3 ms·

Sad that we've commercialized external perspective and wisdom.

jfengel 5y ago
I'd say "professionalized", but that's really just another way of saying the same thing. I see it as a positive thing that there are those who have specialized in it, and that it's a resource you can get. It should be part of your mental health care, and it sucks that we've commercialized that along with the rest of our health care. That costs a fortune in the US, and mental health care is often limited. It would be great if we had a more rational way of paying for it, freeing up our professionals to put their help where it's best used rather than for those who can best afford it.
- aahortwwy 5y ago
  Professionalized is a good term. > I see it as a positive thing that there are those who have specialized in it, and that it's a resource you can get. That is a positive thing but historically we haven't needed to turn to professionals for that resource. It's been provided, gratis, by community leaders and elders for most of human history. I see reliance on professionals for this sort of thing as a major negative. I'd argue that it reduces a community's ability to produce that resource for itself. Like this: > And unlike your friends circle, they're paid to be objective about it, to solve the problems rather than remain your friend. If you rely on a therapist to be objective with you, you don't need your friends to be, and you don't need to be that friend to other people. You can just tell them, "go to therapy, it's really helped me!" and be done with it... Maybe I'm taking something different away from your post above than what you actually meant. I see people talking about therapy as a way of maintaining mental fitness, rather than treating mental illness, and that bothers me. A bit of a rambling post, but I hope you catch my drift.
  - mlyle 5y ago
    I catch your drift, but (not previous poster) I disagree. I think it's wonderful that we have an outside resource for these things that: * is not in a position of power (like community leaders and elders) * is not compromised by pressures of friendship dynamics * is bound to confidentiality and rules of ethical conduct. People in positions of power and friends will still try and help, but the nature of the relationship makes it more difficult. Often, in the past, clergy would also be in the role of helping and were pseudo-professionalized... but again, this service was generally hardly "free" and the religious perspective had its own confounds.

I'd say "professionalized", but that's really just another way of saying the same thing. I see it as a positive thing that there are those who have specialized in it, and that it's a resource you can get. It should be part of your mental health care, and it sucks that we've commercialized that along with the rest of our health care. That costs a fortune in the US, and mental health care is often limited. It would be great if we had a more rational way of paying for it, freeing up our professionals to put their help where it's best used rather than for those who can best afford it.

aahortwwy 5y ago
Professionalized is a good term. > I see it as a positive thing that there are those who have specialized in it, and that it's a resource you can get. That is a positive thing but historically we haven't needed to turn to professionals for that resource. It's been provided, gratis, by community leaders and elders for most of human history. I see reliance on professionals for this sort of thing as a major negative. I'd argue that it reduces a community's ability to produce that resource for itself. Like this: > And unlike your friends circle, they're paid to be objective about it, to solve the problems rather than remain your friend. If you rely on a therapist to be objective with you, you don't need your friends to be, and you don't need to be that friend to other people. You can just tell them, "go to therapy, it's really helped me!" and be done with it... Maybe I'm taking something different away from your post above than what you actually meant. I see people talking about therapy as a way of maintaining mental fitness, rather than treating mental illness, and that bothers me. A bit of a rambling post, but I hope you catch my drift.
- mlyle 5y ago
  I catch your drift, but (not previous poster) I disagree. I think it's wonderful that we have an outside resource for these things that: * is not in a position of power (like community leaders and elders) * is not compromised by pressures of friendship dynamics * is bound to confidentiality and rules of ethical conduct. People in positions of power and friends will still try and help, but the nature of the relationship makes it more difficult. Often, in the past, clergy would also be in the role of helping and were pseudo-professionalized... but again, this service was generally hardly "free" and the religious perspective had its own confounds.