Psycho-Babble Medication Thread 16382

Shown: posts 6 to 30 of 30. Go back in thread:

 

Re: "Therapy's Delusions" - What a crock of...!

Posted by Tom on December 8, 1999, at 21:53:23

In reply to "Therapy's Delusions", posted by Morose on December 7, 1999, at 12:45:03

> What a crock of shit. Everything the book refutes about the unconcious mind is pure bunk. I know why. If you knew what I was carrying around with me for 25 years unbeknowst to me, and what a couple sessions of therapy did for me, you would disagree with everything the book purports to "prove" about psychotherapy and the unconcious mind.

I crack up when I see books or articles about theis type of topic. These people have expended a tremendous amount of time, money, and effort on disproving something that I know first hand to be true. I guess it takes one to know one... and I'm sure the writers of this book have no first hand experience about emotional pain trapped in the unconcious mind like I do. Ask someone with an identity disorder if there illness can be treated with drugs, and they would just laugh in your face.

By the way, the writing is very persuasive, but there is at least one person on this earth (me) who knows its statements are truly a crock a shit...

 

I second Tom's experience

Posted by siri on December 10, 1999, at 11:33:11

In reply to Re: "Therapy's Delusions" - What a crock of...!, posted by Tom on December 8, 1999, at 21:53:23

I know first-hand how life-saving good therapy can be. I tried a lot of therapists and found, like others, that they wanted to saw my feet off to make me fit the bed. So many were confrontational and shaming. Since I figure that most of my problems today came from trauma and profound childhood abuse, I don't see how further violence from a therapist will make me better. When the therapy fails, they all too often blame the client, rather than the method. I only found one therapy model that not only didn't try to do that to me, but was enormously helpful for this trauma survivor. It hasn't been a total miracle cure, or i wouldn't still have this depression. But what it did do was help me to experience and gently change the limiting core beliefs inside me that I COULD change, and now I'm accepting that I still have some biochemical imbalances that i need to adjust with medications. For me, and I know that everybody is different, I need both psychotherapy AND medicine. Neither one alone is complete. There are probably other good methods besides the one I found, but Hakomi has been a Godsend for me.
The article linked below discusses some interesting principles re how therapy needs to evolve. I'm not trying to push this on anybody, though- just sharing some thoughts.:
http://www.hakomi.com/about.html
(i am loving these discussions!)
siri

> > What a crock of shit. Everything the book refutes about the unconcious mind is pure bunk. I know why. If you knew what I was carrying around with me for 25 years unbeknowst to me, and what a couple sessions of therapy did for me, you would disagree with everything the book purports to "prove" about psychotherapy and the unconcious mind.
>
> I crack up when I see books or articles about theis type of topic. These people have expended a tremendous amount of time, money, and effort on disproving something that I know first hand to be true. I guess it takes one to know one... and I'm sure the writers of this book have no first hand experience about emotional pain trapped in the unconcious mind like I do. Ask someone with an identity disorder if there illness can be treated with drugs, and they would just laugh in your face.
>
> By the way, the writing is very persuasive, but there is at least one person on this earth (me) who knows its statements are truly a crock a shit...

 

20 questions for Fred, Adam, Erin, Noa, Tom, Siri

Posted by Morose on December 10, 1999, at 16:52:55

In reply to "Therapy's Delusions", posted by Morose on December 7, 1999, at 12:45:03

1. How do you know you have an unconscious mind? Are you conscious of it?

2. Did your shrink tell you have an unconscious mind?

3. Did you read it in a book?

4. How is talking to your shrink different from talking to a friend? Do you have any friends? Is your shrink your friend?

5. How is talking to your shrink different from talking to your internist?

6. How is talking to your shrink different from reading books?

7. Are you smarter than your shrink?

8. Are you smarter than your unconscious? Is your unconscious smarter than you?

9. What book are you reading this week?

10. What book is your shrink reading this week?

11. If you don’t know what book your shrink is reading this week, why don’t you know? Did you ask? Did your shrink refuse to answer?

12. Which evolved first, the conscious mind or the unconscious mind?

13. Does your shrink prescribe drugs to you?

14. Has your shrink ever taken the drugs he or she prescribes?

15. Let’s assume your shrink knows everything about your finances, your career aspirations, your sex life, your upbringing, everything. What do you know about your shrink?

16. Would you like to go out for a beer with your shrink?

17. If you were out and about with a friend, and you ran into your shrink, would you say hello? Would you introduce your friend?

18. How would your answer to 17 differ if you were with your spouse? One of your kids?

19. Do you think your shrink is afraid to grow old and die?

20. Are you afraid to grow old and die? If so, is that fear conscious, unconscious, or both?

 

Re: 20 questions for Fred, Adam, Erin, Noa, Tom, Siri

Posted by allison on December 10, 1999, at 17:09:40

In reply to 20 questions for Fred, Adam, Erin, Noa, Tom, Siri, posted by Morose on December 10, 1999, at 16:52:55

Ok, Morose, so what's your point?

You asked for comments. Fred, Adam, Erin, Noa, Tom and Siri thought enough to reply. If you don't want to read reactions that might be different from yours, then don't ask. There's no place here for baiting questions and subsequent attacks.

 

Re: 20 questions for Fred, Adam, Erin, Noa, Tom, Siri

Posted by Adam on December 10, 1999, at 18:20:43

In reply to 20 questions for Fred, Adam, Erin, Noa, Tom, Siri, posted by Morose on December 10, 1999, at 16:52:55


> 1. How do you know you have an unconscious mind? Are you conscious of it?

I don't know. I have had deep emotional reactions to certain events that make me
wonder about a subconscious, though. This has lead to my interest in schema theory.

> 2. Did your shrink tell you have an unconscious mind?

Two of them did.

