The Arc de Siècle: functional neurological disorder during the ‘forgotten’ years of the 20th century, 2020, Stone et al

Jon Stone cross referencing himself again.

Paywall, https://academic.oup.com/brain/advance-article-abstract/doi/10.1093/brain/awaa037/5816705
Not available via Sci hub at time of posting.

 

When I search for "Arc de siècle" the only reference to it is the article linked in the first post. So I assume it doesn't mean anything to anybody except the authors of the article.

 

The authors 'treat' FND, words can mean anything they want..

 

The direct translation of Arc de siecle is..

Arse of the century.

Its Stone referencing himself yet again.

 

Nothing at all. I'm trying and... nope. Some attempt at spanning a full century or something like that? Considering the core ideas are still identical to this day, and still lacking even a single bit of evidence, it didn't so much span a century as survived it unscathed as an anachronistic aberration.

 

The Omelette du Fromage: functional neurological disorder during the ‘forgotten’ years of the 20th century, 2020, Stone et al

 

Perhaps he meant Arc en ciel - chasing rainbows.

 

He himself writes:

 

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FJ3M8cj70vs

 

I just found this ... Fin de siècle which means "end of the century". I'm not convinced it makes any more sense than the original bit of dodgy French in the article, but wondered if it was what was intended.

 

There's also Siècle des lumières -

Where presumably siècle is an age or an era.

I think the only enlightenment here is that the author is a bit of a pretentious arse trying to look cleverer than he actually is, attempting to cover the his own mediocrity with fancy language and failing. Miserably.

 

I am not a fan of Stone, but think some of the criticism is a little unfair. I see no reason why he should not, knowingly, create a neologism using some metaphor if he wishes to indicate a belief that the end of the century sees us back to where we were at the beginning. Some may not consider the metaphor a triumph.

 

I think he must be thinking of arc de circle, as in coming full circle.
Trying to be clever and put that in obscure language seems to me very relevant to his inability to make a useful analysis of his subject matter.

There is of course the possibility that it was changed to Siecle by a meddling subeditor but even if one does not proof read one's work in full one should presumably glance at the title.

 

Question: I believe in an idea that lacks credibility. How should I sell this idea to the public?

Answer: Wrap it in sophisticated language to really convey how much more authoritative you are.

(if there was good evidence of course you could simply present it, instead of making references to century old anecdotes or accusing your critics of prejudice against mental health or whatever)

Also I'm pretty sure shell shock has nothing to do with hysteria or psychogenic causes. It was just internal blast injuries that got psychologized heavily. The soldiers naming it shell shock got it exactly right.