The Myth of Pain

The folk understanding of pain is pretty simple: if you feel pain, then it's because some part of the body is damaged, and the sensation of pain is a signal warning us to take care of the damaged part. If a pain exists without an identifiable damaged part, then such pain is supposedly a psychogenic pain, i.e. arising entirely within the head. Also, if a sensation of pain isn't felt, then you aren't suffering from pain. Finally, pain is inherently unpleasant. The author argues that this folk understanding is wrong. Furthermore, mainstream scientific frameworks of pain implicitly adopt and build upon such folk conceptions. This too is wrongheaded. Instead, the author argues that pain is a complex biological phenomenon, that isn't a simple damage -> sensation mechanism. It is possible to feel pain without being distressed by it, as well as the converse. That most psychogenic pain is classified as such because current techniques can't detect physical anamolies. Also, the processing of pain is the result of an interaction between two distinct systems among others - the PSS(Pain Sensory System) and PIS(Pain Inhibitory System). Pain exists within context of overall neurophysiological activity, and the frameworks for pain analysis and treatment need to be aware of this fact. <br /> <br />I'm not qualified to critically examine this book, but the analysis is interesting and engaging.