Posted by Jost on November 4, 2006, at 20:56:28
In reply to Re: Junk medicine:cognitive behavioural therapy » Jost, posted by Racer on November 4, 2006, at 19:54:40
What I like about CBT is that it's an attempt to confront issues about how to work with certain insurmountable obstacles. It's not the specifics, but the focus on change, or actual thinking about change seems right-- overly technical or "organized" but right.
Maybe it's a fad right now. It's not that CBT offers a deep answer to the question of change, but it's raised the question (not only CBT, but because it has a cogent method, it raises the question somehwat more pointedly than general critics).
Long-term therapy is crucial and the subject of somewhat unfair comparisons-- because while costly and time-consuming , it's the best there is so far-- -
For example, in CBT, the relationship between the T and the P is omitted-- at least theoretically-- and that's a huge theoretical problem. And it doesn't address deeper causes or the hold of destructive patterns. But, if the goals are minimal, and a bit flattened, or extremely incomplete-- and even subject to misuse--it's not as simplistic as the article suggested. I mean, the article would be more believable if it at least acknowledged that CBT isn't that reductionistic-- even if it is somewhat reductionistic compared to other treatments. (Hey, isn't reductionistic a word? I've got enough problems without a spell-checker telling me that I've misspelled it, or it isn't a word???)
It's more the potential theoretical challenge it poses to traditional psychotherapy that I like. It does seem like a step in one right direction.
Jost
poster:Jost
thread:700375
URL: http://www.dr-bob.org/babble/psycho/20061026/msgs/700433.html