7 ms·

Ok, so therapy has moved from lobotomies to... As I said, therapy seems to be devoid of any real definition.

digler999 10y ago
psychotherapy is a form of treatment for many psychological disorders as defined by the DSM-V. The treatment varies based on the therapist's style and patient preference, but it always centers around talking to a licensed professional about the patient's feelings, behaviors, thoughts, dreams, fears. Through talking, the therapist can spot patterns of harmful and destructive beliefs and thought patterns. To use a bit of jargon, they can deconstruct a patient's defenses and suggest changes in thoughts/actions that - if followed - may often alleviate some or all of the symptoms. Perhaps the thing that bothers you is that it's an inexact science ?
- atsaloli 10y ago
  BTW, NIMH has turned away from the DSM due to "lack of validity ". https://www.nimh.nih.gov/about/directors/thomas-insel/blog/2013/transforming-diagnosis.shtml https://www.nimh.nih.gov/about/directors/thomas-insel/blog/2... If it's that inexact, I wouldn't call it science. There's presently no standard objective laboratory test for Anxiety, Depression, or similar.
  - digler999 10y ago
    > There's presently no standard objective laboratory test I don't know what's so special about a "laboratory". Is there a name yet for this fallacy "because a machine told me, it must be true." ? Should we name it the "calculator fallacy" or the "internet fallacy" ? from your link: "That is why NIMH will be re-orienting its research away from DSM categories." Its research, it doesn't do any good to toss DSM for treatment of mental disorders. I believe thats why they revise the DSM every year (?), is to keep up with changes in diagnosis. If a new classification system comes along, then replace "DSM" with whatever they call theirs.
    - jsprogrammer 10y ago
      As astaloli said, the DSM is not valid. If changes in diagnoses are changing yearly...the NIMH seems completely correct in rejecting the book.
      - digler999 10y ago
        > the DSM is not valid. that makes treatment easy then. POOF! all mental illness disappears because the book is "invalid". FYI you're using a defense called denial[1] when you do that :) [1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Denial https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Denial
        atsaloli 10y ago
        We do actually need valid treatment.
        TheOtherHobbes 10y ago
        That's going to be hard to organise if no one is sure what they're supposed to be treating. It looks like you're using a God of the Sciences argument - because we don't have a full and complete model of mental anguish and self-defeating behaviours, nothing we currently believe about them can be useful or true. This turns out to be inaccurate. Therapies are tested regularly. Some score better than others, and statistically the results are at least as valid as the result of clinical drug trials. It would be useful to have a complete Theory of Mind, but no such thing is likely to exist for a while. Luckily it isn't needed to make a difference. The most useful therapies are results-oriented rather than process-oriented, and the most consistent results come from behavioural reinforcement techniques (where "behaviour" includes "persistent emotional states.") This doesn't mean other kinds of therapy are useless. But they are less reliable - which may be because they can be more challenging for both sides, or because they don't work, or for all kinds of other reasons.
        jsprogrammer 10y ago
- lisper 10y ago
  I upvoted you, but I would like to say that I think jsprogrammer's remarks being downvoted into oblivion is not warranted. He (she?) may have made his (her?) point inartfully, but it is a valid point: what is the basis for believing that "therapy" (whatever it may mean at this particular point in time) actually works, that it is anything more than a placebo? For example, this to me is a yellow flag: > talking to a licensed professional Why is licensure such a key feature? Licensure can be as much an indication of political corruption and protectionism as scientific validity. [EDIT: Just for the record, I actually do believe that therapy works, and I have advocated for it myself. That doesn't make it any less valid to ask the question: what is the basis for this belief?]
  - digler999 10y ago
    > jsprogrammer's remarks being downvoted into oblivion is not warranted. he's making loaded statements out of ignorance because he wont bother to google psychotherapy's definition. There is a therapeutic process to talking and learning to manage emotions and cope with defenses. Licensure is a key feature so you prohibit people from making fake therapeutic claims or quackery. Or to limit taking advantage of emotionally vulnerable people (it still happens, but licensure requires insurance). Same reason you or I can't call ourselves doctors and claim to cure physiological illness. Do you disagree with that "licensure" too ? Why can't you and I open up a back and spinal clinic ? We could probably make a lot of dough. I dont know why its acceptable to denigrate the field of psychology. Is the 'engineering way' the only way to solve problems ? Should they just "stop it" until they have humans figured out down to a schematic/circuit ? Then they can treat all the anxiety/depression from our overworked consumerist lifestyles and make us into the perfect capitalist cattle ? Is psychology bullshit because Apple doesn't yet sell iPsychometers with USB-C interfaces so we can patch our brains with the latest "update" and all be perfect? Humans aren't machines and healing or treatment for psychological pain and mental illness isn't done by running a script. It's done by interviewing patients, classifying symptoms, taking surveys, attempting (and often failing) treatments, doing double blind trials. Things that aren't deterministic, which is also the nature of reality. Why can't you face that ? edit: let me give you specific examples of why you need a license to practice: * patient comes in and says they were raped. and the alleged rapist is still doing it. unlicensed quack might be scared to report it to the police, might avoid helping the patient at all because it's "too difficult", or might try to exploit abuse victim for his own sexual pleasure. * elderly suicidal patient divulges financial info to therapist, who then tips off a dirty lawyer/estate planner into contacting the patient and stealing /exploiting him. * husband and wife go to therapy. Husband knows he's getting divorced but doesn't want to pay half. So he pays off the therapist to give biased testimony in court blaming the wife for false actions. * therapist was personally harmed by a particular person earlier in life. now they take joy in intentionally misleading/upsetting other patients who look/act like the one who hurt them. I hope this is enough to see why the field is regulated.

