The periodic revisions of psychiatric classificatory systems always draw sharp criticism that put at stake the very nature of the objects they classify. The recurrent question is: do psychiatric disorders in fact exist or are they merely socially constructed? In this article, our aim is to clarify the underlying assumptions of both the essentialist and the social constructionist positions. We also show that there are conceptual alternatives, such as the practical-kinds model, that move the center of gravity of the nosological discussion away from the nature-versus-social-construction argument.
Psychiatry; nosology; essentialism; practical kinds