
David Brooks has done it again. In his New York Times op-ed column last Monday, Brooks portrayed psychiatry as a “semi-science” suffering from “Physics Envy.” He pointed to the publication of the latest edition of the Diagnostic and Statistical Manual—or DSM-5—as evidence that psychiatry misrepresents itself as hard science. The column opens, “We’re living in an empirical age,” and it goes south from there. (Does he really not know that empiricism as the basis of science dates at least to the seventeenth century? Or is his definition of “age” so broad as to be meaningless? “We’re living in an empirical age,” declared William Bradford, as he stepped off the Mayflower, citing the observations of the moon, sun, planets, and stars over the previous decade by the Italian astronomer and mathematician Galileo Galilei.)
Physicists and biologists, Brooks continues, “have established a distinctive model of credibility,” whereas “the people in the human sciences have tried to piggyback on this authority model.” If by “piggyback on this authority model” he means “emulate the scientific method,” then yes, I would agree. In my experience, scientists do tend to try to be scientific.