Talk:Neurosis

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Jump to: navigation, search
WikiProject Guild of Copy Editors
WikiProject icon A version of this article was copy edited by Wahrmund, a member of the Guild of Copy Editors, on October 2, 2014. The Guild welcomes all editors with a good grasp of English and Wikipedia's policies and guidelines to help in the drive to improve articles. Visit our project page if you're interested in joining! If you have questions, please direct them to our talk page.
 
WikiProject Medicine / Psychiatry (Rated C-class, Mid-importance)
WikiProject icon This article is within the scope of WikiProject Medicine, which recommends that medicine-related articles follow the Manual of Style for medicine-related articles and that biomedical information in any article use high-quality medical sources. Please visit the project page for details or ask questions at Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Medicine.
C-Class article C  This article has been rated as C-Class on the project's quality scale.
 Mid  This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the project's importance scale.
Taskforce icon
This article is supported by the Psychiatry task force.
 
WikiProject Psychology (Rated C-class, High-importance)
WikiProject icon This article is within the scope of WikiProject Psychology, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Psychology on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.
C-Class article C  This article has been rated as C-Class on the project's quality scale.
 High  This article has been rated as High-importance on the project's importance scale.
 

Note[edit]

Note: psychoanalytic theory is just that, a theory. Are there any cites for the scientific validity of this as a distinction with practical meaning? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 213.253.40.232 (talk) 16:21, 11 November 2002 (UTC)

It's kind of grandfathered in due to the efforts of the psychoanalytic movement (who are considered to be scientists). Obviously there are some serious difficulties with scientific proof. Fredbauder 18:44 Nov 10, 2002 (UTC)

Homosexuality[edit]

Is homosexuality a neurosis ? The preceding unsigned comment was added by 205.205.59.15 (talk • contribs) 16:25, 1 August 2003 (UTC).

If you're a homophobe, or a fundamentalist bible-thumping evangelist, then yes :D --Easty 13:48, 28 Oct 2004 (UTC)
So which were the authors of the early DSMs? —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 68.22.19.194 (talk) 21:33, 2 January 2007 (UTC).
Both!--66.108.140.89 (talk) 13:43, 13 March 2009 (UTC)
I thought neuroses were caused by conflicts between the Id and the Ego, at least according to Freud. --Easty 13:50, 28 Oct 2004 (UTC)
It can be, but often isn't. Depends on the person, situation. It's possible some neuroses (likely about sex) can drive an otherwise heterosexual person to homosexuality. But there are also many homosexuals whose sexual identity doesn't coincide with any neurosis at all. Sexuality is not a black-and-white thing as most ppl think, and a great many factors come into play. There is no simple yes/no answer to that question. --DanielCD 17:10, 14 December 2005 (UTC)
No. The findings of the majority of the medical and scientific community is that it is not, and no, it isn't a yes/no issue or a gray area. If you're talking about the opinions of people who cant make up their mind, then yes.. but if we are talking about actual homosexuality, then the answer is a clear "no"... it is not a neurotic condition whatsoever, and is merely a biological and evolutionary condition and a common trait among mammals. Further discussion can be found in this video: Is Homosexuality a Choice? The video clearly states that the very institutions responsible for the classifications of neurotic conditions (which, by the way, no longer use the term "neurosis") have made it clear that homosexuality is in no way a neurotic condition in all official statements, based on all scientific findings.Radical Mallard (talk) 18:01, 13 December 2010 (UTC)

Dr. Arthur Janov[edit]

COULD IT BE POSSIBLE THAT AN ALCOHOLIC, BEING IN AA TURNS TO BE A "NEUROTIC"? AM I WRONG IN THINKING THAT A NEUROTIC IS ALWAYS FINDING FAULT AND VERBALLY ATTACKING HIS-HER SPOUSE AND CHILDREN? IS THERE SOMETHING THAT CAN BE DONE? THANK YOU VERY MUCH. AME

To cite Dr. Arthur Janov is maybe not a very good idea, as his research may be questionable. See the talk page on his wikipedia entry.
There are substantial differences between neurotic people, depending which mental disorders they have and what other facets of their personality exist. Many neurotics are alcoholics, but most are not. Being over-critical of others and being verbally abusive is the case with some neurotics, but most do not do this. Jim Michael (talk) 19:36, 9 October 2012 (UTC)

Definition[edit]

I deleted the dictionary definition the preceeded the article. The definitions given for 'neurotic' should just not be there. Furthermore, the definition given for neurosis adds nothing new to the article and provides a more limited definition than that given by the article. It also does not function well as an overview of the term, since the first two sentences of the first paragraph do just that (and do it better). --Nuplex 18:02, 17 Apr 2006

Psychology, psychiatry, clinical psychologist - clarify meaning[edit]

