Misdiagnosis Theory proposes the existence of a latent and pernicious Diagnosis Theory in modern culture. Diagnosis Theory is a necessarily latent and non-literary viewpoint or method of explanation. If cultural theorists in the West’s major academic institutions were to fully adopt Diagnosis Theory and treat it as any other lens (such as Feminist Theory or Psychoanalytic Theory), this would itself have effects detrimental to Diagnosis Theory. For one, those in the cultural studies and English Departments receive feedback that is markedly different from the kind of feedback they could expect to receive when touching on gender studies, or when drawing natural connections with psychology or psychiatry departments of different eras. The feedback is not direct, or argumentative. But rather, blame is centered on the humanities for having incautiously stretched young, natural, healthy minds by presenting them with thoughts that might be different. The vehicle for this blame is often within the threat of categorizing individuals within the humanities as deserving to be placed in the category of, in the mind of Diagnosis Theory, rightfully diagnosed patients. And with this is of course the inevitable threat of forced medication, and it’s inevitable concomitant rituals of attack on the autonomy of the noncompliant patient and degradation and desecration of the identity and intelligence of the formerly noncompliant patient once they have surrendered all resistance to degradation and desecration.
The phrase “Diagnosis Theory” may refer, within the medical profession and medical training, to theory relating to how to diagnose or best practices in diagnosis. A pedagogic or professional theory is different from a cultural theory. We hope that calling attention to what we believe is a latent, pernicious and misanthropic doesn’t dissuade any medical student or professional from respecting the study of “Diagnosis Theory” as it relates to the epistemic issues and skills that lead to proper medical diagnoses and improvement in health for medical patients in an ideal fashion. The “Diagnosis Theory” we describe in its sublimated nature is perhaps the opposite of a pedagogic theory, as much as it opposite to Misdiagnosis Theory. It is a way of seeing that is passed along through example, through societal monetary and political pressure, that gets in the way of real diagnosis. Those who are capable of admitting subscribing to or having subscribed to Diagnosis Theory, whether in full or in part, deserve our sympathy and support. In representing Diagnosis Theory, we are not representing how anyone ought to think. But we believe we are representing and explaining how many do think.
We refer to Diagnosis Theory as a latent theory. This is not to suggest that the APA does not have a platform wherein it, with an appearance of coherence to those who subscribe to Diagnosis Theory, lays out some of its beliefs. Rather, we present the dark image of the surviving mass of Diagnosis Theory in our culture much in the same way a diagnostician would present a cancerous growth in the body of a sick patient.
Next: Tenet 1 – Philosophical materialism is superior to philosophical idealism
Or, explore the opposite: Misdiagnosis Theory – Introduction
Misdiagnosed Anonymous 