E pluribus unum: Striking back at disunity

Abstract

Examination of the current tendency to emphasize differences in psychiatry leads to the conclusion that there is a vast distance between those differences offering diversity and controversy that enliven and enlighten our professional lives and those born out of personal pique and intellectual obsolescence. For while diversity is essential and controversy invigorating--ideological sniping at one another is destructive, and being behind the times, downright dangerous. The title of may paper--"E Pluribus Unum"--roughly translated means "out of the many--one." It is my contention that sometimes we perceive the differing views of psychiatry as splitting us apart and destroying us, and indeed when they involve sniping and obsolescence, this may be the case. Such a view of each other is, I believe, increasing because of increasing environmental changes--in science, in corporatization, in reimbursement, and in competition. But I believe equally firmly that the solution to these changes lies in our hanging together and conducting effective, cooperative, educational, political action, and ethical activities, rather than cursing either the darkness or each other. Thus, while many wish to emphasize differences, I wish to conclude by emphasizing similarities. We are many, and that diversity and the controversy it engenders is a source of enormous strength. But we are also one, and that identity and cohesiveness can dispel the more destructive types of differences. We must make sure that we remain many, but we must make equally sure that we remain one.