Scan barcode
watermelleon's reviews
249 reviews
The Psychopath Test by Jon Ronson
3.0
I loved the writing style of this, and because of this it made it an easy read. I know in the past I have really struggled with journalist books but Ronson definitely lays down his thoughts in a really effective way, so I may read more of his books in the future if any topics interest me. (I will note though that this really wasn't laugh out loud funny to me)
HOWEVER.
there was a serious issue with the topic of this one. Guess I should have called it, but a journalist writing a book about psychopathy can only go so far. or at least SHOULD go so far.
In the first year of my psychology degree, we were distinctly warned that although we were learning about many of the items listed in the DSM V we were not in a position where learning this knowledge meant we could go ahead and diagnose anyone unless(or until) we did further education and training to become a psychotherapist. Its a situation of ethics; diagnosing anyone of any condition can have a serious impact on an individual's life almost indefinitely. this is covered sparsely in the book, a little later than necessary, but I felt throughout a little uncomfortable that some man was using a professional checklist to diagnose everyone who he met as a psychopath and write about it in a book.
there were great elements within this book - some good information about previous research was included (most of which I was already aware of, but it was nicely summarised as an introduction for someone interested in the subject). The elements about the historical climb of research in psychology fascinated me, definitely a highlight of this book and perhaps a realm Ronson should have stayed more within in terms of writing. However, I would argue that those interested in this subject may have a better time reading a different book; I am sure there are many other books written by professionals in the field which are just as easy to read but offer a much more reliable insight.
HOWEVER.
there was a serious issue with the topic of this one. Guess I should have called it, but a journalist writing a book about psychopathy can only go so far. or at least SHOULD go so far.
In the first year of my psychology degree, we were distinctly warned that although we were learning about many of the items listed in the DSM V we were not in a position where learning this knowledge meant we could go ahead and diagnose anyone unless(or until) we did further education and training to become a psychotherapist. Its a situation of ethics; diagnosing anyone of any condition can have a serious impact on an individual's life almost indefinitely. this is covered sparsely in the book, a little later than necessary, but I felt throughout a little uncomfortable that some man was using a professional checklist to diagnose everyone who he met as a psychopath and write about it in a book.
there were great elements within this book - some good information about previous research was included (most of which I was already aware of, but it was nicely summarised as an introduction for someone interested in the subject). The elements about the historical climb of research in psychology fascinated me, definitely a highlight of this book and perhaps a realm Ronson should have stayed more within in terms of writing. However, I would argue that those interested in this subject may have a better time reading a different book; I am sure there are many other books written by professionals in the field which are just as easy to read but offer a much more reliable insight.