Scott Alexander critiques Bryan Caplan's argument that psychiatric diseases are unusual preferences rather than real illnesses, providing counterarguments and evidence to show this view is untenable. Longer summary

Scott Alexander critiques Bryan Caplan's 2006 paper arguing that psychiatric diseases are better understood as unusual preferences rather than true illnesses. Scott challenges Caplan's distinction between preferences and budgetary constraints, arguing it breaks down for complex human experiences. He provides counterexamples showing how mental illnesses can resemble physical constraints, discusses how most psychiatric patients seek help voluntarily, and examines issues with Caplan's explanations of alcoholism and schizophrenia. Scott concludes that viewing psychiatric illnesses as simply different preferences is not tenable given the evidence. Shorter summary