Re: ACT's attack on CBT @ randy:-)

[Guest guest]

Hi randy:-)

i love how u write...i might not make any sense AT ALL right now, but i dunno y

, i am not seeing ACT therapy as a dental floss. Or any mindfulness based

therapy for that matter. perhaps u r gonna talk about act and mbct later, hence

i am misunderstanding ur email

<<<they assume that once therapy has done its job, it is no

> longer needed. >>>>

RANDY, i have this strange feeling i live in la-la land, coz to me incorporating

ACT principles in ur life is like attaching a " value " to ur action. E.g. i value

being a giving spouse. It's not a goal, so i won't say, ok now i'm done, now i

can go back to being selfish.

to me, It will be needed as long as our mind will keep generating positives and

negatives. negativilty from within us, or from the outside world will never end,

then how can u applying a perticular theraputic approach end? i dunno randy, i

am just wondering. plz don't get me wrong, i am not telling u, but asking, coz

that's where sometimes i really wonder y am i soooo off?

i have been telling my community this, and i dunno if i am telling them the

wrong thing, but i tell em if u take therapy as a " treatment for mental health

disorders " than ur chances of going through it r unlikely, but if u c it as a

'tool to cope with what is an envitable part of life and living' then u r more

liekly to incorporate it into ur life with open arms, and maybe use it as a

toothbrush? , and it is such an imp. part of ur daily living, and the great

benefits that come out of it daily e.g. fresh breathe.

>

> > In particular, I've found ACT to be fairly unforgiving of CBT's

> > association with a medical model of care more aligned with physical

> > ailments, which looks at " abnormalities " and tries to heal them.

>

> Earlier in this thread I said this too, and referenced the 1999 ACT

> book as evidence. But to be fair, that book wasn't picking on CBT

> alone, or even CBT by name. And to me this view of mental illness as

> abnormality goes way, way back in the psychotherapeutic culture.

> Pretty much any traditional talk therapy you can name assumes that

> therapy is something you do to get fixed, after which you no longer

> need it, any more than you would need to wear a splint once a broken

> bone has mended.

>

> I am working my way up to a piece of writing about ACT that may touch

> on this subject. Below is an excerpt from an EXTREMELY rough draft

> that gives the general flavor.

>

> - Randy

>

> (Excerpt)

>

> Most therapies are like dental floss: we use dental floss when we have

> to, at night before we go to bed; but otherwise we would rather not

> waste time talking or thinking about it. Dental floss is mundane,

> utilitarian, something we do only to keep our gums healthy; if we

> could skip it, we would. It plays no part in our romantic view of

> ourselves and our lives. If we were to write a memoir a thousand pages

> long about our life, in all its glory and shame, we would not waste

> even a single paragraph describing our flossing habits.

>

> Talk therapy is like that. Or at least, most talk therapies are.

> Freudian psychoanalysis assumes we are a mass of sick tendencies that

> even in a healthy person are threaten to destroy us: defense

> mechanisms that defend too well; drives for sex and death that must be

> reined in by an ego that is itself prone to becoming monstrous; an

> unconscious that resembles a cave of permanent darkness, brimming with

> bones and bodies and nightmarish memories from infancy. Newer

> therapies like cognitive behavior therapy are much more crisp and

> modern: they assume that our brains are essentially computers, and

> like computers, are prone to bugs that distort proper information

> processing. A new program is installed, fully of rational rather than

> irrational thoughts, and voila - we can get back to the business of

> living.

>

> And in fact that is something nearly all talk therapies have in

> common: regardless of their particular philosophy or method of

> treatment, they assume that once therapy has done its job, it is no

> longer needed. In other words, there is an absolute division between

> " therapy " and " living " such that therapy can make healthy living

> possible where previously it was not, but is otherwise like dental

> floss.

>