1017/S0033291720004183
25. Kihlstrom, J. F. (2002). To honor Kraepelin...: From symptoms to pathology in the diagnosis of mental illness. Rethinking the DSM: A psychological perspective (eds. L. E. Beutler & M. L. Malik, pp. 279–303). American Psychological Association (APA). https://doi.org/10.1037/10456-011
26. Kolle, K. (1957) Karl Jaspers as psychopathologist. The philosophy of Karl Jaspers (ed. Paul A. Schilpp, pp. 437–466). New York: Tudor Publishing Company.
27. Kraepelin, E. (1893). Psychiatrie: Ein kurzes Lehrbuch für Studirende und Aerzte, Leipzig: Verlag von Ambr. Abel.
28. Kraepelin, E. (1987). Memoirs. (trans. by C. Wooding-Deane, eds. H. Hippius, G. Peters & D. Ploog D). Berlin: Springer-Verlag.
29. Kraepelin, E. (1887/2005). The Directions of Psychiatric Research, (trans. by. E. J. Engstrom & M. M. Weber). History of Psychiatry, 16(3), 350–364. https://doi.org/10.1177/0957154X0501600306
30. Kraepelin, E. (1910). Psychiatrie. Ein Lehrbuch für Studierende und Ärzte. Achte, vollständig umgearbeitete Auflage. II. Band. Klinische Psychiatrie. I. Teil. Leipzig: Verlag vJA Barth.
31. Kraepelin, E. (1918/1962). One Hundred Years of Psychiatry (trans. by W. Baskin). London: Peter Owen.
32. Lehmann, H. E & Ban, T. A. (1997). The History of the Psychopharmacology of Schizophrenia. The Canadian Journal of Psychiatry, 42(2), 152–162. https://doi.org/10.1177/070674379704200205
33. Marneros, A. (2008). Psychiatry’s 200th birthday. British Journal of Psychiatry, 193(1), 1–3. https://doi.org/10.1192/bjp.bp.108.051367
34. Marx, O. M. (1972). Wilhelm Griesinger and the History of Psychiatry: A Reassessment. Bulletin of the History of Medicine, 46(6), 519–544.
35. Moskowitz, A. (2011). Schizophrenia, Trauma, Dissociation, and Scientific Revolutions, Journal of Trauma & Dissociation, 12(4), 347–357. https://doi.org/10.1080/15299732.2011.573770
36. Müller, U., Fletcher, P.C. & Steinberg, H. (2006). The origin of pharmacopsychology: Emil Kraepelin’s experiments in Leipzig, Dorpat and Heidelberg (1882–1892), Psychopharmacology, 184, 131–138. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00213-005-0239-5
37. Pauly, P. J. (1983). The Political Structure of the Brain: Cerebral Localization in Bismarckian Germany. International Journal of Neuroscience, 21(1–2), 145–149. https://doi.org/10.3109/00207458308986130
38. Ploog, D. (1999). Die Deutsche Forschungsanstalt/Das Max-Planck-Institut für Psychiatrie, Fortschritte der Neurologie und Psychiatrie, 67(12): 529–539.
39. Rosiou, E., Sgantzos, M., Abatzoglou, G., Papavramidou, N. & Markos, S. (2024). Bénédict Augustin Morel (1809-1873): The Originator of the Degenerative Theory of the Heredity of Mental Disorders and the Pioneer of the Biological Approach to Psychiatry. Cureus, 16(9). https://doi.org/10.7759/cureus.69523
40. Rössler, W., Riecher-Rössler, A., & Meise, U. (1994). Wilhelm Griesinger and the Concept of Community Care in 19th-Century Germany. Psychiatric Services, 45(8), 818–822. https://doi.org/10.1176/ps.45.8.8
41. Rybakowski, J. K. (2019). 120th Anniversary of the Kraepelinian Dichotomy of Psychiatric Disorders. Current Psychiatry Reports, 21, 65. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11920-019-1048-6
42. Steinberg H. (2015) Emil Kraepelin’s ideas on transcultural psychiatry. Australasian Psychiatry, 23(5), 531–535. https://doi.org/10.1177/ 1039856215590253
43. Steinberg, H. & Angermeyer, M. C. (2001). Emil Kraepelin's years at Dorpat as professor of psychiatry in nineteenth-century Russia. History of Psychiatry 12(47:3), 297–327. https://doi.org/10.1177/0957154X0101204703
44. Steinberg, H. & Himmerich, H. (2013). Emil Kraepelin's habilitation and his thesis: A pioneer work for modern systematic reviews, psychoimmunological research and categories of psychiatric diseases, The World Journal of Biological Psychiatry, 14(4), 248–257, https://doi.org/10.3109/15622975.2011.623717
45. Taylor, M. A. & Vaidya, N. A. (2008). A history of psychiatric classification. İçinde Descriptive Psychopathology: The Signs and Symptoms of Behavioral Disorders (22–52). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
46. van Praag, H. M. (2008). Kraepelin, biological psychiatry, and beyond. European Archives of Psychiatry and Clinical Neuroscience, 258 (2), 29–32. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00406-008-2006-1
47. Weissmann, G. (2008). Citizen Pinel and the madman at Bellevue. The FASEB Journal, 22(5), 1289–1293.
48. Zilboorg, G. (1941) A History of Medical Psychology. New York, Norton.