> 3. Did you read it in a book?
>
> 4. How is talking to your shrink different from talking to a friend? Do you have any friends? Is your shrink your friend?

Yes. I can discuss things with a therapist that would be too embarassing or disturbing to discuss on a regular basis with
friends. Besides, I don't want to burden them with it.

> 5. How is talking to your shrink different from talking to your internist?

My internist would refer me to a shrink.

> 6. How is talking to your shrink different from reading books?

Books aren't very interactive. It's difficult to get answers to specific questions or suggestions to deal with specific
problems from a book. I do find some books very valuable, though.

> 7. Are you smarter than your shrink?

Maybe, maybe not. Probably not. That doesn't matter to me, so long as they are very knowledgeable and creative.

> 8. Are you smarter than your unconscious? Is your unconscious smarter than you?

Why do you separate "you" and "your subconscious"? It's like asking if I'm faster than my legs.

> 9. What book are you reading this week?

Eugene Onegin, by Aleksandr Pushkin; Morgoth's Ring by JRR Tolkien; Mind Over Mood, Greenberger and Padesky, PhDs.
>
> 10. What book is your shrink reading this week?

That might be an interesting question to ask a therapist, actually. But can you really judge someone's worth
based only on what they read?

> 11. If you don’t know what book your shrink is reading this week, why don’t you know? Did you ask? Did your shrink refuse to answer?
>
> 12. Which evolved first, the conscious mind or the unconscious mind?

I don't know. It seems somewhat illogical to ask about a subconscious before there is a conscious mind to be subject to.

> 13. Does your shrink prescribe drugs to you?

My _psychotherapist_ does not, if that's what you mean. My psychiatrist does.

> 14. Has your shrink ever taken the drugs he or she prescribes?

Would it matter? Responses to drugs can be so different, the best he could do is check the literature if my
reaction seemed unusual, etc. That's what someone who wasn't taking an antidepressant would do too.

> 15. Let’s assume your shrink knows everything about your finances, your career aspirations, your sex life, your upbringing, everything. What do you know about your shrink?

That he's a very smart and caring person.

> 16. Would you like to go out for a beer with your shrink?

I wish I were on friendlier terms with my psychiatrist, because I have so many questions I would like to
ask him. I think having a more professional relationship with my psychologist is more condusive to
the openness I need in therapy.

> 17. If you were out and about with a friend, and you ran into your shrink, would you say hello? Would you introduce your friend?

Yes, I would.

> 18. How would your answer to 17 differ if you were with your spouse? One of your kids?

Don't have them. Hypotehtically, spouse, same. Kids, depends on age an maturity.

> 19. Do you think your shrink is afraid to grow old and die?

Probably no more than I am.

> 20. Are you afraid to grow old and die? If so, is that fear conscious, unconscious, or both?

Yes, I am. I am learning to accept age, though I mourn much of what I lost in my youth to deprssion and OCD.
I don't want to die before I'm ready to. I think I will know when I am, and then I will not be afraid.


For the record, I think the article you posted was very interesting, and I think the author has some cogent points.
I just feel it's too difficult to dismiss psychoanalysis completely. I'm guessing what you wanted is to hear the
thoughts and ideas of others, perhaps because of experiences you have had with therapy. In my own experience, I have
found it hard to let go of my feelings of dissilusionment with psychoanalytical therapy and acknowledge its value.
Discussion here has helped change my mind about that a bit, and I'm inclined to acknowledge its benefit to others,
and thus its value.

 

Re: One question for Morose

Posted by Phil on December 10, 1999, at 20:20:16

In reply to 20 questions for Fred, Adam, Erin, Noa, Tom, Siri, posted by Morose on December 10, 1999, at 16:52:55

How do you know when a person is passive/aggressive?

 

Re: 20 questions for Fred, Adam, Erin, Noa, Tom, Siri

Posted by Erin on December 10, 1999, at 20:35:33

In reply to 20 questions for Fred, Adam, Erin, Noa, Tom, Siri, posted by Morose on December 10, 1999, at 16:52:55

I had a hard time telling if you meant for those questions to be seriously thought about, or if you dissagreed with our opinions and were trying to prove yours through questions. It sounded to me to be more of the latter. If I'm wrong, please correct me. Also, I personally find the term "shrink" a little demeaning, due to the fact that, although today more and more people are going to therapists/psychiatrists/social workers etc. because society is starting to consider it a way of "staying" healthy, rather than solely "becoming" healthy, as i think it should be. To me, the term "shrink" is one of those derrogative terms used in the 50's when going to a therapist meant that something was wrong with you, and that you were crazy, no questions asked. I'm not trying to argue, just looking for inputs, does anybody else find the term derrogative? What do you all prefer to call a therapist...? Erin

 

Re: Erin

Posted by Morose on December 11, 1999, at 1:01:09

In reply to Re: 20 questions for Fred, Adam, Erin, Noa, Tom, Siri, posted by Erin on December 10, 1999, at 20:35:33

> I had a hard time telling if you meant for those questions to be seriously thought about, or if you dissagreed with our opinions and were trying to prove yours through questions. It sounded to me to be more of the latter. If I'm wrong, please correct me. Also, I personally find the term "shrink" a little demeaning, due to the fact that, although today more and more people are going to therapists/psychiatrists/social workers etc. because society is starting to consider it a way of "staying" healthy, rather than solely "becoming" healthy, as i think it should be. To me, the term "shrink" is one of those derrogative terms used in the 50's when going to a therapist meant that something was wrong with you, and that you were crazy, no questions asked. I'm not trying to argue, just looking for inputs, does anybody else find the term derrogative? What do you all prefer to call a therapist...? Erin


