@unmind I'm not interested in participating in another arcana hellthread but anyways I think that D&G are actually even more applicable to modern psychology than they are to psychoanalysis. like, they were critical of how it was being used (especially Lacanian psych) but Guattari was himself a psychoanalyst who did some of the most interesting work I'm aware of in that field when he was at La Borde. to me that + Deleuze's essay "Postscript on the Societies of Control" are kind of the key to understanding what their broad critiques are, because schizoanalysis as I've always understood it is meant to be thinking *with* the periphery (the schizophrenic) rather than forcing them into an economy of signs where everything is judged according to negation (its degree of resemblance to the Same). there's a very clear line imo from this to modern psychology where the neurodivergent aren't just locked up anymore but rather they're made to consent and assent to that economy of signs where their own thinking is varying degrees of removed from """reality""" and to me the core of what is being critiqued in C&S at least as far as psychiatry goes is the evolution of disciplinary societies into societies of control and how they are creating a civilization that is even more neurotic and willing to accept fascism. in the current year with how much we've seen a push towards normalizing mental health stuff (but only the ones that aren't scary like schizophrenia!) and how this has pretty much become a secular version of Christian morality, I think their ideas have only become more applicable and that psychoanalysis is actually less worthy of criticism in comparison.