An interesting article has appeared in The Guardian. "A quick fix for the soul" by Darian Leader, Tuesday September 9 2008, The Guardian
http://www.guardian.co.uk/science/2008/sep/09/psychology.humanbehaviour
The writer argues that the highly successful form of psychotherapy called C B T is ideologically justified by the prevailing philosophy of market economy. Everything including the human psyche is viewed as commodities. Symptoms of mental illness like anxiety and depression are viewed as the result of 'faulty thinking patterns' which can be corrected using appropriate techniques rather than as expression of deep underlying conflicts.
He argues that such superficial skin deep approaches will only lead to cosmetic correction and symptoms may reappear in another form. This particular argument has been voiced by the predominant psychoanalytic school against Cognitive and Behavior therapy schools since the beginning of the latter. I think there is nothing inherently wrong in going by evidence base which favors C B T. The psychoanalytic and related therapists were unable to deliver results, despite their claims of addressing deep rooted issues. Any way, the article makes interesting reading and merits serious consideration of all mental health professionals, philosophers and public policy makers.
ഇന്ത്യ
2 weeks ago
5 comments:
CBT may help to adapt better. But I do not like the way they explain the causes of depression and other mental problems. Reading Beck's theory of depression is like looking at an abstract painting. Psychology feels to me more a myth than a science. At some times in history a new psychologist/psychotherapist with a new theory emerges, becomes popular and try to solve all mental problems with his theory. A science (or is it an art?) that is full of contradictory, biased ideas may not be useful in treating severe mental disorders as the only therapy. I think it may be useful combined with more scientific approachs.
I think some words should be discarded or updated in mental health settings. Nobody wants to be labeled as a psychiatric patient. But the same patients will be happy to accept that they have a malfunctioning neuro circuit or a neurological handicap.
Society, including doctors consider mental health problems as ugly or funny. Problems with serotonin or insulin leads to health problems but we look at both things differently.
No surprise in some people getting a lot of patients while they use words like "changing thinking patterns" or "modifying wrong thoughts". People go to them because they do not classify anyone as psychiatric patients.
There are mental problems, but I think there are not mental diseases. All diseases are biological in nature. As Marx said mind is the ultimate product of the material being.
I have read the article in the gaurdian. It is not necessary to find the deep rooted conflicts in clinical practices. CBT helps to adapt better, that's all about it. Finding all deep rooted conflicts in a human mind before treatment is like finding the exact variant of a bacteria before putting a patient on an antibiotic. It is not practical.
Keep writing in your blog, a good social work, hope you get more readers every day.
nice post..
hi, agree with ajeesh. Psychology is not philosophy. Real and imagined deeprooted causes are reinforced in the patient if the patient himself finds the physician more in melancholic contemplation that he himself is ! I think the old system is the hangover of thse good old days when psychiatrists invariably had long beards, and even longer faces. Some modern psychiatrists might rue the days of CBT and such quick treatments, especially in countries where psychiatrists are paid by the hour. Those days, a few patients would ensure a good life, but unfortunately, in countries where the taxpayer pays the doctor, even psychiatrists find that they are not totally exempt from showing results for the money spent ! The delving into the soul etc etc might be left to those worthies who have more bulging foreheads than the average human being. Thank you
I am very happy to learn/welcome the new result oriented,scintific approaches in the field of science of mind.!
I agree with the views of both Ajeesh and Sashi..! Good!
Ajeesh. I really liked the last para of your comment, comparing the enquiry of deep rooted conflivts to trying to identify the precise subtype of a bacteria even when there is no added advantage in choosing the therapy.
Two issues are addressed by this.
1) Medicine is an applied science. The task at hand is to treat and improve outcome, theoretical considerations are important only as long as they have practical implications.
2) I have always tried to draw parllel between the physical aspect of medicine to the psychological aspect. This helps to avoid useless metaphysics and philosophy form psychology. Also it makes understanding of the subject easier, at least for the beginners.
Post a Comment