Field Guide to the Spirit World is barely about spirits and mostly about bad takes on mental health. According to the author, who has a PhD in anthropology rather than psychology or medical psychiatry, all mental illness is the work of spirits and NOT anything detectable by science. I actually have no issue with a person believing in spirits or even that they impact our mental health. One is free to propose that idea.

The declaration that mental health issues are not impacted by our brain chemistry or our human experiences is garbage unless you can come up with a case against it. The case for traditional mental healthcare has been made repeatedly, is peer reviewed, and is tested. I'm not saying the mental health field is perfect. Even researchers will admit we do not understand everything. This author sees that admission as weakness. I see it as basic honesty. This author attacks the mental health field constantly with no evidence aside from vague conspiracy theories and her own counter argument. This counter-argument is backed solely by picked out anecdotal evidence. Most of this anecdotal evidence comes from the statements of serial killers taken at face value. Serial killers say something outside of them made them commit crime and the author asks us to just buy that. Most of her evidence falls apart when one points out that serial killers have a strong reason to lessen their sense of guilt by blaming things on spirits, devils, entities, etc.

Mental health researchers, on the other hand, have a strong reason to have a case that stands up to peer scrutiny. This doesn't make researchers perfect, but it does mean their motives are more honest than those of a serial killer.

I have checked out reviews on other sites and I'm saddened by the claims that the author presents a lot of evidence. This is a mischaracterization. The author produces many quotes, but that does not translation to quality or even quantity of evidence. Most of these quotes cycle around the same points over and over again. If I write 1+1=3 fifty times, I do not have a lot of evidence that 1+1=3. I have simply stated the wrong conclusion many times. If I cite dozens of people from the time before Copernicus that the Earth is at the center of the universe, I haven't disproven Copernicus. To do that I would have to engage with Copernicus, understand Copernicus, and not get basic terms wrong. This author confuses bipolar and schizophrenia refers to "rapid cycling" as the rapid change between personalities or moods. It's neither. Rapid cycling is when someone with bipolar experiences a change between manic and depressive several times in a year not within a moment. It has nothing to do with Dr. Jekyll and Mr. Hyde, which is a work of fiction. The fact that the author doesn't even bother knowing or understanding these terms really highlights how this book is morally and academically bankrupt. It is devoid of merit or even entertainment value.