"The Sixth Coming" or how schizophrenia was born
This kaleidoscopic throwing ended at the 12th International Medical Congress in 1900. It was then that Emil Krepelin presented the next edition of the psychiatric manual he had committed, the second psychiatric revolution, to the general psychiatric public. He combined all of the above-mentioned forms of illness and suggested that they should be referred to as dementia praecox - early dementia. In the sixth edition of the manual, Krepelin made a clear distinction: no matter how the disease begins. It is important how it flows. If it leads to degradation, it should be considered dementia praecox, and if it does not, it should be called manic-depressive psychosis. An important difference between Krepelin considered the presence of "light" intervals. These are persistent remissions, which are not observed during dementia praecox.
The nosological era of psychiatry has begun
Scientists unanimously agreed on a new term and paradigm of disease sharing. For more than a hundred years now, they have been reluctant to give it up, although they regularly rename dementia praecox itself.
Bleuler was the first to rename it, marking it with schizophrenia, which sounds like shizophrenia in German transcription.
Kaleidoscope, however, did not stop turning - in the next editions of the manual Krepelin himself pointed out that even with dementia praecox there are remissions, bordering on complete recovery, and TIR sometimes leads to irreversible changes in the psyche. In general, although the doctrine of schizophrenia was formed at that time, it allowed for reservations at the very beginning.
The psychology of schizophrenia stems from a phenomenon that Krepelin described as a characteristic of schizophrenia, namely splitting. Krepelin spoke of it:
"the loss of the internal and external interrelation of the series of representations"
or just
"loss of inner unity"
He often renounced his previous views unless they were confirmed by observation. He was constantly correcting his own system as soon as new clinical data become available.
As a result, Krepelin's school was a model example of a real, speculative work. Its creator would undoubtedly reject every element of artistic content in his works, as well as the recognition of the artist himself. And yet, like every true pioneer-researcher, he was undoubtedly an artist. But not only in the sense of an exemplary form of presentation of psychological and psychiatric phenomena. He was an artist thanks to his intuition, which allowed him not only to see the general connections but also to predict them.
In this way, the Kreplin system of mental illness was created. The system was soon afterward ridiculed and unrecognized, but went through a triumphant procession through the world.
Without Kreplin, we wouldn't have found a connection between some psychopathic disorders and certain mental features of healthy people. And also to the recognition of mixed psychoses (manic-depressive and schizophrenic forms). It would not be possible to associate the innate characteristics of healthy individuals and some patients with a particular body structure. The work of the clinical school of Krepelin has outlined and studied certain connections of the phenomena.