Erin,

I meant for the questions to be thought-provoking and, geez, maybe even entertaining. I assure you I don't mean to be "baiting" or "passive/aggressive," whatever that means, toward anyone (except Allison; for some reason I can't explain, I reserve the right to be a smart-ass to Allison). I have felt the need to visit various shrinks over the years, so I have a natural sympathy for anyone with the same need. However, I found the experience of consulting a shrink to be odd and unsatisfactory. The relationship between patient and shrink is important, of course, but is different from other important relationships that adults have; different from friendship, different from consulting an internist, etc. Those differences are thought about a lot by shrinks, and not much by patients (shrinks, you know, are deliberately odd). Also, for me, it was a useless means of gaining any wisdom whatsoever about myself, people in general, life, what have you, as compared to reading a book or bullshitting with a friend. Everybody I know, or at least everybody I care for, is at least a little bit screwed up; and the people I care for the most spend as much time as they can trying to figure out what it means to be stuck in a carcass on this planet, and they approach that quest (if you will) with imagination and good humor. No shrink I've met is a Seeker. My sessions with a psychiatrist were essentially sales pitches for psychotherapy. The closest comparison I can think of would be listening to a rhetorically gifted Amway salesman. My impression is that this group is predominantly critical of drug manufacturers and insurance companies, but forgiving of shrinks. I am interested in hearing how others in this group view their relationships with their shrinks (by the way, I vote for "shrink" and I vote against "pdoc"). I am interested in hearing from people like Adam.

Drugs, on the other hand, are wonderful. Drugs change everything. Drugs will chase those naughty blues away. I have been taking ad's and benzos for over a year, and I have never been so happy in my life. One of the best books I've read on this topic is "Listening to Prozac," which I consider a sunnier and less polemical companion to "Therapy's Delusions." Drugs are so effective they are putting shrinks out of business. Insurance companies know this and shrinks know this. After the drugs kick in, all that confusing and exasperating blather about your mom, and your dad, and what your uncle did to you that time, it all seems so witless and unnecessary. The mere fact that drugs work so well calls into question everything that came before the drugs: the cause of depression, the romance of the quest, the banality of the box of Kleenex in your shrink's office.

The narrower question of whether people believe in the existence of an unconscious is, I guess, less interesting. Erin, have you ever thought about the premise of an unconscious? Your unconscious, according to any psychotherapist (not only Freud) is supposed to have its own feelings, volition, and imagination, distinct from your conscious mind. It (your unconscious) supposedly fears things that "you"(your conscious mind)do not fear, decides to repress "thoughts" for its own reasons, and concocts symbols and hysteria. That's impossible for me to believe. I suggest it is impossible for most brain scientists and psychopharmacologists to believe. I suggest it is offensive and of no more than placebo effect for psychotherapists to press such nonsense on screwed-up people.

Enough said, Erin. The questions are meant to be taken seriously. Get busy on your answers.

Regards,
Morose

 

Re: 20 questions for Fred, Adam, Erin, Noa, Tom, Siri

Posted by allison on December 11, 1999, at 18:01:01

In reply to 20 questions for Fred, Adam, Erin, Noa, Tom, Siri, posted by Morose on December 10, 1999, at 16:52:55

Well, Morose, you can be as much of a smart ass as you like to me or anyone else, but where does it get you and what does it prove? You want answers. I'll play your game:


> 1. How do you know you have an unconscious mind? Are you conscious of it?
Because things go on in my mind that I notice only some of the time, and when I notice them I try to figure where they came from. Usually it's only traces of things that, when I start to notice them, disappear like cockroaches disappear when you turn on the kitchen light.

> 2. Did your shrink tell you have an unconscious mind?
Not directly. We have talked about dreams, but only started that in the second year.

> 3. Did you read it in a book?
I have read about it in several books.

> 4. How is talking to your shrink different from talking to a friend? Do you have any friends? Is your shrink your friend?
Friends have filters and motives that are not always in synch with mine. While often helpful, friends generally have less capacity, insight and focus to discuss situations as in-depth as conversations with my psychiatrist. However, I sometimes use my friends to bounce ideas off them, some of which I've gotten from my doctor. As you, I find most folks I know are screwed up in some way, but many of my friends are pretty normal. At times they are useful for insights into situations, however most haven't been through the crap I have and have trouble comprehending it, so I don't bring it up. Besides, it's depressing. If I talked about myself and my problems all the time to my friends, I wouldn't have many. Friends are better for lightening the load in other ways. My shrink knows more about me than anyone on this earth. We have a good relationship and a mutual respect, but I would not exactly define him as a friend.

> 5. How is talking to your shrink different from talking to your internist?
My internist is more interested in hearing about physical ailments. When I approached him for help with this depression, he referred me to my psychiatrist.

> 6. How is talking to your shrink different from reading books?
Books don't listen or give feedback or ask questions that make me think. Information in books usually is only partly relevant to any given situation. Conversation with my psychiatrist is much more personal and relevant.

> 7. Are you smarter than your shrink?
We each have intelligence in particular areas that is greater than the other's.

> 8. Are you smarter than your unconscious? Is your unconscious smarter than you?
I think there's a symbiotic relationship that I am only partly aware of. It has nothing to do with intelligence, really.

> 9. What book are you reading this week?
A Guided Tour of the Complete Works of CG Jung (author's name escapes me), Oblivion by Josephine Hart, Aspects of the Feminine by Hull, and a little bit of Shakespeare (King Lear). Before that it was Motherless Daughters by Edelman, Anima and Animus by Emma Jung, and Women Who Run with the Wolves by Clarissa Pinkola Estes. I am about to begin The Feeling of What Happens by Damasio and Women's Ways of Knowing (several women wrote it), and The Power of Feelings by Chodrow (sp?).

> 10. What book is your shrink reading this week?
Not sure. A few weeks ago it was Care of the Psyche. A few months ago it was Eternal Echoes by John O'Donohue.

