Whew! I'm very happy to say that I am much relieved after watching episode two of season two. Paul has been transformed! In any case, his professional performance has taken a dramatic and wonderful turn for the better. Maybe I shouldn't have worried? Maybe I should have understood that the requirements of TV drama were at work, and that in some way, all would return to a happy homeostasis. Of course, and no doubt, these very same requirements will give us other moments of tension regarding Paul, in both his personal and his professional life. (Those of you already into season three, please indulge my time warp experience of what is now well in the past for you. Perhaps all is well now, in a future that I cannot see. But probably not. Not if the series is to continue, eh?)
mdavid-lpcc.com
Sunday, November 21, 2010
Monday, November 15, 2010
"In Treatment" on HBO
It seems that so many people, including me, enjoy this cable tv show, now in its third season. I have to wait a year after the season ends to get it on netflix, since cable isn't available where I live, so I'm just now starting to watch season two. I was talking with my wife about the first episode while and after we were watching it recently, and there is a point that I feel almost compelled to make.
My concern is that most people who are watching this series - that is to say, the lay audience - might not be aware, unless they may have experienced some good therapy themselves as clients, that this series is presenting a portrait of a therapist in crisis, both personally and professionally, and that what the viewing audience is witnessing is a practitioner who is significantly compromised in his abilities to provide good therapy. In other words, we are seeing, often, the delivery of "bad" therapy.
I confirmed this just yesterday with a good friend who also enjoys the series. He acknowledged that he was not aware of this, and that it hadn't occurred to him that "Paul" was not doing a good professional job of it. My friend's partner however, who has experienced long term therapy of her own, did have more of a sense of some of Paul's shortcomings.
I'm concerned about this because people may well view this brilliantly produced and acted series thinking that what they are seeing is what good therapy is like, when it is not, or that they may indeed be turned away from therapy because they might sense or feel that something is "off" in Paul's work, but think that this is what therapy consists of. Yikes! Of course, there is already enough stigma, still - imagine that here we are in the 21st century, and there is still an enormous bias against "mental health" treatment; it's very nearly incomprehensible, but there it is nonetheless - when it comes to therapy. We don't need any more.
The hopeful bit is that at the end of episode one of season two, Paul recognizes that he needs to be back in therapy himself, and plans to begin again with his long time professor, mentor, friend and, now, therapist, Gina (This relationship, by the way, raises other important questions which I won't go into here and now). Good for him. We all hope, of course, that he will benefit personally, and improve professionally as a result. His patients deserve, and require, no less.
mdavid-lpcc.com
My concern is that most people who are watching this series - that is to say, the lay audience - might not be aware, unless they may have experienced some good therapy themselves as clients, that this series is presenting a portrait of a therapist in crisis, both personally and professionally, and that what the viewing audience is witnessing is a practitioner who is significantly compromised in his abilities to provide good therapy. In other words, we are seeing, often, the delivery of "bad" therapy.
I confirmed this just yesterday with a good friend who also enjoys the series. He acknowledged that he was not aware of this, and that it hadn't occurred to him that "Paul" was not doing a good professional job of it. My friend's partner however, who has experienced long term therapy of her own, did have more of a sense of some of Paul's shortcomings.
I'm concerned about this because people may well view this brilliantly produced and acted series thinking that what they are seeing is what good therapy is like, when it is not, or that they may indeed be turned away from therapy because they might sense or feel that something is "off" in Paul's work, but think that this is what therapy consists of. Yikes! Of course, there is already enough stigma, still - imagine that here we are in the 21st century, and there is still an enormous bias against "mental health" treatment; it's very nearly incomprehensible, but there it is nonetheless - when it comes to therapy. We don't need any more.
