|
|
|
|
NubiWan
Skeptic Friend
USA
424 Posts |
 Posted - 09/22/2004 : 22:22:08
|
|
Just watched this program again, from the top this time. Thought it was excellent. Just wondered if anyone else here at the ol' SFN happened to catch it, and their reaction to it..?
|
 |
|
|
Dude
SFN Die Hard
USA
6891 Posts |
 Posted - 09/22/2004 : 22:34:46 [Permalink]
|
| not playing in my area till later this week.... will prob watch it. |
Ignorance is preferable to error; and he is less remote from the truth who believes nothing, than he who believes what is wrong.
-- Thomas Jefferson
"god :: the last refuge of a man with no answers and no argument." - G. Carlin
Hope, n.
The handmaiden of desperation; the opiate of despair; the illegible signpost on the road to perdition. ~~ da filth |
|
 |
|
|
beskeptigal
SFN Die Hard
USA
3834 Posts |
Posted - 09/24/2004 : 21:57:13 [Permalink]
|
| I saw it. It was interesting. I have a hard time paying attention to a show that gets more philosophical than hard science. And, I have little respect for Freud's work. There was quite a bit of biography that I was unaware of. I enjoyed that. |
|
|
|
Kil
Evil Skeptic
USA
13476 Posts |
Posted - 09/25/2004 : 12:32:11 [Permalink]
|
quote:
beskeptigal:
And, I have little respect for Freud's work.
I find it odd that many skeptics speak of Freud in negative terms without taking into consideration when he was developing his new science and how radical his approach to mental illness was. Even the idea that mental illness was humanely treatable was controversial at the time. He may have been wrong about many things but he was still a pioneer in an area of research that owes a giant debt to Freud.
Plus, he wasn't wrong about everything.
http://www.iep.utm.edu/f/freud.htm |
Uncertainty may make you uncomfortable. Certainty makes you ridiculous.
Why not question something for a change?
Genetic Literacy Project |
|
|
|
@tomic
Administrator
USA
4607 Posts |
Posted - 09/25/2004 : 12:40:37 [Permalink]
|
quote:
I have a hard time paying attention to a show that gets more philosophical than hard science.
I saw a lot of this show and while the show had little science no one should have gone in expecting it. It was nice to see an atheist perspective in a show like this given enough time to actually say something significant instead of the usual sound bite.
@ |
Gravity, not just a good idea...it's the law!
Sportsbettingacumen.com: The science of sports betting |
|
|
|
Kil
Evil Skeptic
USA
13476 Posts |
Posted - 09/25/2004 : 12:45:48 [Permalink]
|
| Oh yeah, I saw the show and liked it.... |
Uncertainty may make you uncomfortable. Certainty makes you ridiculous.
Why not question something for a change?
Genetic Literacy Project |
|
|
|
Dude
SFN Die Hard
USA
6891 Posts |
Posted - 09/25/2004 : 14:43:31 [Permalink]
|
| Totally missed it.... was on at 2am.... damn PBS... |
Ignorance is preferable to error; and he is less remote from the truth who believes nothing, than he who believes what is wrong.
-- Thomas Jefferson
"god :: the last refuge of a man with no answers and no argument." - G. Carlin
Hope, n.
The handmaiden of desperation; the opiate of despair; the illegible signpost on the road to perdition. ~~ da filth |
|
|
|
|
Siberia
SFN Addict
Brazil
2322 Posts |
Posted - 09/25/2004 : 17:00:10 [Permalink]
|
Ahhh, I am denied of such things. Damn South American networks and their bloody weak programmes. What was it about (exactly)?
Btw - interesting page, Kil! I'll make sure I'll read it more carefully later. Exam + saturday morning = ruin your mind for the rest of the day. |
"Why are you afraid of something you're not even sure exists?"
- The Kovenant, Via Negativa
"People who don't like their beliefs being laughed at shouldn't have such funny beliefs."
-- unknown
|
|
|
|
beskeptigal
SFN Die Hard
USA
3834 Posts |
Posted - 09/26/2004 : 02:44:21 [Permalink]
|
quote:
Originally posted by Kil
quote:
beskeptigal:
And, I have little respect for Freud's work.
I find it odd that many skeptics speak of Freud in negative terms without taking into consideration when he was developing his new science and how radical his approach to mental illness was. Even the idea that mental illness was humanely treatable was controversial at the time. He may have been wrong about many things but he was still a pioneer in an area of research that owes a giant debt to Freud.
Plus, he wasn't wrong about everything.
http://www.iep.utm.edu/f/freud.htm
Frankly, I think he was wrong on most everything. While I do agree we probably did need to make the progress on mental illness during Freud's time before we could arrive at where we are with mental illness today. Your parents can definitely screw you up, just as significant events can precipitate mental illness. But mental illness for the most part results from a biological basis.
