My only gripe with the [Wired] article is it seems a little star-struck by the idea that mental illness could be validated or even wholly defined by reference to neuroscience, which is a huge category error. ... That’s not to say that neuroscience isn’t important, essential even, but we can’t define disability purely on a biological basis. It would be like trying to define poverty purely on how much money you had, without reference to quality of life. We need to know what different amounts of money can do for the people in their real-life situations. Earning $5 a day is not the same in New York and Papua New Guinea.