psychotherapy is a form of treatment for many psychological disorders as defined by the DSM-V. The treatment varies based on the therapist's style and patient preference, but it always centers around talking to a licensed professional about the patient's feelings, behaviors, thoughts, dreams, fears. Through talking, the therapist can spot patterns of harmful and destructive beliefs and thought patterns. To use a bit of jargon, they can deconstruct a patient's defenses and suggest changes in thoughts/actions that - if followed - may often alleviate some or all of the symptoms. Perhaps the thing that bothers you is that it's an inexact science ?

atsaloli 10y ago
BTW, NIMH has turned away from the DSM due to "lack of validity ". https://www.nimh.nih.gov/about/directors/thomas-insel/blog/2013/transforming-diagnosis.shtml https://www.nimh.nih.gov/about/directors/thomas-insel/blog/2... If it's that inexact, I wouldn't call it science. There's presently no standard objective laboratory test for Anxiety, Depression, or similar.
- digler999 10y ago
  > There's presently no standard objective laboratory test I don't know what's so special about a "laboratory". Is there a name yet for this fallacy "because a machine told me, it must be true." ? Should we name it the "calculator fallacy" or the "internet fallacy" ? from your link: "That is why NIMH will be re-orienting its research away from DSM categories." Its research, it doesn't do any good to toss DSM for treatment of mental disorders. I believe thats why they revise the DSM every year (?), is to keep up with changes in diagnosis. If a new classification system comes along, then replace "DSM" with whatever they call theirs.
  - jsprogrammer 10y ago
    As astaloli said, the DSM is not valid. If changes in diagnoses are changing yearly...the NIMH seems completely correct in rejecting the book.
    - digler999 10y ago
      > the DSM is not valid. that makes treatment easy then. POOF! all mental illness disappears because the book is "invalid". FYI you're using a defense called denial[1] when you do that :) [1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Denial https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Denial
      - atsaloli 10y ago
        We do actually need valid treatment.
        TheOtherHobbes 10y ago
        That's going to be hard to organise if no one is sure what they're supposed to be treating. It looks like you're using a God of the Sciences argument - because we don't have a full and complete model of mental anguish and self-defeating behaviours, nothing we currently believe about them can be useful or true. This turns out to be inaccurate. Therapies are tested regularly. Some score better than others, and statistically the results are at least as valid as the result of clinical drug trials. It would be useful to have a complete Theory of Mind, but no such thing is likely to exist for a while. Luckily it isn't needed to make a difference. The most useful therapies are results-oriented rather than process-oriented, and the most consistent results come from behavioural reinforcement techniques (where "behaviour" includes "persistent emotional states.") This doesn't mean other kinds of therapy are useless. But they are less reliable - which may be because they can be more challenging for both sides, or because they don't work, or for all kinds of other reasons.
        jsprogrammer 10y ago
lisper 10y ago
I upvoted you, but I would like to say that I think jsprogrammer's remarks being downvoted into oblivion is not warranted. He (she?) may have made his (her?) point inartfully, but it is a valid point: what is the basis for believing that "therapy" (whatever it may mean at this particular point in time) actually works, that it is anything more than a placebo? For example, this to me is a yellow flag: > talking to a licensed professional Why is licensure such a key feature? Licensure can be as much an indication of political corruption and protectionism as scientific validity. [EDIT: Just for the record, I actually do believe that therapy works, and I have advocated for it myself. That doesn't make it any less valid to ask the question: what is the basis for this belief?]
- digler999 10y ago
  > jsprogrammer's remarks being downvoted into oblivion is not warranted. he's making loaded statements out of ignorance because he wont bother to google psychotherapy's definition. There is a therapeutic process to talking and learning to manage emotions and cope with defenses. Licensure is a key feature so you prohibit people from making fake therapeutic claims or quackery. Or to limit taking advantage of emotionally vulnerable people (it still happens, but licensure requires insurance). Same reason you or I can't call ourselves doctors and claim to cure physiological illness. Do you disagree with that "licensure" too ? Why can't you and I open up a back and spinal clinic ? We could probably make a lot of dough. I dont know why its acceptable to denigrate the field of psychology. Is the 'engineering way' the only way to solve problems ? Should they just "stop it" until they have humans figured out down to a schematic/circuit ? Then they can treat all the anxiety/depression from our overworked consumerist lifestyles and make us into the perfect capitalist cattle ? Is psychology bullshit because Apple doesn't yet sell iPsychometers with USB-C interfaces so we can patch our brains with the latest "update" and all be perfect? Humans aren't machines and healing or treatment for psychological pain and mental illness isn't done by running a script. It's done by interviewing patients, classifying symptoms, taking surveys, attempting (and often failing) treatments, doing double blind trials. Things that aren't deterministic, which is also the nature of reality. Why can't you face that ? edit: let me give you specific examples of why you need a license to practice: * patient comes in and says they were raped. and the alleged rapist is still doing it. unlicensed quack might be scared to report it to the police, might avoid helping the patient at all because it's "too difficult", or might try to exploit abuse victim for his own sexual pleasure. * elderly suicidal patient divulges financial info to therapist, who then tips off a dirty lawyer/estate planner into contacting the patient and stealing /exploiting him. * husband and wife go to therapy. Husband knows he's getting divorced but doesn't want to pay half. So he pays off the therapist to give biased testimony in court blaming the wife for false actions. * therapist was personally harmed by a particular person earlier in life. now they take joy in intentionally misleading/upsetting other patients who look/act like the one who hurt them. I hope this is enough to see why the field is regulated.