Research
My Research Program
My research centers on the role that values play in psychiatry and related fields, in keeping with the broader research program of "values in science" within philosophy of science. I have published on such subjects as the inclusion of psychiatrized people in the process of revision of the Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders (DSM), the proper role of values and concepts of well-being in delineating the boundaries of psychiatry, and issues of justice and responsibility in the use of AI chatbots for psychotherapy.
Published Work
Knox, Bennett, Pierce Christoffersen, Kalista Leggitt, Zeia Woodruff, and Matthew H. Haber. (2023). “Justice, Vulnerable Populations, and the Use of Conversational AI in Psychotherapy” — The American Journal of Bioethics 23 (5): 48-50. https://doi.org/10.1080/15265161.2023.2191040.
*Commentary on: Sedlakova, Jana, and Manuel Trachsel. (2023). “Conversational Artificial Intelligence in Psychotherapy: A New Therapeutic Tool or Agent?” The American Journal of Bioethics 23 (5): 4–13. https://doi.org/10.1080/15265161.2022.2048739.*
Abstract: Sedlakova and Trachsel (2023) identify a major benefit of conversational artificial intelligence (CAI) in psychotherapy as its ability to expand access to mental healthcare for vulnerable populations and provide helpful guidance on some ethical issues that arise from the status of CAI as neither a simple tool nor a full agent. However, considerations related to cross-cultural diversity, potential sources of biases against the vulnerable populations that CAI is meant to provide access to, and questions of how to handle responsibility for harms unintentionally inflicted by CAI complicate this picture. In this commentary we discuss some of these complicating factors and provide recommendations about how to proceed with greater attention to issues of justice and accountability in the use of CAI for psychotherapy.
Knox, Bennett. (2023). “The Institutional Definition of Psychiatric Condition and the Role of Well-Being in Psychiatry” — Philosophy of Science 90 (5): 1194-1203. https://doi.org/10.1017/psa.2023.48.
Abstract: This article draws on Kukla’s “Institutional Definition of Health” to provide a definition of “psychiatric condition” that delineates the proper bounds of psychiatry. I argue that this definition must include requirements that psychiatrization of a condition benefit the well-being of (1) the society as a collective and (2) the individual whose condition is in question. I then suggest that psychiatry understand individual well-being in terms of the subjective values of individuals. Finally, I propose that psychiatry’s understanding of collective well-being should be the result of a “socially objective” process and give certain desiderata for this understanding.
Knox, Bennett. (2022). “Exclusion of the Psychopathologized and Hermeneutical Ignorance Threaten Objectivity” — Philosophy, Psychiatry, & Psychology 29 (4): 253-266. https://doi.org/10.1353/ppp.2022.0044.
*Winner of the 2022 Karl Jaspers Award from the Association for the Advancement of Philosophy and Psychiatry (AAPP)*
Abstract: This article brings together considerations from philosophical work on standpoint epistemology, feminist philosophy of science, and epistemic injustice to examine a particular problem facing contemporary psychiatry: the conflict between the conceptual resources of psychiatric medicine and alternative conceptualizations like those of the neurodiversity movement and psychiatric abolitionism. I argue that resistance to fully considering such alternative conceptualizations in processes such as the revision of the Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders emerges in part from a particular form of epistemic injustice (hermeneutical ignorance) leveled against a particular social group (which I call the "psychopathologized"). Further, insofar as the objectivity which psychiatry should aspire to is a kind of "social objectivity" which requires incorporation of various normative perspectives, this particular form of epistemic injustice threatens to undermine its scientific objectivity. Although many questions regarding implementation remain, this implies that psychiatry must grapple substantively with radical reconceptualizations of its domain if it is to achieve legitimate scientific objectivity.
Knox, Bennett. (2022). “Standards and Assumptions, the Limits of Inclusion, and Pluralism in Psychiatry” — Philosophy, Psychiatry, & Psychology 29 (4): 275-277. https://doi.org/10.1353/ppp.2022.0047.
*Response to Commentaries on the Above Jaspers Award Paper*
Forthcoming Work
Knox, Bennett, Hannah Allen, and Stephen M. Downes. [Forthcoming]. “The Uselessness of Polygenic Scores for Addressing College Drinking” — Philosophy, Psychiatry, & Psychology.
Knox, Bennett. [Forthcoming]. “Hermeneutical Pluralism in Psychiatry: Lessons from Spectrum 10K” — In Tsou, Jonathan Y., Jamie Shaw, and Carla Fehr (eds.), Values, Pluralism, and Pragmatism: Themes from the Work of Matthew J. Brown. Boston Studies in the Philosophy and History of Science. Springer.