> 11. If you don’t know what book your shrink is reading this week, why don’t you know? Did you ask? Did your shrink refuse to answer?
I haven't asked. It wasn't relevant. He brings up books he's reading or has read if there's something that's relevant to our discussions.

> 12. Which evolved first, the conscious mind or the unconscious mind?
I suspect unconscious, but who cares? I'm stuck with them both.
>
> 13. Does your shrink prescribe drugs to you?
Yup.

> 14. Has your shrink ever taken the drugs he or she prescribes?
There are so many out there, I doubt anyone could take them all. Besides, if one doesn't have the symptoms that a particular drug allegedly affects, why take it unnecessarily? Does an oncologist take chemotherapy if he/she doesn't have cancer? It's my psychiatrist's job to know how/why they work, how to use them, and how to measure their efficacy.

> 15. Let’s assume your shrink knows everything about your finances, your career aspirations, your sex life, your upbringing, everything. What do you know about your shrink?
Enough that he's a person full of thought, compassion and insight who tries to help me figure out how to get through this life.

> 16. Would you like to go out for a beer with your shrink?
Perhaps.

> 17. If you were out and about with a friend, and you ran into your shrink, would you say hello? Would you introduce your friend?
I would and I have.

> 18. How would your answer to 17 differ if you were with your spouse? One of your kids?
No.

> 19. Do you think your shrink is afraid to grow old and die?
No.

> 20. Are you afraid to grow old and die? If so, is that fear conscious, unconscious, or both?
I don't particularly like the idea of growing old because I'll most likely be stuck in a nursing home. I would welcome death. The only thing that I fear is the possible pain.

It's too bad that your experiences with therapists have been so negative, Morose. I often find the sessions with my psychiatrist more helpful than the drugs he prescribes. Unlike your doctors, I **would** define mine as a seeker, who encourages his patients to seek answers, take journeys, be curious. As for the drugs, I'd probably be dead without them. I don't like taking them; I tolerate them. They have not been a panacea by any means. They've never made me **happy.**

 

Re: 20 questions clarification

Posted by allison on December 11, 1999, at 18:14:32

In reply to Re: 20 questions for Fred, Adam, Erin, Noa, Tom, Siri, posted by allison on December 11, 1999, at 18:01:01

To clarify answer to #18:
> > 18. How would your answer to 17 differ if you were with your spouse? One of your kids?
> No. My answer would not differ had I a spouse or a child.

 

Re: allison

Posted by Morose on December 11, 1999, at 18:55:11

In reply to Re: 20 questions for Fred, Adam, Erin, Noa, Tom, Siri, posted by allison on December 11, 1999, at 18:01:01

allison,

Thank you for your interesting response. I hereby relinquish my right to be a smart-ass to you.

Regards,
Morose

 

Re: allison

Posted by Erin on December 11, 1999, at 23:58:41

In reply to Re: allison, posted by Morose on December 11, 1999, at 18:55:11

You guys crack me up!

 

Re: 20 questions for Fred, Adam, Erin, Noa, Tom, Siri

Posted by Tom on December 12, 1999, at 21:23:06

In reply to 20 questions for Fred, Adam, Erin, Noa, Tom, Siri, posted by Morose on December 10, 1999, at 16:52:55

> 1. How do you know you have an unconscious mind? Are you conscious of it?

Can't be proven, but it's my personal belief that it exists.

> 2. Did your shrink tell you have an unconscious mind?
>
No; did research on my particular disorder (dissociative disorder) and learned about the unconcious mind.
> 3. Did you read it in a book?
>
No, on-line.
> 4. How is talking to your shrink different from talking to a friend? Do you have any friends? Is your shrink your friend?
>
Friends don't want to hear about mental illness. Maybe discuss some problems, but nothing further. Have plenty of friends. Don't consider my shrink my friend (he's very cool, calm, methodical; not the friendly type).
> 5. How is talking to your shrink different from talking to your internist?
>
Mdoc doesn't want to discuss this. Feels it should be handled by my shrink.
> 6. How is talking to your shrink different from reading books?
>
About the same.
> 7. Are you smarter than your shrink?
>
About psychiatry? No. The rest? Don't know.
> 8. Are you smarter than your unconscious? Is your unconscious smarter than you?
>
Tough one. Unconscious mind is were your true emotions lie, not intellegence. Trying to compare apples with oranges.
> 9. What book are you reading this week?
>
None currently. Read alot of business mags though.
> 10. What book is your shrink reading this week?
>
Don't know. He is currently writing a book about his specialized practice (disoc disorders) though.
> 11. If you don’t know what book your shrink is reading this week, why don’t you know? Did you ask? Did your shrink refuse to answer?
>
Don't spend much time on small talk. Just concentrating on my issues.
> 12. Which evolved first, the conscious mind or the unconscious mind?
>
Simultaneously evolving every day.
> 13. Does your shrink prescribe drugs to you?
>
He will. I'm currently not taking any.
> 14. Has your shrink ever taken the drugs he or she prescribes?
>
Don't know, don't really care.
> 15. Let’s assume your shrink knows everything about your finances, your career aspirations, your sex life, your upbringing, everything. What do you know about your shrink?
>
Only know about his professional background. Enough for me.
> 16. Would you like to go out for a beer with your shrink?
>
Uh, no.
> 17. If you were out and about with a friend, and you ran into your shrink, would you say hello? Would you introduce your friend?
>
Yes.
> 18. How would your answer to 17 differ if you were with your spouse? One of your kids?
>
No different.
> 19. Do you think your shrink is afraid to grow old and die?
>
If he is afraid, I can't see it. I'm sure he had as much fear as most people.
> 20. Are you afraid to grow old and die? If so, is that fear conscious, unconscious, or both?
Yes, to some degree. The fear is both conscious and unconscious. Thats the beauty of both minds. You can feel something, and process it through thoughts. The healthiest individuals have no trouble accepting their feelings. Those who reject them get sick; no fault of their own though. Kinda sucks, doesn't it?

