© 2000 Macmillan Magazines Ltd

the Diagnostic and Statistical Manual ofMental Disorders (DSM) shows, it was notuntil the publication of DSM-III in 1980that most psychoanalytic concepts were formally excluded from psychiatric ortho-doxy in America. DSM-III replaced the oldpsychoanalytic concept of ‘neurosis’, whichhad been central to DSM-I and DSM-II,with the more general one of ‘disorder’(although the word ‘neurosis’ was restoredin parentheses after protests by psycho-analysts fighting a rearguard action).

The organization of the text is partlychronological and partly thematic. There are10 chapters, each dedicated to one decade ofthe twentieth century. Each chapter consistsof various sections which cover particularthemes, such as a form of treatment, a diag-nostic category, a famous psychiatrist, orsome wider social or national development.Each section can be read on its own, makingthe book a handy reference tool. There isinevitably a degree of overlap between thevarious sections, but this is not a seriousdefect. The book is amply illustrated witharchive photographs, which bring the storiesvividly to life. There are no references in thetext, as befits a non-academic work, but thereare plenty of suggestions for further readingat the end of each chapter.

Perhaps the most interesting thing toemerge from this collection of historicalessays is a real sense of the nitty-gritty of sci-entific discovery. The mental disorders aresuch terribly complex phenomena that theyare still poorly understood today. As thisbook shows, there has been real progress inunderstanding and treating mental illnessduring the past century, but it has been a veryhaphazard advance. Many therapies that initially seemed promising turned out to bedead-ends, while the few therapies that havestood the test of time, such as neurolepticsand antidepressants, were largely discoveredby accident.

Intuition and enthusiasm have played asimportant a role as theory in driving psychiatry forward, and the history of thediscipline is correspondingly peppered withcolourful characters and leaps of imagina-tion. The fact that psychiatry has had morethan its fair share of eccentric geniuses maybe one of the reasons for its failure to shakeoff its image as the least respectable branchof medicine, but what progress there hasbeen is almost entirely due to these maver-icks. There is a view of scientific progressthat downplays the context of discovery. Thehistory of psychiatry favours a differentview, one that sees nature’s mysteries as giv-ing way to an odd combination of brilliantmental leaps, accident and sheer, doggedpersistence. ■

Dylan Evans is in the Department of Philosophy,Logic and Scientific Method, London School ofEconomics and Political Science, Houghton Street,London WC2A 2AE, UK.

book reviews

20 NATURE | VOL 403 | 6 JANUARY 2000 | www.nature.com

The Year 2000: A Framework for Speculation on the Next Thirty-three Yearsby Herman Kahn and Anthony WienerMacmillan: 1967. £3.15

The above volume was perhaps the mostprofessional attempt made during the 1960sto predict the world of AD 2000. Its authors

worked at the Hudson Institute, a respected USindependent think-tank, and their remit coveredseveral aspects of the world 33 years ahead.

One aspect was economic — how rich theworld, and the different countries within it,would be by 2000. Knowing that the economy,and society in general, was driven largely byscientific and technical developments, the tank-thinkers made guesses in these areas too. Theywere greatly concerned by politics and wars. Theyeven tried to predict sociological changes — thefeel and character of society in the future. Like allsensible crystal-ball gazers, they hedged their bets.They expounded not only the most likely‘surprise-free projection’, but a range of spreadsaround it, together with many possible surprisesand variants. Their reference region was, ofcourse, the United States, but their scope wasglobal. How well did they do?

In economics, their forecasts tended to be onthe high side. Thus, for the United States, theypredicted a GNP for the year 2000 of (in 1965dollars) $1.3–4.5 trillion, with a best guess of $3.2trillion. Taking $1 (1965) = $5.14 (1998), this is$7.1–23 trillion, with a best guess of $17 trillion.The published figure for 1998 was $8.5 trillion.

Their view of the technological future wassimilarly bold and expansive. They listed 100significant developments they expected before theyear 2000, and feared they would miss manyothers. In fact, fewer than 30 of their 100 havecome to pass, mainly without much impact. Theyalso suggested 35 “less likely” possibilities, such asdirect input into the human memory, a drugequivalent to Aldous Huxley’s “soma”, andgenetic modifications taking human beingsbeyond the definition of Homo sapiens. Perhapsmercifully, not one of their less-likely list has yetbeen realized.

Kahn and Wiener’s few accurate predictionsdealt mostly with electronic communications.They successfully foresaw home video-recording,automated banking systems, pervasive high-capacity data transmission, mobile phones,satellite broadcasting, the universal business useof computers, and new pervasive techniques forthe surveillance, monitoring and control ofindividuals and organizations. But they did notmiss as much as they had feared. The mostnoticeable absentees are the global positioningsystem, the personal computer (instead theyenvisaged universal ‘thin client’ terminals, servedby central time-sharing mainframes), the pocketcalculator and the video game. Technology has

not advanced as dramatically as they had guessed.In their political prophesies, the tank-thinkers

concentrated on the international scene — warand inter-bloc conflicts. They projected the coldwar forward from 1967 in many ways, someculminating in nuclear exchanges (a professionalconcern of the Hudson Institute at the time), andothers maintaining a tense stability. Some of theirscenarios featured an erosion of communism, butnone its outright collapse. Only the simple-minded genius of Ronald Reagan ever imaginedthat outcome.

But the most interesting speculations in thebook are sociological. Here the dangerousoptimism of the 1960s shines out clearly. Kahnand Wiener’s predictions of economic growth,and the boundless wealth to come, led them topredict a “post-industrial society” whose mainproblem would be making the best use of leisuretime. As they grew richer, such societies wouldevolve into a sort of hippy paradise, with perhapshalf the population more or less voluntarily andcheerfully loafing on the vast output of anautomated industrial system. Thirty-three yearslater, that boundless wealth, in GNP terms atleast, has largely come our way; and yet we havesomehow failed to enjoy or even notice it. Mostworking people feel as pressured as ever, perhapsmore so. And the increase of the underclass, neveranticipated by the most doom-laden prophets,has disfigured even the richest modern societies.

I cannot blame the tank-thinkers for failing toforesee the ramifications of the social trends oftheir day. The 1960s hippies, pursuing happinessas the Declaration permits them, caught it up inthe form of addictive drugs — and lit a vast socialconflagration that is still spreading. The feministrevolution, the environmental movement, thegrowth of global migration and ethnic cleansing,the eruption of AIDS: all these would have beenbeyond the most insightful of prophets.

Kahn and Wiener did, however, glimpse thespread of electronic totalitarianism. Theirtechnical predictions included some shrewdguesses at how, by the merging of big databanksand the widespread installation of surveillanceequipment, whole populations could be routinelyand continually monitored. They clearly foresawthe erosion of privacy. To them this was an evil, athreat to freedom. Our more enlightened ageknows it as a safeguard. Only the gaze ofinnumerable cameras saves us from theunderclass. Only by allowing the government toperuse all our bank accounts can we discouragethe tax-dodgers and the money-launderers. Onlywhen every telephone conversation and everyInternet connection is logged, and even recorded,can the gangsters, terrorists and pushers be keptin check. Freedom must sometimes be destroyedto save it. ■

David Jones is in the Department of Chemistry,University of Newcastle upon Tyne, Newcastleupon Tyne NE1 7RU, UK.

In retrospect: chosen by David Jones