Notes

1. The author highlights the difference of the conception of depression between Japan and the United States. If Japanese people normally consider depression possible in the most chronic and devastating manifestations, what are the implications of introducing pills for what the Japanese culture do not consider an illness? How can this change the Japanese culture and society?

2. The author says that the pharmaucetical companies “were learning how to market a disease” (516). Do you think that this is ethically acceptable? Do you think that we can classify this influence on other cultures as imperialism?

They were trying to benefit from this drug and enforce this disease onto people to sell the drug.

3. Tajima highlights the fact that a process of standardization of psychiatry has started around the world and that this is positive for facilitating accurate diagnosis. Do you think that that could be negative outcomes? What is the role of globalization not only in standardizing the illness but also in causing the illness?

There would be negative outcomes if the procedures were standardized because every country, and individual, has different ways of approaching things. Standardization never has a positive outcomes because it only benefits some people but not an entire society.

4.