Freud's psychoanalysis didn't do much to further the treatment of mental illness. It just continued in the same vein as before treating mental illness as somehow not medical illness. We still have this legacy today. Insurance companies treat mental illness separately. People view it differently. Let me give you a different perspective to consider.
Counseling would not likely be ordered if you were a diabetic. Instead, you would get a medical diagnosis and a whole lot of education on how to take care of your disease. Counseling to help you cope with the difficulties would more likely than not also be labeled as education.
But if you have a mental illness, medication is ordered to treat the disease. And we now have a lot more evidence based treatments available. But you would never be sent to classes to teach you how to manage the disease. Instead you would go to counseling or group sessions. In reality, a lot of what goes on in counseling is really education on how to manage your disease.
And the counseling approach to someone who wasn't thinking rationally isn't really all that different from trying to help a person in denial of their diabetes take better care of themselves. In such a case, your 'teaching' might very well be more counseling.
My point is, your brain is an organ just as your pancreas is. Dysfunction in either organ is a medical problem. Whether the illness is from a chemical imbalance, (insulin or seratonin), or behavioral, (obesity from behavioral causes or attachment disorder because your mother neglected you), either organ can exhibit disease. You don't cure these diseases by talking to someone.
And then there is the absolutely ridiculous claim about the Oedipus complex. Don't get me started on that absurdity. So I guess I just don't think psychoanalysis represented an advance so much as it represented a different direction of misunderstanding mental illness.
|
|
|
|
Kil
Evil Skeptic
USA
13476 Posts |
Posted - 09/26/2004 : 09:27:03 [Permalink]
|
quote:
beskeptigal:
Your parents can definitely screw you up, just as significant events can precipitate mental illness. But mental illness for the most part results from a biological basis.
I think it would be fair to point out that Freud himself believed psychosis to be biologically based. It was others who expanded his theory's on neurosis to include psychosis as a the more severe form, brought on by the same but worse conditions that Freud hypothesized in his study of neurosis. Not all of what has become known as Freudian psycology is Freudian psycology as he might have understood it to be...
I'll have more to say in responce to your post tonight, time permiting... |
Uncertainty may make you uncomfortable. Certainty makes you ridiculous.
Why not question something for a change?
Genetic Literacy Project |
|
|
|
Kil
Evil Skeptic
USA
13476 Posts |
Posted - 09/26/2004 : 19:24:49 [Permalink]
|
quote:
Me:
I find it odd that many skeptics speak of Freud in negative terms without taking into consideration when he was developing his new science and how radical his approach to mental illness was. Even the idea that mental illness was humanely treatable was controversial at the time. He may have been wrong about many things but he was still a pioneer in an area of research that owes a giant debt to Freud.
Plus, he wasn't wrong about everything.
http://www.iep.utm.edu/f/freud.htm
quote:
Beskeptigal:
Frankly, I think he was wrong on most everything. While I do agree we probably did need to make the progress on mental illness during Freud's time before we could arrive at where we are with mental illness today. Your parents can definitely screw you up, just as significant events can precipitate mental illness. But mental illness for the most part results from a biological basis.
Again, Freud thought that psychosis was biologically based. I suppose we must define our terms because most people seek counceling/therapy for situational depression. The duration of the therapy is usually from six to twelve weeks. Are you saying that most of these people require drugs?
quote:
Bespectigal:
Freud's psychoanalysis didn't do much to further the treatment of mental illness. It just continued in the same vein as before treating mental illness as somehow not medical illness.
From the book by David Stafford-Clark, What Freud Really Said
quote:
page 141:
From an early stage in his encounter with the neuroses, Freud had shown a remarkable readiness to accept them as basically real and very crippling forms of illness.
Clark goes on to say that in Freud's time this was a big deal because the clinical community mostly pushed neurosis under the rug. They didn't really want to deal with neurotics because there was nothing physically wrong with them.
quote:
Beskectigal:
We still have this legacy today. Insurance companies treat mental illness separately. People view it differently.
This has less to do with Freud than it has to do with the APA and others, as I explained in my previous post.
quote:
Beskeptigal:
Counseling would not likely be ordered if you were a diabetic. Instead, you would get a medical diagnosis and a whole lot of education on how to take care of your disease. Counseling to help you cope with the difficulties would more likely than not also be labeled as education.