 

Re: 20 questions for Fred, Adam, Erin, Noa, Tom, Siri

Posted by Morose on December 13, 1999, at 14:24:19

In reply to Re: 20 questions for Fred, Adam, Erin, Noa, Tom, Siri, posted by Tom on December 12, 1999, at 21:23:06

Tom,

Thank you for your response.

A couple of commentators viewed my questions as being condescending and argumentative, and I apologize for that. I had meant for them to illustrate the oddness of the notion of a psychodynamic unconscious and of the psychiatrist/patient relationship. I also realize that viewing psychotherapy as an intellectual adventure can seem very glib to someone in acute pain. At the risk of flogging a dead duck, I will recap the issues that interest me.

1. I believe the very notion of a psychodynamic unconscious mind is what the French pointy-heads call a construct, invented by Sigmund Freud about 100 years ago, which construct has pervaded culture to such an extent that it is nearly universally taken for granted. A psychodynamic unconscious is necessary to most talk therapy, but is unnecessary to neurobiology, behavioral genetics, evolutionary psychology, psychopharmacology and as I understand it, types of cognitive therapy. I suggest that if one had never been taught the concept of a psychodynamic unconscious, there would be nothing either in one’s experience or in science absent Freud to suggest the existence of one. I believe a psychodynamic unconscious simply does not exist, and we would do well to dispense with the concept. Furthermore, the world I am conscious of is so thoroughly scary that resort to a frightened unconscious is superfluous. On a personal level, my childhood was utterly unremarkable and, to me, unrelated to my adult mental problems; even so, the psychiatrists I consulted pressed psychotherapy on all their patients (not just me), moreover, as a condition to a prescription for drugs that completely eliminated my mental problems without psychotherapy (I realize I am lucky that my ailments are alleviated solely by medicine). I believe those psychiatrists have an economic interest in the existence of a psychodynamic unconscious.

2. A shared belief in the existence of the unconscious mind dictates a very peculiar relationship between a psychiatrist and patient. Only the fortune-teller can see into the crystal ball, and only the shrink can see into the patient’s unconscious. In any ordinary adult discourse, one brings to the party sovereignty over one’s intellect, good-faith skepticism, a consideration of alternatives, a willingness to explain oneself when asked and an expectation that others do likewise, good manners, common sense, and a reciprocal exchange ideas and confidences. None of those qualities necessarily pertain to a psychiatrist/patient discourse. For example, roughly half the responses to my postings here are words to the effect that I am a trivial, bad-mannered asshole, and that’s okay! That’s the way people communicate; but I wonder, would those so quick to call bullshit on me be just as quick to call bullshit on their shrinks. I hope so.

Regards,
Morose

 

Re: 20 questions for Fred, Adam, Erin, Noa, Tom, Siri

Posted by Adam on December 13, 1999, at 15:45:37

In reply to Re: 20 questions for Fred, Adam, Erin, Noa, Tom, Siri, posted by Morose on December 13, 1999, at 14:24:19

Morose,

Again, I think you have some very good points. Freud's concept of the subconscious was a construct,
one that he rather lamely tried to explain as a logical necessity of intelligence and Darwinian
theory, with, of course, no evidence to support such a theory but his own subjective observations.
Freud was not a scientist, and I imagine psychoanalytical theory fails where it clings to Freudian
theory most tightly.

Be that as it may, the concept of an unconscious mind was a revolutionary deduction, and is something
that can and is under scientific scrutiny. We may very well be able to dispense with id and super-ego,
but we might find it more diffucult, given the evidence, to dispense with the notion that there are
forces that operate at a level below (or perhaps one should say parallel to) what we are cognizant of,
and that these forces can have a basis in biology and environment. The fact that medications can
effectively treat affective disorders does not preclude the existance of the"subconscious".

I offer a couple abstracts below, to demonstrate the point. One was published in the journal Nature,
which is arguably the most respected and prestigious scientific publication on the planet. I could
provide many more ad nauseum, but you get the point: people do real science to probe unconscious
which have a basis in biology. The second is an example, I think, that psychoanalysts are very much
aware of the concerns you have mentioned, recognize the deficits of psychoanalytic theory, and are
attempting to evolve to keep pace with the progress of other disciplines and remain relevant. They do
get it.

Suggestions you are an asshole are unfortunate. I might point out that your questions were posed in a
distincly rhetorical manner, and in a couple places you seem to be commanding people to "do their
homework," which is a bit pugilistic. I'm guilty of this at times too, as are many here. It's an
unfortunate symptom of the lack of face-to-face contact that simultaneously disinhibits us and leaves
us vulnerable to projections and misinterpretations. I don't wish to chide, but to inform.

Nature 1998 Oct 8;395(6702):597-600

Imaging unconscious semantic priming.

Dehaene S, Naccache L, Le Clec'H G, Koechlin E, Mueller M, Dehaene-Lambertz G, van de Moortele PF, Le Bihan D

INSERM U.334, Service Hospitalier Frederic Joliot, CEA/DRM/DSV, Orsay, France. dehaene@shfj.cea.fr

Visual words that are masked and presented so briefly that they cannot be seen may nevertheless facilitate the subsequent processing of related words, a phenomenon
called masked priming. It has been debated whether masked primes can activate cognitive processes without gaining access to consciousness. Here we use a
combination of behavioural and brain-imaging techniques to estimate the depth of processing of masked numerical primes. Our results indicate that masked stimuli have a
measurable influence on electrical and haemodynamic measures of brain activity. When subjects engage in an overt semantic comparison task with a clearly visible target
numeral, measures of covert motor activity indicate that they also unconsciously apply the task instructions to an unseen masked numeral. A stream of perceptual,
semantic and motor processes can therefore occur without awareness.

