Mad or bad: Psychiatry’s foundational divide and the illusion of binary thinking

This paper revisits Philippe Pinel's (1745-1826) psychiatric legacy, on the occasion of the 200th anniversary of his death, to challenge the enduring dichotomy between madness and criminality. While Pinel is celebrated for separating the insane from the criminal, his deeper insight - that madness is always partial and never fully negates agency - has been largely overlooked. Drawing on this dialectical view, the paper critiques the persistence of rigid classifications in psychiatry and forensic contexts. It argues for a model of mental illness as a dynamic interplay between vulnerability and self-awareness, with profound implications for clinical practice, legal judgment, and public perception. By highlighting psychiatry's double bind - caught between therapeutic nuance and legal absolutism - the paper calls for a renewed ethical stance that embraces complexity and reclaims psychiatry's role as a bridge-builder rather than a boundary enforcer.

Authors

Institutions

Publication Details

Journal
European Psychiatry
Published
2025-01-01
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1192/j.eurpsy.2025.10054
Primary Topic
Mental Health and Psychiatry
Type
article
Field-Weighted Citation Impact
0.00
Controls
|||
ALL TIME
JAN
FEB
MAR
APR
MAY
JUN
JUL
AUG
SEP
OCT
article

Mad or bad: Psychiatry’s foundational divide and the illusion of binary thinking

Giovanni Stanghellini
European Psychiatry
Mental Health and Psychiatry
article

Mad or bad: Psychiatry’s foundational divide and the illusion of binary thinking

Giovanni Stanghellini
article en

Abstract

This paper revisits Philippe Pinel's (1745-1826) psychiatric legacy, on the occasion of the 200th anniversary of his death, to challenge the enduring dichotomy between madness and criminality. While Pinel is celebrated for separating the insane from the criminal, his deeper insight - that madness is always partial and never fully negates agency - has been largely overlooked. Drawing on this dialectical view, the paper critiques the persistence of rigid classifications in psychiatry and forensic contexts. It argues for a model of mental illness as a dynamic interplay between vulnerability and self-awareness, with profound implications for clinical practice, legal judgment, and public perception. By highlighting psychiatry's double bind - caught between therapeutic nuance and legal absolutism - the paper calls for a renewed ethical stance that embraces complexity and reclaims psychiatry's role as a bridge-builder rather than a boundary enforcer.

European PsychiatryVol. 68(1)
University of Florence (IT), Universidad Diego Portales (CL)
Reduced inequalities
Openalex Percentile: Top 84%
Mental Health and Psychiatry
AI Navigator

Ask Laika to Summarize, Analyze, and Connect papers live on the map.

Summarize Papers & Methodologies

Extract key findings, datasets, and comparative methods across publications.

Benchmark Rankings & Visual Analytics

Rank top research institutions, authors, funders, topics, and journals by Field-Weighted Citation Impact (FWCI) and paper volume with instant charts.

Connect Distant Disciplines

Bridge topological clusters on the map to find hidden collaborative intersections.

Mad or bad: Psychiatry’s foundational divide and the illusion of binary thinking — Giovanni Stanghellini · European Psychiatry (2025) | TGRS Research Map | TGRS