This week we are happy to have Christophe Gauld and colleagues presenting a recent paper investigating philosophical conceptual competence among French psychiatrists.
 |
| Christophe Gauld |
A recent international study published in L’Encéphale aim to offer an overview of how psychiatry residents and psychiatrists in France relate to conceptual and philosophical aspects of their discipline. Based on responses from 353 participants, the survey highlights a strong endorsement (over 90%) for integrating philosophy into psychiatry curricula, with a more cautious self-assessment of conceptual confidence.
This result highlights a situation where interest and perceived importance coexist with limited perceived preparedness. While 80% support the development of specific conceptual skills, many respondents report uncertainty or limited familiarity with the relevant philosophical frameworks. Such findings suggest that the place of conceptual reflection in psychiatric training remains potentially underdeveloped and would benefit from clearer educational pathways.
Philosophy of psychiatry is concerned with how we understand mental health and illness, not just through clinical categories or biological mechanisms, but also through the frameworks we use to define, explain and engage with these conditions. Issues such as the status of psychiatric diagnoses, the role of values in clinical reasoning, or the diversity of explanatory models are regularly encountered in practice, even if not always explicitly addressed.
In this study, participants were invited to evaluate their engagement with three types of conceptual competences: integration (how often they consider conceptual issues in their training and clinical reasoning), execution (their confidence in applying such reasoning), and knowledge (their agreement with key philosophical insights). While knowledge scored relatively high, confidence in applying these competences remained limited. One notable result, for instance, is that only 4.2% of participants strongly agreed that they feel confident identifying the assumptions that shape their clinical approach.
The study also explored how clinicians conceptualize psychiatric conditions. Among six descriptors presented, “disorder” and “dysfunction” were the most commonly endorsed. This pattern suggests that psychiatric conditions are primarily seen in terms of functional deviation – rather than biological disease or social meaning. Such tendencies echo debates in philosophy of psychiatry (e.g., related to the prominence of frameworks such as Wakefield’s harmful dysfunction analysis, even when not explicitly named).
Finally, the study confirms that familiarity with philosophical issues is associated with higher self-reported competence across all dimensions. Age and level of training, by contrast, were not predictive. This reinforces the idea that exposure to these debates (whether through teaching, discussion, or interdisciplinary work) can make a tangible difference.
In response to this need, several programs have emerged internationally to support conceptual reflection in psychiatry, including electives, reading groups, and dedicated courses. In France, the inter-university diploma "Philosophies de la psychiatrie" has developed an interesting curriculum that combines theoretical knowledge with reflective and experiential learning.
Rather than treating philosophy as an abstract concern, this work shows its relevance for clinical care and education. By clarifying the tools and perspectives available, and sustaining reflective practice, philosophy can contribute meaningfully to how psychiatry understands itself, and how it evolves.