The Problem of ‘Scientifically Unfounded Attitudes’: A BioPsychoSocial Analysis



A small, but select, number of individuals in our society can be seen to be suffering from the mysterious problem of “Scientifically Unfounded Attitudes“.

This is a significant issue for society as a whole since those afflicted tend to hold high status, influential positions in the academic, state and corporate medical community, and have been complicit in cobbling together a rag bag of ideas (under the guise of a theory) which has had profoundly negative effects on many people’s lives, economically, socially and personally.

This is also true of its effects on taxpayers money, a great deal of which has been wasted on spurious processes whose only objective, it seems, is to channel vast amounts of money into the pockets of private companies. 

So how has this situation arisen?

biopsychosocial model is very helpful in the analysis of these individuals:

First it is necessary to address the ‘bio-medical’ element (in order to get it out of the way, which is the usual concern of these adherents).

Exhaustive medical data is not available for this group, but considering their fairly advanced average age, and the fact that they are still furiously active, and able to travel extensively around the world touting their ‘theories’ suggests that they belong to a privileged sector of the health spectrum.

That is, they are those in whom illness is relatively absent.

This is confirmed visibly by the absence of any ‘aids’ in their conduct of work.

It can be reasonably assumed, then, that they have been in the main favoured with good health.

Further, and here we introduce a social aspect into the analysis, a singular feature which connects all these individuals is their tenancy of high profile positions within state, academic or corporate agencies.

Occupying, as they do, the top strata of the employment scale, which attracts to it a slew of benefits extra to the significantly high salaries these positions command, they are comfortably placed should they ever find the spectre of ill-health casting a shadow across their lives.

This ‘social’ lens, then helps to explain how their distorted perspective on illness may have been reinforced by their privileged social location. The protection of affluence provides an impenetrable buffer against physical or mental affliction.

And it is the second of these, the mental, which perhaps offers the greatest insight into the behaviour and attitudes of this group.

The psychological element of this model is able to highlight the source of shared distortions in beliefs that manifest within this sector of the population. Significantly this group place an excessive value upon psychological explanations of illness.

Perhaps this is an instinctive acknowledgement of the fact that they, themselves, suffer from psychologically deluded ideas about the sources of illness (for reasons not unconnected to their own bio and social circumstances).

Many of them, some explicitly, some tacitly, derive their understanding of illness from what is termed ‘positive’ psychology (or the rather more respectable ‘cognitive behavioural’ theory).

The ideas underpinning this minority field of the discipline is that it is not the circumstances of people’s lives which determine the outcomes for them but their ‘attitude of mind‘.

More rational people consider this ‘wishful thinking’, or when applied to the dire circumstances of some people’s lives by an outside agent, abuse.

Other psychological dysfunctions are also visible among this group, particularly that of the persecution complex which is evidenced in ‘knee-jerk’ responses to any legitimate criticism that those actually suffering from illness have the temerity to raise.

This has been a brief analysis of this afflicted group, but it has also been a demonstration of just how widely it is possible to apply the BPS model.

I believe it has been put to a far more realistic use here than it has by the group in question, who stretch one or two ideas to breaking point in their attempt to legitimise their theories, with their notably unbalanced emphasis on the (out-dated) psychological at the expense of those accompanying elements of the model.

Interestingly, this analysis too has found more significance of the ‘psycho‘ aspect in revealing underlying attitudes and distorted beliefs surrounding an issue.

Perhaps that ultimately is this model’s failing, in that under the aegis of a purported ‘scientific’ paradigm it is able to provide a platform for the legitimisation of any, or all,  biased attitudes.

Hopefully this small exercise will have enlightened people as to the uses to which the BPS model can be put.

Anyone who wishes to give an apparent scientific gloss to their biased propositions need only to remember to quickly dispense with the ‘bio’ and the ‘social’ and focus excessively on the ‘psycho’ where, given its controversial history, psychology is certain to furnish them with something with which to underpin their claims.


5 thoughts on “The Problem of ‘Scientifically Unfounded Attitudes’: A BioPsychoSocial Analysis

  1. jed goodright says:

    If I didn’t know better I’d think that BSP is genius

    We are talking about the British Socialst Party aren’t we?

  2. Laz says:

    Sums up the ConDems perfectly as they do not understand what others have to go through so they apply their own mind set to the problem and get it wrong .
    Primarily they mentaly lack the ability to understand the complexity of problems that face the sick and disabled having a complete lack of empathy to their plight & the open mindedness needed to relate to their issues and instead apply the nose to the grindstone attitude that is fine for the fit and able bodied.
    Actualy bringing manufacturing back to the UK rather than sending it off-site to the cheapest bidder oversease would establish full employment with certain jobs now done by the ablebodied being re-allocated to the semi-disabled with a relativly small amount of intensive training .The whole of our population would therefore benefit with more revenue in the economy for support for the elderly & those mentaly or physicaly unable to work.What would it cost,a little less proffit for already wealthy indaviduals but the gains in these selfless acts would bind the nations people together as a community rather than force it apart as the present system does, everyone would be working together willingly rather than the oppressive bullying methods of the distant past that are being bought into playagain.
    The past speaks for this as the way the people united from all classes and status to fend off the threat of conquest by forces of the Axis powers in WW2 .That was why post War we put certain standards and securities into force to protect the most vulnrable from the pre-war stupidity that was pushing the nation toward a bloody social revolution as happened in other areas of the world.We made the mistake of taking things for granted and are slipping back rather than truely working with an aim for a better existance for all instead of just the few.
    Camerons Big Society is obtainable but not with the methods being used or in the way he probably sees it at the present.Wealth is being taken and possesed by the few ,the more they get the more they want & until it is spread around so the all benefit we will be stuck in the same vicious circle.

  3. Humanity2012 says:

    People have been Far too Complacent in the UK and far too many have Fiddled
    whilst Troy has Burned since the Trojan Horse of the Millionaires Con Dem Regime
    came to Office in May 2010 through an very Unholy Alliance

    Millionaires with their Wealth and Security have Not a Clue about what Existence
    is like for those without their Obscene Amount of Wealth

    We Need to Challenge the Power of the Rich by Redistribution of Wealth from Rich to
    Poor and Insist that any Government in Office Properly Looks After the Poor and
    Vulnerable in the Noble Spirit of Charity and Humanity

Leave a Reply