Talk:Karl Menninger

Szasz's Mea Culpa Letter

Is it necessary to have that letter posted in its entirety? Typos 07:40, 14 January 2006 (UTC)

I think not, a simple reference to one of the multitutdes of websites hosting it would be ample. Ifnord 00:16, 15 February 2006 (UTC)

I went ahead and deleted it. Typos 09:34, 17 February 2006 (UTC)

Szaz did not say Mea Culpa. Menninger did. Check facts 2601:6C1:300:B210:18B4:DF20:1F12:89F5 (talk) 18:00, 30 March 2023 (UTC)

Yes, It's Necessary

You simply dislike the content of the letter and wish to add a step in order for people to read it. I didn't appreciate you taking down this important letter by Menninger and an important document in the history of psychiatry. There isn't a court room in the country where the ideas espoused in "The Crime Of Punishment" haven't been put into practice. I think it is important that people see that the most prominent proponent of the insanity defense conceded that he was wrong and his most prominent critic was right. The letter and Szasz's reply are in the public domain and I'm putting it back up. -Chiefbromden

Actually, I don't particularly care for Menninger's arguments myself. My objection to the section you add, is that first, it distorts Menninger's views (he never claimed everybody was mentally ill) and second, it turns the article into a paean to Szasz. Mentioning the letter is fine, but having it occupy two-thirds of the article is excessive. You're not a Scientologist perchance? Typos 06:27, 16 May 2006 (UTC)

I now realize that it was brother William Menninger who said that everybody is mentally ill (Mental health problems do not affect three or four out of every five persons but one out of one). Brother Karl differed in that he believed "most" people are mentally ill: "Gone forever is the notion that the mentally ill person is an exception. It is now accepted that most people have some degree of mental illness at some time." from the book "The Vital Balance". I still don't believe it is a "distortion" to say that he argued that everybody is mentally ill. The psychiatric enterprise is a project aimed at medicalizing basicaly every aspect of everyday life, a movement that owes a lot to the Menningers.

I do also know what the source is for his argument that all crimes are symptoms of mental illnesses, which is his 1968 book "The Crime Of Punishment". Psychiatrists are going to "prevent" crime by treating it as if it is an illness, Menninger argues throughout that book. The "crime" of punishment is that it amounts to a form of "medical neglect" of a "sick" person, because only a "sick" person would commit a crime. Therefore, we must involuntarily "treat" this "sick" person in order to "prevent" him from reoffending.

The only argument of Menninger's you don't care for the most was the one he made in his letter to Szasz at the end of his life. The one where he clearly says Szasz was right and he was wrong and you simply don't want people to read it. If my edit had been about what a psychiatric saint Menninger was, then you never would have taken the edit down. You show your biased hand when you write that "it turns the article into a paean to Szasz". In other words, anything positive written about Szasz is something you don't want to see in this encyclopedia, even if it is written by the psychiatric saint Karl Menninger.

You show your bigoted hand when you ask "You're not a Scientologist perchance"? A question I don't have to answer anymore than you should have to answer the question "Are you Jewish"?, as if that has anything to do with the questions at hand. You're saying with your question quite clearly that if you criticize psychiatry, you are, therefore, a "Scientologist". For the record Mr. Bigot, Szasz is NOT a Scientologist, but a libertarian and an atheist, and, most importantly, an MD orginally trained in internal medicine. Of course, the fact that he helped found the CCHR with Scientologists makes him a "Scientologist" in the eyes of believers in psychiatry. This is an argument the same level with calling white supporters of the post World War II civil rights movements " lovers".

No judge anywhere can order an innocent person in a civil court proceeding to be imprisoned by Scientologists. But they can order an innocent person to be imprisoned by psychiatrists. That is the issue in this debate, and it is one people like you Mr. Bigot wish to avoid by brining up "Scientology".

The reason why I put the entire contents of the letter up is because of it represents a complete recantation of the views of one of the most important psychiatrists of the 20th century. A man who did and wrote a lot during his long life. The reason why it takes up 2/3 of the entry is because nobody else has added anything else to it. Having the letter on this page is not stopping anybody else from adding any other biographical details for a man who lived a very long and productive life.