Am J Psychother 1999 Winter;53(1):52-9

The fate of the unconscious in future psychotherapy.

Grotstein JS

Department of Psychiatry, UCLA School of Medicine, USA.

It is important in these changing times to reconsider the psychoanalytic conception of the unconscious and the phantasmal mental life that occupies it--so that we can
recalibrate our clinical work with it. It is the foundation of all our endeavors. Recent developments in neurobiology, combined with a more pragmatic intersubjective
approach in psychoanalysis and psychotherapy, have marginalized the status of the unconscious in the eyes of many mental health professionals. Moreover,
considerations of realistic childhood traumata and neglect are being more and more counterposed to the traditional concept of the infantile neurosis. What is at stake is a
dismissal of a concept that is still of enormous importance, yet one that has been too little understood. What is required is a dual-track conception in which an interplay
can be seen to be taking place between the unconscious, neurobiology, and trauma in the intrasubjective as well as in the intersubjective matrix.

> Tom,
>
> Thank you for your response.
>
> A couple of commentators viewed my questions as being condescending and argumentative, and I apologize for that. I had meant for them to illustrate the oddness of the notion of a psychodynamic unconscious and of the psychiatrist/patient relationship. I also realize that viewing psychotherapy as an intellectual adventure can seem very glib to someone in acute pain. At the risk of flogging a dead duck, I will recap the issues that interest me.
>
> 1. I believe the very notion of a psychodynamic unconscious mind is what the French pointy-heads call a construct, invented by Sigmund Freud about 100 years ago, which construct has pervaded culture to such an extent that it is nearly universally taken for granted. A psychodynamic unconscious is necessary to most talk therapy, but is unnecessary to neurobiology, behavioral genetics, evolutionary psychology, psychopharmacology and as I understand it, types of cognitive therapy. I suggest that if one had never been taught the concept of a psychodynamic unconscious, there would be nothing either in one’s experience or in science absent Freud to suggest the existence of one. I believe a psychodynamic unconscious simply does not exist, and we would do well to dispense with the concept. Furthermore, the world I am conscious of is so thoroughly scary that resort to a frightened unconscious is superfluous. On a personal level, my childhood was utterly unremarkable and, to me, unrelated to my adult mental problems; even so, the psychiatrists I consulted pressed psychotherapy on all their patients (not just me), moreover, as a condition to a prescription for drugs that completely eliminated my mental problems without psychotherapy (I realize I am lucky that my ailments are alleviated solely by medicine). I believe those psychiatrists have an economic interest in the existence of a psychodynamic unconscious.
>
> 2. A shared belief in the existence of the unconscious mind dictates a very peculiar relationship between a psychiatrist and patient. Only the fortune-teller can see into the crystal ball, and only the shrink can see into the patient’s unconscious. In any ordinary adult discourse, one brings to the party sovereignty over one’s intellect, good-faith skepticism, a consideration of alternatives, a willingness to explain oneself when asked and an expectation that others do likewise, good manners, common sense, and a reciprocal exchange ideas and confidences. None of those qualities necessarily pertain to a psychiatrist/patient discourse. For example, roughly half the responses to my postings here are words to the effect that I am a trivial, bad-mannered asshole, and that’s okay! That’s the way people communicate; but I wonder, would those so quick to call bullshit on me be just as quick to call bullshit on their shrinks. I hope so.
>
> Regards,
> Morose

 

Allison

Posted by Morose on December 13, 1999, at 16:41:49

In reply to Re: 20 questions for Fred, Adam, Erin, Noa, Tom, Siri, posted by allison on December 13, 1999, at 16:05:51

Allison, where's your message?

 

apology for the previous post

Posted by allison on December 13, 1999, at 16:45:05

In reply to Re: 20 questions for Fred, Adam, Erin, Noa, Tom, Siri, posted by Morose on December 13, 1999, at 14:24:19

Morose,

Apologies for the previous post. I hit the wrong button.

Your second point interests me. Perhaps I am mistaken, but it feels to me as though you have a somewhat narrow view of a psychiatrist/patient relationship.

I can only comment on my own experience. I don't care for evangelists and don't mean to come off as one.

While I have found my psychiatrist has tons more knowledge/study of the field (as well he should), he assumes no fortune-telling attitude, and I do not **think** that I assume the position of a wide-eyed person awaiting some pronouncement.

When I started seeing my psychiatrist, I was extremely hesitant. I would not have gone at all had I not been at the very end of the rope. I suspended my suspicions, skepticism, cynicism and held my fear at bay to see whether the time spent would/could be beneficial. Over more than two years I have found in my relationship with my doctor (with the exception of reciprocal confidences, which I view as irrelevant) exactly what you characterize as generally absent in a doctor/patient relationship : sovereignty over one’s intellect, good-faith skepticism (on my part), a consideration of alternatives (when skepticism arises), a willingness to explain oneself when asked and an expectation that others do likewise, good manners, common sense, and a reciprocal exchange of ideas.

There is no hidden agenda, no secrets held. If things aren't clear, I make him elaborate. I often ask where my doctor is going with particular lines of thought, accept, reject, or suspend pending further cogitation on the subject. I am trying to educate myself more on the field to see for myself before calling bullshit on any of it. At this point, some things make sense. Others seem obscure. Others I doubt or reject or suspend judgment pending further study. I would like to think that if I can understand more of the field, I will be able to judge for myself whether what we're doing is helping.

At this point, all I can say is that a good number of my doctor's observations and questions have got me to thinking a lot about how and why things are and how they can be. And I feel an absolute, active, and very real and central participant in the whole process.

Your points are interesting and well-made and have caused me to think even more. And although your delivery seems abrupt, I do not consider you an asshole.