I am not happy with claims in this article that Psychoanalysis is not to be confused with Psychology or Psychiatry, or that the word neurosis is not now used in English speaking countries in Psychology. Psychology is surely the generic catch-all heading and must not be abused by allowing it to describe a formal branch of something (psychology?). Arthur Janov, for example, comes under the heading of Psychologist (and Psychiatrist) as far as I am concerned. To treat Psychologist as a strict job description is like allowing the word Physicist to become hijacked by a group of alchemists (Newton was an alchemist, but he was also a physicist). This hijacking is rife in psychology, for example clinical psychologist is taken to specify a particular training now in the UK, leaving no term for the general clinical practise of psychology. Psychodynamics is similarly hijacked by Psychoanalysis. --Memestream 20:18, 14 May 2007 (UTC)

What about Freud?![edit]

Hello

it seems rather strange to have a page on neurosis without at least an outline of Freud's theories of neurosis, and yet with a summary of Jung's views on the subject. I am not personally qualified to do this, but I hope somebody can be found to do it, without which this page remains incomplete.

Peter Coville

I have to agree, it was Freud's theory of neurosis that is prevalent today not Jung's views. Jung as far as this term is concerned is irrelevant.142.150.48.174 (talk) 23:20, 14 July 2008 (UTC)


Here's a good summary of Freud's views:[edit]

"It was discovered that a person becomes neurotic because he cannot tolerate the amount of frustration which society imposes on him in the service of its cultural ideals, and it was inferred from this that the abolition or reduction of those demands would result in a return to possibilities of happiness." Freud ( Civilizations and Its Discontents, III, p 275)\ —Preceding unsigned comment added by 70.27.145.80 (talk) 18:56, 7 March 2010 (UTC)

Definition of "neurosis"[edit]

"Neurosis, also known as psychoneurosis or neurotic disorder, is a "catch all" term that refers to any mental imbalance that causes distress, but, unlike a psychosis or some personality disorders, does not prevent rational thought or an individual's ability to function in daily life." (emphasis mine)

It was my understanding that neuroses could affect an individual's ability to function in daily life, in the worst cases leading to inevitable failure in many everyday endeavors. Twin Bird 06:12, 6 July 2007 (UTC)

Types of neurosis[edit]

there are different types of neurosis  

1.... pyschoneurosis,anxiety [the ones i m 2....psychoneurosis,manic depressive sufferin from] —Preceding unsigned comment added by 59.183.165.171 (talk) 09:34, 26 September 2007 (UTC)

Treatment[edit]

It would be nice if we could get a source, gonna quote the article "Some studies show no benefit is gained from talk therapies. However, some benefit is gained from other kinds of untrained personal companionship and discussion". It bashes psychotherapy and psychiatry with no actual proof and saying that is kinda risky. I say we should modify or delete that section, Tarot cards FTW! >_> —Preceding unsigned comment added by 201.160.145.42 (talk) 21:16, 13 November 2007 (UTC)

Suggested correction by FireRaider. Somebody fix it if needed![edit]

In the main article: "I have frequently become neurotic when wrong answers to the questions of life (Jung, [1961] 1989:140)."

I seriously believe there is a verb missing at the end of that sentence. Somebody do something about it... —Preceding unsigned comment added by Fireraider (talkcontribs) 20:03, 29 November 2007 (UTC)

No verb missing at the end of the sentence... but quite a few words were removed by a vandal that nobody apparently caught. It's been restored.--Isotope23 talk 20:40, 29 November 2007 (UTC)

Yes check.svg Done

Clarification on where the term is still in use[edit]

Those who retain a psychoanalytical perspective, which would include a majority of psychologists in countries such as France, continue to use the term 'neurosis'.

Countries such as France? This is a kind of useless definition. Meaning socialist countries? I don't know if that's true and is it even really true on a nationwide level in France? I don't know enough to answer it, but it would be better to have something like, "psychologists that follow..." some psychologist or school of psychoanalysis. Prayformojo (talk) 02:24, 26 January 2008 (UTC)

Neurosis the term is the one of the only terms that survived past the era of Freudian psychology. Its widely used in many fields of psychology and country as no relevance. It is widely used in modern psychology.142.150.48.174 (talk) 23:19, 14 July 2008 (UTC)

Jung's theory of neurosis[edit]

As a complete outsider... I am wonder if Jung's theory of neurosis deserves to be in this article. It seems kind of pseudo-sciency and the link to Jung's theory of neurosis only provides a page that seems not to be of great importance and only cites a few sources, all of which are of Jung himself. Jason Quinn (talk) 12:55, 5 February 2009 (UTC)

Hi Jason. Jung employed the term in his system of thought and therapy, so, yeah, something about his use would be appropriate here. Absence of scientific rigor shouldn't exclude him. Anthony (talk) 14:30, 11 May 2009 (UTC)