Take a look at the link to the letters at Szasz.com and notice the source for wherw it was originally published: "Reading Notes, Bulletin of the Menninger Clinic, Vol. 53, No. 4, July 1989, pp. 350-352". If it can be published by Menninger himself while he was still alive, then why is having it up at Wikipedia such a big deal? You make it clear that it is because you believe in psychiatry and bigotedly paint all critics of psychiatry as "Scientologists".

Is there any way to resovle this matter, instead of going back an forth with taken it down and putting it back up? There is no way I will back down now that I have added the contents of the letter to Menninger's entry. -Chief Bromden

You can stop frothing. Christ. I think you were more bearable on the Lorazepam. Yes I am a bigot. I also enjoy torturing kittens. Cute fluffy kittens. I believe all psychiatrists are saints and Menninger is my personal Jesus Christ. Now that we've covered my character flaws, let's talk about the letter. While I agree that it is significant, it does not warrant taking up more space than the biography itself. I've asked for mediation, but in the meantime I'm reverting. Typos 04:22, 14 June 2006 (UTC)

I think it is very un-encyclopedic to include the contents of the letters in the body of the article. The external link is sufficient. -- Dcflyer 10:57, 14 June 2006 (UTC)

The second you bring up "Scientology" is the second you chose not to have any polite discussion about the subject Typos. I didn't say one thing about any "character flaws" you might have, but rather I'm simply commenting on what you believe. I said you're question amounts to an ad hominem attack on critics of psychiatry as all being "Scientologists". It's classic bigoted reductionism. We just don't share the same values.

Where does it specifically say in any of the style guidelines that you can't include the contents of a letter anywhere? I've only given them a brief glance and I don't have the time to read them carefully right now. But if they don't say so, then it's going back up until they do. If it does, then I'll just edit the letters out of my edit and provide a brief summary of Menninger's recantation of his life's work. -Chief Bromden

Actually this discussion left the realm of civility when you started assuming bad faith (which was, incidentally, pretty much immediately). If you must know, my beliefs line up closer to Szasz than with Menninger. His conception of a crime-free "utopia" seems more Orwellian than anything I could imagine. So you can stop ascribing intent or belief to me. And for what its worth, I regret bringing up Scientology. Typos 06:46, 17 June 2006 (UTC)

Mediation

Hi, I am Adam and I have taken this case. The details of the request for mediation are at 2006-06-14 Karl Menninger.

During this mediation please refrain from editing the article.

Please try to keep your discussion concise and to the point. Please read and remember WP:No personal attacks. Comments about Scientologists, bigots, medications needed, and general sarcasm will not be tolerated.

Please sign your name using four tildes (~~~~); this will automatically produce your name and a timestamp.

It seems to me Chief Bromden's closing sentence outlines a possible compromise. Is this course of action acceptable to both sides? Ideogram 12:31, 15 June 2006 (UTC)

Instead of including the entire letter, why not just include a brief summary of the two letters, which would include a quotation or two from the letters? How about making it a seperate section at the at end, since it was written at the end of Menninger's life? What could be included in between the bio and the exchange with Szasz would be a section that summarizes Menninger's ideas in his writings. I think it would be helpful for the reader to know that the letter to Szasz didn't come out of nowhere, but represented a life time of thought about the issues confronting psychiatry in the 20th century. What one finds when reading, say, "The Crime Of Punishment" is that Menninger didn't actually believe that crime is an illness. Nevertheless, he argued that it should be seen as illness anyway, because public opinion demands that it be seen as an illness that is treated by doctors. I think it would be self evident to the reader why Menninger would write the letter knowing this. Chiefbromden

BTW don't cut and paste the four tilde text I inserted, that's a form that won't be interpreted. Hit the tilde key (should be top left of your keyboard, shifted) four times. Ideogram 23:27, 16 June 2006 (UTC)

A summary of Szasz's reply should not be included. This article is about Menninger not Szasz. Other than that, the compromise Chief outlined seems acceptable. Typos 06:17, 17 June 2006 (UTC)

Is that acceptable to you Chief Bromden? Ideogram 06:27, 17 June 2006 (UTC)

He seems to have gone away. I will close the case; feel free to leave a note on my talk page if he returns and the compromise is unacceptable. Ideogram 17:29, 21 June 2006 (UTC)