No. It would be labeled counseling, just as cancer patients have counseling and support groups, so do diabetics and neurotics. And in those sessions they are dealing with issues far deeper than simple education of their disease, for example fears of death and regret.
quote:
Beskeptigal:
But if you have a mental illness, medication is ordered to treat the disease. And we now have a lot more evidence based treatments available. But you would never be sent to classes to teach you how to manage the disease. Instead you would go to counseling or group sessions. In reality, a lot of what goes on in counseling is really education on how to manage your disease.
Not all mental patients are getting drugs, nor would we want that. As for counseling, if your talking about an organic illness, it is true that some of the time will be spent on education. If it's not an organic problem the goal of therapy is to eradicate the illness. Sometimes medications are used to alleviate painful symptoms thus freeing the patient to focus on the central issue that caused the illness in the first place.
quote:
Beskeptigal:
And the counseling approach to someone who wasn't thinking rationally isn't really all that different from trying to help a person in denial of their diabetes take better care of themselves. In such a case, your 'teaching' might very well be more counseling.
This sounds like semantics to me. Also, without Freud, the term "in denial" would not be available to you in the context that you have used it...
quote:
Beskectigal:
My point is, your brain is an organ just as your pancreas is. Dysfunction in either organ is a medical problem. Whether the illness is from a chemical imbalance, (insulin or seratonin), or behavioral, (obesity from behavioral causes or attachment disorder because your mother neglected you), either organ can exhibit disease. You don't cure these diseases by talking to someone.
Nope, your pancreas doesn't think. I would not waste my time talking to your pancreas since it is unlikely that conversation will get me very far. On the other hand, you do think, therefor, that makes talking to you a possible avenue by which your brain may be reached. What pill do you take to cure attachment disorder? And by the way, the idea that something in your childhood can cause you problems as an adult came from Freud.
quote:
Bekeptigal:
And then there is the absolutely ridiculous claim about the Oedipus complex. Don't get me started on that absurdity.
So, you have never met daddy's little girl? You have never met a mommas boy?
quote:
Beskeptigal:
So I guess I just don't think psychoanalysis represented an advance so much as it represented a different direction of misunderstanding mental illness.
To some extent this is true. But as I stated above, that is not exactly what Freud had in mind.
More from What Freud Really Said:
quote:
Page 140:
(Freud)was aware of the biochemical nature of nervous and glandular activity. He gave it full weight not simply in the chemistry of sexuality and adolescence, but also in his remark that one day perhaps the psychoses and possibly neuroses might be susceptible of changes b |
Uncertainty may make you uncomfortable. Certainty makes you ridiculous.
Why not question something for a change?
Genetic Literacy Project |
|
|
|
tomk80
SFN Regular
Netherlands
1278 Posts |
Posted - 09/27/2004 : 02:58:08 [Permalink]
|
quote:
Originally posted by beskeptigal
Counseling would not likely be ordered if you were a diabetic. Instead, you would get a medical diagnosis and a whole lot of education on how to take care of your disease. Counseling to help you cope with the difficulties would more likely than not also be labeled as education.
But if you have a mental illness, medication is ordered to treat the disease. And we now have a lot more evidence based treatments available. But you would never be sent to classes to teach you how to manage the disease. Instead you would go to counseling or group sessions. In reality, a lot of what goes on in counseling is really education on how to manage your disease.
And the counseling approach to someone who wasn't thinking rationally isn't really all that different from trying to help a person in denial of their diabetes take better care of themselves. In such a case, your 'teaching' might very well be more counseling.
My point is, your brain is an organ just as your pancreas is. Dysfunction in either organ is a medical problem. Whether the illness is from a chemical imbalance, (insulin or seratonin), or behavioral, (obesity from behavioral causes or attachment disorder because your mother neglected you), either organ can exhibit disease. You don't cure these diseases by talking to someone.
In risk of simplifying your standpoint. You're saying we should just put every psychological patient on drugs? That seems what you are saying.
However, for example, serious phobias are treated here in Maastricht by and large without medication. Phobias are treated here by talking with patients about their phobia, trying to get them to rationally see that there is nothing to fear. Meanwhile, they are confronted with their fears (standard example: aragnaphobia is treated by confronting people first with little spiders in jars, then with little spiders out of jars, then with bigger spiders and last with BIG spiders). These treatment programs are very effective, and very rarely need medication.
For more severe psychological diseases, medication is often necessary. However, at least in the Netherlands, these are combined with programs where you try to change peoples mindsets. I don't know about the effectiveness of these, unfortunately. |
Tom
`Contrariwise,' continued Tweedledee, `if it was so, it might be; and if it were so, it would be; but as it isn't, it ain't. That's logic.'
-Through the Looking Glass by Lewis Caroll- |
|
|
|
 |
|
|
|
Topic Locked
