Context: Aristotle, 2000 years ago, was asking how is the mind attached to the body. We are asking the question still.
Objectives: The main objective of this paper is to assess the changes in the understanding of the mind-brain problem in last 100 years. This was done by comparing a number of writings about the physical basis of mind and philosophy of mind at the beginning of last century with the current literature on these topics. Implications of such a comparison to contemporary clinical psychiatry are discussed.
Key messages: The arguments around the mind-body/brain problem have changed only minimally over the years despite the technological advances in studying the brain. Despite this academic psychiatry has become ever more focused on biological research. Meaningful human behaviour can only partly be explained by non-meaningful entities such as genes and neurotransmitters. An understanding of values, meaning and context is crucial in day to day clinical work. Psychiatric drugs and therapy work largely on account of meanings, expectations and relationships. A full-field or holistic model is discussed as an alternative to biomedical and biopsycho-social models of understanding psychiatric disorders.
Conclusions: Arguments from past and present suggest that clinically, scientifically and conceptually there is no escaping the mind-body problem. A retreat into either extreme, excluding mind or brain, may be equally abusive.