The hopeful bit is that at the end of episode one of season two, Paul recognizes that he needs to be back in therapy himself, and plans to begin again with his long time professor, mentor, friend and, now, therapist, Gina (This relationship, by the way, raises other important questions which I won't go into here and now). Good for him. We all hope, of course, that he will benefit personally, and improve professionally as a result. His patients deserve, and require, no less.
mdavid-lpcc.com
Sunday, September 19, 2010
Psychotherapy: A Place To "Dump"?
So is this beneficial to me?, she asked, after a long session of sharing her life and work. I'm not inside you, I said, I can't say. What do you think? Yes, she said, it has been beneficial. It's helpful to have a place to "dump".
I confess: A part of me cringes when I hear this. Is that what psychotherapy is about? A place for people to "dump" their "stuff" (or more graphically, their "shit"), as in, turn it over to me so that they imagine that they are now free of it? Well, I know how I answer this question: of course not. And yet...............
there is clearly some benefit for people, initially at least, in realizing that they can talk candidly and in some depth about their lives, about what they struggle with, about, for example, being sometimes morally compromised on the job, and that they will not be judged or criticized for this. For new clients especially, this experience is often unique and perhaps unprecedented in their lives. As an early step then, it has benefit, and this benefit is palpable. Also, it helps to set the stage for a pattern of exploration that will no doubt go deeper
as the therapeutic process proceeds, and can provide (almost) immediate feedback about the potential inherent in this process.
I suppose I can relax some about the implications, to me in any case, of "dumping".
My fear is that a client will imagine or assume that this dumping is all there is to it, and that by doing this, they have actually done meaningful therapeutic work, when, in my view, they have only introduced themselves to a possibility. Really though, when there is sufficient motivation to continue, the nature of therapy will become more and more clear, and the necessity to participate in other, perhaps more challenging ways will become so also.
mdavid-lpcc.com
I confess: A part of me cringes when I hear this. Is that what psychotherapy is about? A place for people to "dump" their "stuff" (or more graphically, their "shit"), as in, turn it over to me so that they imagine that they are now free of it? Well, I know how I answer this question: of course not. And yet...............
there is clearly some benefit for people, initially at least, in realizing that they can talk candidly and in some depth about their lives, about what they struggle with, about, for example, being sometimes morally compromised on the job, and that they will not be judged or criticized for this. For new clients especially, this experience is often unique and perhaps unprecedented in their lives. As an early step then, it has benefit, and this benefit is palpable. Also, it helps to set the stage for a pattern of exploration that will no doubt go deeper
as the therapeutic process proceeds, and can provide (almost) immediate feedback about the potential inherent in this process.
I suppose I can relax some about the implications, to me in any case, of "dumping".
My fear is that a client will imagine or assume that this dumping is all there is to it, and that by doing this, they have actually done meaningful therapeutic work, when, in my view, they have only introduced themselves to a possibility. Really though, when there is sufficient motivation to continue, the nature of therapy will become more and more clear, and the necessity to participate in other, perhaps more challenging ways will become so also.
Thursday, September 16, 2010
A New Look At The Role Of Psychotherapy In Society
OK. I'll go out on a limb. I'll say that "mental health", in its deepest sense, cannot exist without an active psycho-spiritual orientation toward the welfare of others.
This would then logically extend to an active political and social orientation in this direction; and to an active "environmental" orientation of this kind as well.
Mental health in this deep and broad sense cannot exist in a psycho-spiritual, socio-political, environmental vacuum. Is it mental health for a species - in this case humans - to actively and knowingly destroy its own habitat, its own means of pro-generation, and the possibility of its own continuation? I'd say it is not, and in fact that it is a form of insanity.
Now, in light of the way I am defining mental (psycho-spiritual/emotional) health, what then is the role of psychotherapy? What is its legitimate scope? What are its legitimate questions and concerns as regarding the individual, the couple, the family, the species?
