You do not currently have permission to view the full text for this document. Please sign in to an account with an active subscription or contact support.
Scientists are too apt to work in watertight compartments. In particular, the psychotherapeutist should be more ready than he often is to call in the help of his colleagues in neighbouring fields. The neurologist may not be able to assist the treatment; but, without his diagnosis, neural infections or lesions, which need the bacteriologist or surgeon, may remain undetected. More may be hoped from co-operation with the endocrinologist, who, as Freud has suggested, may be able to vary the relative intensities of instinctive drives and so provide more favourable conditions for analytic work. The sociologist, too, might well combine with the psychotherapeutist in a mutual attempt, each from his own side, to lessen the gap between the psychological needs of the maladjusted individual and the exorbitant demands of the society in which he lives.
Not only the neighbouring sciences, but also ethics are, Dr. Crichton-Miller argues, necessary to the psychotherapeutist. Here the psycho-analysts come in for special criticism and are accused of reducing religion to 'that level where there is no vision, no adventure and no element of the Creative'. Their fault, therefore, is not that they have ignored religion, but that they have approached it scientifically.