Neurosis and magnification or exaggeration[edit]

er dont neurotics blow things out of proportion, exaggerate or magnify minor problems ? nothing about this here--Penbat (talk) 11:34, 31 January 2010 (UTC)

This could very well describe people with Borderline Personality Disorder, or Anxiety. In some cases it may be a symptom of Narcissism.Radical Mallard (talk) 01:50, 14 December 2010 (UTC)

Term no longer officially used by psychiatrists[edit]

It's important to make it clear that the term is no longer used officially by licensed psychiatrists, and people who are Freudists or Jungists and so on, who practice non licensed, non evidence based (new age) medicine and people who simply prefer to pick and choose what to believe in (I know many of us go through periods of life like that) should accept that it is no longer an officially used term. I have asked about it's use in a number of hospitals and licensed psychiatric persons I have met and they have said the term is no longer used. If anyone wishes to say the term is still officially in use they should specifically identify who uses it and why. While i think people like to use easy labels to describe human beings, it's apparent that the catch-all term has done more to confuse the issue and cause adverse results for people with psychiatric conditions. The problem is that "neurosis" describes a number of different conditions and it has proven to be better to simply say "a psychiatric condition" or "has undergone a trauma". There is a big problem of the people who follow philosophical or ideological trends (where a specific person or guru says what is right or wrong with people) vs actual scientific findings, procedures and results. Philosophers or Ideologues will tend to wish to keep around terms that have become outdated or have a stigma attached to them, while the scientific community functions well by abandoning scientific dead-ends. This explains in part why the term "Neurosis" is no longer officially used. Radical Mallard (talk) 18:11, 13 December 2010 (UTC)

Broken link[edit]

The Link to the medical dictionary is broken. Also, it would be nice to have an explanation as to what the condition is called nowadays since the article mentions the deprecation of the term so prominently. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 82.82.91.2 (talk) 07:42, 27 February 2011 (UTC)

Hmmm, that dictionary seems to have been taken offline. Graham87 13:59, 27 February 2011 (UTC)

Just wondering...[edit]

I'm not the smartest person, but...

Symptoms: "anxiety, sadness or depression, anger, irritability, mental confusion, low sense of self-worth, etc., behavioral symptoms such as phobic avoidance, vigilance, impulsive and compulsive acts, lethargy, etc., cognitive problems such as unpleasant or disturbing thoughts, repetition of thoughts and obsession, habitual fantasizing, negativity and cynicism, etc. Interpersonally, neurosis involves dependency, aggressiveness, perfectionism, schizoid isolation, socio-culturally inappropriate behaviors"

yet "behavior is not outside socially acceptable norms" 84.168.101.54 (talk) 22:57, 4 July 2011 (UTC)

Psychoanalytical theory section definition of neurosis[edit]

"poor ability to adapt to one's environment, an inability to change one's life patterns, and the inability to develop a richer, more complex, more satisfying personality."

This can't be right as it assumes ones objective is to adapt. Isn't it often the case in traumatic situations and unpleasant environments that resistance is the objective? Hence not a failure or inability. A neurotic person doesn't necessarily have a "poorer" personality (and by what means is that measured? Too subjective). Isn't someone with that much going on about them a more complex personality? Schpitt (talk) 18:00, 8 April 2012 (UTC)

Bias in the definition[edit]

"Neurosis is a class of functional mental disorders involving distress but neither delusions nor hallucinations, whereby behavior is not outside socially acceptable norms"

Does anyone else see the problem with this definition? Can "outside socially acceptable norms" really be used? We all know that what is socially acceptable is not necessarily healthy. Many cultural norms are self defeating and encourage neurosis. Also, cultural norms varie greatly from place to place. None of the greatest minds in history followed the "social norms". Can't we just change that bit to something like "whereby behavior causes the individual unnecessary suffering and is impractical". — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2.97.254.158 (talk) 16:49, 18 October 2012 (UTC)

It is sourced content though, and I think the point of "not outside socially acceptable norms" is that this is one of the distinctions between neurosis and psychosis. When behavior is outside socially accepted norms, we could suspect psychosis. There is more to say about this, but I can't find the right words right now. Lova Falk talk 18:27, 18 October 2012 (UTC)

Should the symptom "vigilance" be termed "hyper-vigilance" or "hypervigilance"?[edit]

That's the way it's usually presented, no? Benvhoff (talk) 02:58, 21 October 2012 (UTC)

I think this is a typo, after rereading the wiki article on hypervigilance so I'm going to edit "vigilance" to "hypervigilance". Benvhoff (talk) 03:06, 21 October 2012 (UTC)

Even though I agree with you that hypervigilance makes more sense than vigilance, this is a direct quote, and writing vigilance instead of hypervigilance is not the kind of typo we can just correct. So it seems our options are to remove the quote, or to replace it with a better one. Lova Falk talk 08:31, 21 October 2012 (UTC)