Sorry, I've been away for a while. All right, I'll edit in a brief summary of the exchange and only summarize Menninger's letter. The issue is settled. Chiefbromden

All right, here is the edit I've done regarding the letter. Short and to the point with a brief summary of the contents, ending with a reference to the link to the letter in its entirety. Chiefbromden

This article needs some balance

Karl Menninger is widely understood to be one of the most important names in the history of psychology and a major contributor to our present day understanding of abnormal psychology and psychotheraputic technique. These contributions have been widely recognized for several decades and many challenging clinical successes have been attributed to his pioneering insights. The Menninger article fails to say anything specific about these important insights -- it would be like an article on Christopher Columbus which says only that he was a 15th Century slave trader who has a country named after him. It is astonishing that, in light of the score of books that Menninger has written -- only one of which is mentioned, and without any discussion -- that the article spends so much ink on one letter, a letter that offers scant insight into Menninger's own significance. Szasz, in contrast, is a popular writer of light, easy-reading books that can be read in one sitting. He is primarily a populizer of ideas which should fairly be attributed to certain original thinkers who preceded him, such as Michel Foucault. It is a credit to Meninger, whose work as a whole is more pragmatic than speculative, that he learned to overlook the chaff of Szasz's exhortations and appreciate the kernels. The letter is rather more personal than professional, and more important to Szasz than to Menninger. (69.108.111.150 06:03, 3 April 2007 (UTC)) April 3, 2007

---

I would like to add a quote of Karl Menninger's found in my desk-top calendar today:

"What's done to children they will do to society"

Just thought you'd might like to know... --Polgarahanwi 06:38, 14 May 2007 (UTC)

---

A straight-forward reading of the letter to Szasz makes it clear that it is in no way a substantive concession to Szasz's ideas but rather a collegial reaching out to a long-time adversary in the profession. That this letter and the discussion thereof occupies such a central part of this article is a sad reflection of the zealotry that apparently still afflicts some members of the profession or interested parties. Arnow 06:10, 22 May 2007 (UTC)

agreed--Keerllston 00:57, 21 December 2007 (UTC)

Quotes

This quote is at the beginning of The Chosen by Chaim Potok on the dedication page: "When a trout rising to a fly gets hoooked on a line and finds himself unable to swim about freeely, he begins with a fight which results in struggles and splashes and sometimes an escape. Often, of course, the situation is too tough for him. In the same way the human being struggles with his environment and with the hooks that catch him. Sometimes he masters his difficulties; sometimes they are too much for him. His struggles are all that the world sees and it naturally misunderstands them. It is hard for a free fish to understand what is happening to a hooked one." Dwarf Kirlston 23:52, 4 October 2007 (UTC)

Karl Menninger, addressing the issue of sexual activity between children and adults, once noted that "when the experience actually stimulates the child erotically, it would appear ... that it may favor rather than inhibit the development of social capabilities and mental health in the so-called victims" — Preceding unsigned comment added by 62.228.59.227 (talk) 09:32, 20 February 2014 (UTC)

Finding Sources

Google Search hits:G; Google News (all time) hits:GN;Google Books hits:GB; Google Scholar Hits:GS

["Karl Menninger"] G:48,700; GN:1,220; GB:1005; GS:2,780

--Keerllston 19:57, 19 December 2007 (UTC)

"See Also" section

In the See Also section, there is a link to "Ann Gottesman", but that page has been deleted. Perhaps this link should be removed. Lattefever (talk) 20:50, 31 July 2009 (UTC)Lattefever

The Crime of Punishment

The Crime of Punishment has been published at 1968 (copyrighted 1966). I've this edition of the book on my shelf. Kassie (talk) 19:52, 18 November 2009 (UTC)

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 2 external links on Karl Menninger. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20060216111729/http://www.bartleby.com/65/me/Menninge.html to http://www.bartleby.com/65/me/Menninge.html
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20030430064323/http://www.srmason-sj.org/web/journal-files/Issues/mar03/uzzel.htm to http://www.srmason-sj.org/web/journal-files/Issues/mar03/uzzel.htm

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 18 January 2022).

• If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
• If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 14:32, 6 December 2017 (UTC)