The gathering place for Mental Health and
Applied Behavior Science Professionals. Become a charter member of Behavior OnLine. |
#1
|
|||
|
|||
Cognitive Mechanisms, Ugly Babies, Wind & Winning
Back in 12/2000 I came across this forum and a 2/99 JimB post entitled, “Cognitive Mechanisms and the Bucket of Mush,†wherein Jim suggested, among other things that, “… cognitive therapy [CT] is simple minded stuff that reproduces because it works independently of context and it is fed by trends in modern health care.†Liking what I read, I made my first post here regarding my view (based on my understanding of LeDoux, Damasio, etc.) regarding the separateness of emotion and cognition, and how Cognitive Therapy (CT) generally fails to make this necessary distinction, starting with these paragraphs:
Quote:
Essentially I was being told that my baby was ugly . . . and I was elated, having found a “psychology†forum where the participants didn’t feel a need to blow wind up each other’s ass, as many are often wont to do in these kinds of forums/discussions. (Although, as it turned out in my case, it does seem that my initial assertions/arguments were more or less correct after all, something my critics may still be disinclined to acknowledge.) Anyhoo, as I see it, this forum isn’t about “winning†arguments, or any of this “win-win†feel-good nonsense—rather it’s more a place where you have an opportunity to provide snapshots of your issue, enabling others to then evaluate and explain what they see as defects in your, more than likely, bastardised offspring; and for those that really want to know, maybe they experience a bit of evolution. |
#2
|
|||
|
|||
Re: Cognitive Mechanisms, Ugly Babies, Wind & Winning
Fred,
I get embarrassed whenever you remember what I wrote. (but thanks!) And, my own toy-collection has done a "Rudy Raff" number: duplicate, compartmentalize, vary, and launch new developmental, weakly-linked cascades. (See Russian posting) Anyhew... Would you buy the idea that thoughts reflect competiting "modules" and that CBT works by switching the underlying modules? Indignation, fear of separation, hierarchy, and entrapment: these are the biggies that escort folks to my office.... Jim |
#3
|
|||
|
|||
Re: Cognitive Mechanisms, Ugly Babies, Wind & Winning
Quote:
Your “modules†don’t seem to make a distinction between matter and coding. As computer hardware requires software to function, human matter requires coding to function, and to “understand.†And as computers can have hardware or software problems, humans can have biochemical or mentality problems—and as adding memory (hardware), or upgrading the software, may help a computer function better, taking an SSRI (matter), or doing CBT (upgrading the coding), may help a human function better. OTOH, as things become more complex, I suppose the distinctions between hardware and software, biochemistry and coding, become less apparent. And really, maybe it all boils down to Max Planck’s POV: “There is no matter as such! All matter originates and exists only by virtue of a force. We must assume behind this force the existence of a conscious and intelligent Mind. This Mind is the matrix of all matter.†So anyhoo, setting aside my inclination to make distinctions between matter and mentality, and if by “modules†you mean modules consisting of matter and coding, then yeah, I can see where thoughts reflect competing "modules" and that CBT works by altering the underlying modules. And I might add that it is with our cognition in CBT that we humans are choosing, perhaps with the help of a therapist, to alter underlying modules—or we may choose to alter those underlying modules with drugs instead. |
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
|
|