 

Re: apology for the previous apology

Posted by Morose on December 13, 1999, at 17:04:03

In reply to apology for the previous post, posted by allison on December 13, 1999, at 16:45:05

This is really a very attenuated point, and a clunky anti-climax to the sentiment that perhaps I am not an asshole, but I did not mean to whine about anybody's criticism. I like conversation as a contact sport. I pulled my horns in a bit because some people on this board are, shall we say, a bit sensitive, and I do not want to aggravate anybody's problems.

Regards,
Morose

 

Morose, to answer your questions...(long)

Posted by siri on December 13, 1999, at 23:10:51

In reply to Re: apology for the previous apology, posted by Morose on December 13, 1999, at 17:04:03

I'm finally getting back to this. I, too, was a little taken aback by what I perhaps wrongly perceived to be a condescending tone to your questions. I apologize for misjudging you. I enjoy conversation and debate, but I don't like feeling interrogated. So I will simply answer in my own way.
I don't care to socialize with my therapist, or consider her a buddy. That said, I love her dearly. She has helped me get through some hellish times. She has always been warm, loving, accepting, non-judgemental, humorous and gentle.
When my car breaks down, I take it to the best mechanic I can find. I don't have to be buddies with him, or share books with him in order to have him do good work on my car.
I don't want to be buddies with my therapist and share in her personal life. She helps me in a way that no one else does. I can be buddies with anybody-but I don't choose to be buddies with her. I do not want to blur our boundaries and bring distractions into our relationship. And it is a GOOD relationship! Just not the same kind of relationship I have with my friends. I don't choose to have the same kind of relationship with other men that I have with my husband. No one would expect me to! Why should I have to have an outside friendship with my therapist?
And I am proud to introduce her to people as my therapist. I am not ashamed of our relationship at all.
I do not see a psychiatrist. I personally don't believe in the Freudian philosophy, and I don't like the inequal balance of power in many therapeutic relationships. I do not agree with the Freudians that the "Royal Road" to the "Unconscious" is through dreams.
I prefer the methods and philosophy of Hakomi. If you went to the URL I posted you may have gotten a small taste of how Hakomi differs from classical analysis. I have found a lot of truth in the Hakomi experience that the "unconscious" speaks through the body.
Have you ever gotten a tightness in your gut, or felt your jaw clench or your feet get the jitters? Have you ever seen someone say something very happy but their face is very sad? Sometimes the body has a wisdom that is far deeper than the intellect. It's like the 90% of the iceberg that is under water. By accessing the body in the present moment, discovering its' language and observing without judgement, which means without preconceived notions of what must be changed or "fixed", a great wealth of knowlege can be tapped within. I don't mean bodywork or massage- it's not like that. It's studying the whole self, not just intellectualizing and talking on an intellectual level. It is very hard to understand feelings by simply theorizing about why one feels such a way. I have found Hakomi to be a more elegant and efficient method to discover what is going on inside. It was very helpful, for example, helping me to heal from childhood abuse as well as cancer. I was able to use Hakomi methods to engage my killer cells and fight the cancer. You don't have to believe me- I know what I experienced.
The role of a Hakomi therapist is to make things as safe as possible within the therapeutic relationship, so as a client I can feel comfortable going inside and discovering my own answers. Sometimes the past comes up, sometimes it's sad, sometimes it's about discovering my inner strength and joy. My therapist simply supports whatever comes up, because she trusts me and has absolute respect for me and my own healing process. She has a lot of methods she uses to help me explore and evoke present experience. We don't theorize and talk on an intellectual level about my past. It is a very different methodolgy to typical analysis- like comparing apples and elephants.
If I cut my hand, it heals without my knowing how. If my psyche is wounded, it knows how to heal, if I only learn to listen within. My therapist helps me to listen, but she does not project her own agenda on me.
I believe that mind and body and spirit are not separate entities, and for me at least, I do best when I integrate all these parts of myself.
I hope I have been clear enough. I don't know how to explain any more clearly. And if you disagree, that's fine. I don't feel it necessary to argue about who is right and who is wrong- i just like this school of therapy for myself, but if others like other methods, fine. Whatever works.
Be well,
siri

> This is really a very attenuated point, and a clunky anti-climax to the sentiment that perhaps I am not an asshole, but I did not mean to whine about anybody's criticism. I like conversation as a contact sport. I pulled my horns in a bit because some people on this board are, shall we say, a bit sensitive, and I do not want to aggravate anybody's problems.
>
> Regards,
> Morose

 

Re: apology for the previous apology

Posted by allison on December 14, 1999, at 8:19:47

In reply to Re: apology for the previous apology, posted by Morose on December 13, 1999, at 17:04:03

Interesting. I guess I don't see conversation in that way at all. The contact sports I can think of generally have winners and losers and quite often involve aggression. Those things often are not conducive to a healthy and open exchange of ideas.

If I may ask a more personal question, if drugs have solved your problems and you're happy now than you've ever been, why do you call yourself Morose?

allison

> This is really a very attenuated point, and a clunky anti-climax to the sentiment that perhaps I am not an asshole, but I did not mean to whine about anybody's criticism. I like conversation as a contact sport. I pulled my horns in a bit because some people on this board are, shall we say, a bit sensitive, and I do not want to aggravate anybody's problems.
>
> Regards,
> Morose

 

Allison

Posted by Morose on December 14, 1999, at 11:50:19

In reply to Re: apology for the previous apology, posted by allison on December 14, 1999, at 8:19:47

> Interesting. I guess I don't see conversation in that way at all. The contact sports I can think of generally have winners and losers and quite often involve aggression. Those things often are not conducive to a healthy and open exchange of ideas.

Something tells me that you hold your own in any kind of conversation.

> If I may ask a more personal question, if drugs have solved your problems and you're happy now than you've ever been, why do you call yourself Morose?
>
It would be my pleasure to answer a more personal question, but I will presume permission to ask you one in return.

