5 ms·

Sorry for being harsh but this is pseudoscience. The most researched approach - CBT - says this: we can change our thoughts and it will change our emotions. Som

Sorry for being harsh but this is pseudoscience. The most researched approach - CBT - says this: we can change our thoughts and it will change our emotions. Something happens, first we experience neutral arousal, our fast automatic thoughts color it and then we experience emotions. For example, we interpret this neutral arousal as anger if we think that another person did something intentionally, not by mistake/accident/because of tiredness... If we think that it was our mistake - we experience sadness. You thoughts are lines of code that cause your emotions and actions. You can rewrite your thoughts. I recommend counseling and reading the primary source - CBT Basics and Beyond by Beck - it’s very readable and simple. It’s like learning another programming language and rewriting your own brain OS. You’ll change your nonadaptive unhelpful thoughts to the adaptive helpful ones. P.S. Please, at least remove the line about suicidal thoughts. You should never say “change” to a suicidal person.

0xcde4c3db 3y ago
> The most researched approach - CBT While it's true that CBT is the most researched, virtually all of that research is on overall observed efficacy (and there are concerns that the efficacy that has been observed, especially in the earliest studies, is inflated by allegiance effects). That kind of research doesn't provide the tools to say anything about the validity of CBT's underlying conceptual/theoretical model, especially considering that CBT doesn't consistently outperform other modalities with radically different underlying models.
- antonkar 3y ago
  One of the most proven things we have to manage depression and anger among others things (I regularly check the most recent meta analysis and CBT is always one of the top treatments by efficacy). What other psychological approach you consider more effective to manage depression? The writer of the article based it on the book by Karla McLaren M.Ed., as her Amazon page describes her “an award-winning author, social science researcher, and pioneering educator whose empathic approach to emotions revalues even the most “negative” emotions, and opens startling new pathways into the depths of the soul.” When was the last time scientists discussed souls? Here is her articles, make your own conclusions: https://scholar.google.com/scholar?hl=en&as_sdt=0%2C5&q=Karla+McLaren&btnG= https://scholar.google.com/scholar?hl=en&as_sdt=0%2C5&q=Karl... Compare them with Beck’s articles: https://scholar.google.com/scholar?hl=en&as_sdt=0%2C5&q=aaron+beck&btnG= https://scholar.google.com/scholar?hl=en&as_sdt=0%2C5&q=aaro...
  - roguecoder 3y ago
    "One of the top treatments by efficacy" doesn't even slightly imply that its theory of the world is more correct than those other top treatments. Even being effective doesn't mean its stated rationale is correct. Acupuncture absolutely treats numerous conditions, but that doesn't mean meridians are real. I'm glad you found a modality that works for you. But in general, it doesn't routinely out-perform other interventions. It is more popular than the other effective modalities because it easier to administer and sell to insurance companies, but that doesn't make it more correct.
    - antonkar 3y ago
      Yes, I never said that CBT is completely correct in every regard. I was just shocked to see an articles based on a book that mentions souls on Hacker News. CBT is actually researched and quite effective unlike the book of former chakra practitioner Karla McLaren. We cannot change emotions directly, we can only change our thoughts and it will change our emotions. I recommend reading Beck directly in addition to counseling, it really helps. Sadly some psychologists are not great. Wish you the best!
      - roguecoder 3y ago
        Ah, I see the confusion: this book isn't about changing our emotions. It is about learning from them. There are aspects of CBT that are essentially gaslighting ourselves, ignoring the information we could get from our emotional responses in favor of becoming more socially acceptable. It is part of why it is contraindicated in cases of cPTSD. This book is about a very different goal. It is about what can be learned from our built-in sensors, rather than how we silence their alerts.
        maleldil 3y ago
        > There are aspects of CBT that are essentially gaslighting ourselves Could you be more specific? I'm another patient undergoing CBT, and I've found it overall helpful in managing BPD. I'm curious what you mean by this.

0xcde4c3db 3y ago

> The most researched approach - CBT While it's true that CBT is the most researched, virtually all of that research is on overall observed efficacy (and there are concerns that the efficacy that has been observed, especially in the earliest studies, is inflated by allegiance effects). That kind of research doesn't provide the tools to say anything about the validity of CBT's underlying conceptual/theoretical model, especially considering that CBT doesn't consistently outperform other modalities with radically different underlying models.

antonkar 3y ago
One of the most proven things we have to manage depression and anger among others things (I regularly check the most recent meta analysis and CBT is always one of the top treatments by efficacy). What other psychological approach you consider more effective to manage depression? The writer of the article based it on the book by Karla McLaren M.Ed., as her Amazon page describes her “an award-winning author, social science researcher, and pioneering educator whose empathic approach to emotions revalues even the most “negative” emotions, and opens startling new pathways into the depths of the soul.” When was the last time scientists discussed souls? Here is her articles, make your own conclusions: https://scholar.google.com/scholar?hl=en&as_sdt=0%2C5&q=Karla+McLaren&btnG= https://scholar.google.com/scholar?hl=en&as_sdt=0%2C5&q=Karl... Compare them with Beck’s articles: https://scholar.google.com/scholar?hl=en&as_sdt=0%2C5&q=aaron+beck&btnG= https://scholar.google.com/scholar?hl=en&as_sdt=0%2C5&q=aaro...
- roguecoder 3y ago
  "One of the top treatments by efficacy" doesn't even slightly imply that its theory of the world is more correct than those other top treatments. Even being effective doesn't mean its stated rationale is correct. Acupuncture absolutely treats numerous conditions, but that doesn't mean meridians are real. I'm glad you found a modality that works for you. But in general, it doesn't routinely out-perform other interventions. It is more popular than the other effective modalities because it easier to administer and sell to insurance companies, but that doesn't make it more correct.
  - antonkar 3y ago
    Yes, I never said that CBT is completely correct in every regard. I was just shocked to see an articles based on a book that mentions souls on Hacker News. CBT is actually researched and quite effective unlike the book of former chakra practitioner Karla McLaren. We cannot change emotions directly, we can only change our thoughts and it will change our emotions. I recommend reading Beck directly in addition to counseling, it really helps. Sadly some psychologists are not great. Wish you the best!
    - roguecoder 3y ago
      Ah, I see the confusion: this book isn't about changing our emotions. It is about learning from them. There are aspects of CBT that are essentially gaslighting ourselves, ignoring the information we could get from our emotional responses in favor of becoming more socially acceptable. It is part of why it is contraindicated in cases of cPTSD. This book is about a very different goal. It is about what can be learned from our built-in sensors, rather than how we silence their alerts.
      - maleldil 3y ago
        > There are aspects of CBT that are essentially gaslighting ourselves Could you be more specific? I'm another patient undergoing CBT, and I've found it overall helpful in managing BPD. I'm curious what you mean by this.