I didn't devote any thought to my nom de Psychobabble other than wanting to connote that my deal is depression rather than one of the other afflictions that get discussed here. For years I thought of recurring depression as a character problem I could think my way out of. Today, instead, I think of a vulnerability to depression as a permanent feature of my temperament that will require medication from time to time. I am a recovering depressive, if you will, so to that extent I am Morose.

Question: how in the hell do you expect to ever get well reading things like Oblivion and King Lear?

Best regards,
Morose

 

Morose

Posted by allison on December 14, 1999, at 13:04:43

In reply to Allison, posted by Morose on December 14, 1999, at 11:50:19

> Question: how in the hell do you expect to ever get well reading things like Oblivion and King Lear?

Permission granted. However, follow-up questions will ensue.

I'm rereading parts of Oblivion to refresh my memory and help me think more clearly about some current issues. My psychiatrist mentioned the book some months ago. I read it then and we discussed. To be more specific, we had been talking about the recent death of my mother and the fact that I am the last surviving leaf of that limb of the family tree, hence saddled with the burden of being the keeper of 160 years' worth of the personal effects of dead ancestors.

Have you read the book? The cogent point I took away from it has to do with the idea that memories of dead people fade over time as the people who remember them die. With the exception of a few famous folks, we all eventually fade into an oblivion.

Re: Lear. I studied it in-depth in college. It's my favorite play of Shakespeare's. I like to reread it from time to time anyway. The reason for this particular rereading: My shrink in the past has asked me whether I identify with particular well-known literary characters or others that spring to mind. To date, I haven't. However, recent discussions about my current and continuing tumultuous relationship with my father have made me curious and wanting to refresh my memory on Cordelia's relationship with good ol' daddy. If nothing else, it's comforting to know that Lear wises up in the end. I cannot predict the same for my dad.

My questions to you then: Is reading fiction that some might construe as depressing any worse than one naming onself with an adjective of the same nature? Does reading depressing fiction have any effect on a person's wellness if, according to the theory you've introduced, medication is the only thing that "cures" these sorts of maladies?

Cordially,
allison

 

Allison

Posted by Sigmund on December 14, 1999, at 17:32:45

In reply to Morose, posted by allison on December 14, 1999, at 13:04:43

I changed my name - just like that! - to remove one issue.

Your second question is a stumper. If I cannot think my way out of depression, how can I suggest that you can think (read) your way into depression?

I don't know; maybe that's just the way things are. Depressing fiction is depressing and uplifting fiction is . . . well, let's face it, it's depressing too. Try this experiment: when you are feeling up, read Phillip Larkin's "Aubade." Now how do you feel? When you are feeling down, go the the newspaper and read Family Circus. Feel any better?

I no longer believe, if I ever did, that contemplation of horror is edifying. I know this might sound like an advertisement for illiteracy, but I have found that I can paint myself into a psychological corner by pursuing the wrong kind of reading, and I have learned not to do that. Some terribly important questions simply do not have answers and are best ignored. When I am depressed, I think about death all day and dream about death all night, and I am drawn to books about death. With my current ad's, I am not so hung up on death and I am not attracted to deathy books. Maybe reading morbid literature is a symptom of depression rather than a cause of depression.

It is interesting to think that Shakespeare wrote Lear, MacBeth, and (think) Antony & Cleopatra in the space of 15 months, and blasted through that period of his life to go on to write the Tempest. His courage and wisdom are astounding.

Best regards,
Sigmund (fka Morose)

 

Sigmund

Posted by allison on December 14, 1999, at 18:45:35

In reply to Allison, posted by Sigmund on December 14, 1999, at 17:32:45

> I changed my name - just like that! - to remove one issue.
Now you're cheating.

> Your second question is a stumper. If I cannot think my way out of depression, how can I suggest that you can think (read) your way into depression?
Are you suggesting we might agree on something?

"An only life can take so long to climb
Clear of its wrong beginnings, and may never" -- to me, that's scarier than death. And "Family Circus" is scarier than Philip Larkin. But "Cathy" is worse.

> Maybe reading morbid literature is a symptom of depression rather than a cause of depression.
Well Morose, maybe you and I agree on two things then, or is Sigmund another personality of yours? (Kidding, KIDDING...)

You've made me laugh more than once today. I thank you for it.

Kind regards,
Allison

 

Re: Sigmund

Posted by Sigmund on December 15, 1999, at 12:19:39

In reply to Sigmund, posted by allison on December 14, 1999, at 18:45:35

> > I changed my name - just like that! - to remove one issue.
> Now you're cheating.
>
> > Your second question is a stumper. If I cannot think my way out of depression, how can I suggest that you can think (read) your way into depression?
> Are you suggesting we might agree on something?
>
> "An only life can take so long to climb
> Clear of its wrong beginnings, and may never" -- to me, that's scarier than death. And "Family Circus" is scarier than Philip Larkin. But "Cathy" is worse.
>
> > Maybe reading morbid literature is a symptom of depression rather than a cause of depression.
> Well Morose, maybe you and I agree on two things then, or is Sigmund another personality of yours? (Kidding, KIDDING...)
>
> You've made me laugh more than once today. I thank you for it.
>
> Kind regards,
> Allison
>

I would like permission to comment on your October postings. May I send you an e-mail?

Best regards,
Sigmund


This is the end of the thread.


Show another thread

URL of post in thread:


Psycho-Babble Medication | Extras | FAQ


[dr. bob] Dr. Bob is Robert Hsiung, MD, bob@dr-bob.org

Script revised: February 4, 2008
URL: http://www.dr-bob.org/cgi-bin/pb/mget.pl
Copyright 2006-17 Robert Hsiung.
Owned and operated by Dr. Bob LLC and not the University of Chicago.