If you suffer from anxiety, for example, and you do not see yourself as a small manifest extension of a much larger and much greater system of existence, a system which has direct and inevitable effects on you, the small individual, it will be more difficult, I suggest, to 1) understand your anxiety, and to 2) do anything genuinely healing/remedial about it. If you suffer from depression, and have not been able to achieve relief through bio-chemical treatments alone, and also do not understand your depression in a cultural/experiential context, it will be more difficult (impossible?), I suggest, to 1) understand your depression, and to 2) do anything genuinely healing/remedial about it.
If your marriage is strained and struggling because you and your spouse don't seem to be able to talk to each other without slipping into another self defeating argument, and you lead your lives dedicated to a system of values and beliefs that by its nature opposes collaborative relationship, how will you be able to remedy this dysfunction?
The idea of systems in psychotherapy is nothing new. I think we have not taken this idea far enough, nor understood its implications thoroughly enough.
mdavid-lpcc.com
This would then logically extend to an active political and social orientation in this direction; and to an active "environmental" orientation of this kind as well.
Mental health in this deep and broad sense cannot exist in a psycho-spiritual, socio-political, environmental vacuum. Is it mental health for a species - in this case humans - to actively and knowingly destroy its own habitat, its own means of pro-generation, and the possibility of its own continuation? I'd say it is not, and in fact that it is a form of insanity.
Now, in light of the way I am defining mental (psycho-spiritual/emotional) health, what then is the role of psychotherapy? What is its legitimate scope? What are its legitimate questions and concerns as regarding the individual, the couple, the family, the species?
If you suffer from anxiety, for example, and you do not see yourself as a small manifest extension of a much larger and much greater system of existence, a system which has direct and inevitable effects on you, the small individual, it will be more difficult, I suggest, to 1) understand your anxiety, and to 2) do anything genuinely healing/remedial about it. If you suffer from depression, and have not been able to achieve relief through bio-chemical treatments alone, and also do not understand your depression in a cultural/experiential context, it will be more difficult (impossible?), I suggest, to 1) understand your depression, and to 2) do anything genuinely healing/remedial about it.
If your marriage is strained and struggling because you and your spouse don't seem to be able to talk to each other without slipping into another self defeating argument, and you lead your lives dedicated to a system of values and beliefs that by its nature opposes collaborative relationship, how will you be able to remedy this dysfunction?
The idea of systems in psychotherapy is nothing new. I think we have not taken this idea far enough, nor understood its implications thoroughly enough.
Who Are Your Heroes?
Of course we are motivated and inspired by those we admire most. Who are the inspirations in your life? And what is it about them that inspires you? Who are your real heroes? Who do you aspire to emulate?
The prospect of mental health, happiness, or wisdom is more or less likely depending upon the kinds of people we truly look to as models for our own lives. Some models will serve us well in this quest, and some will not. It may be obvious that having, say, the Son Of Sam, or Hitler, or Lindsay Lohan as a role model will not lead to mental health. It may be less obvious that having, say, some of our parents, our civic/political leaders, our religious leaders, or our business leaders will also not lead to mental health. Indeed, it may be shocking to consider that having some of the most respected and revered members of society as our models might contribute to mental illness, foolishness or even insanity, rather than to health.
Without looking for perfection, we might still be on solid ground in looking for some sustainable commitment to integrity, to compassion, to tolerance and to genuine caring about others and about the world at large, in our healthier heroes.
We might do well to look for heroes who have the capacity to make sacrifices in the service of humanity. We might look for heroes who even make service to humanity a real priority in their lives. When I say service to humanity, I don't mean service to a privileged few - that ever touted but highly suspect value of "enlightened self interest". I mean something more along the lines of a real consideration of what some Native American peoples are said to call the well being of the next seven generations. All of humanity, not merely me and mine.
It is my opinion, professionally and personally, that the latter possibility is much more likely to lead in the direction of health, happiness, wisdom and well being than is the former.
mdavid-lpcc.com
The prospect of mental health, happiness, or wisdom is more or less likely depending upon the kinds of people we truly look to as models for our own lives. Some models will serve us well in this quest, and some will not. It may be obvious that having, say, the Son Of Sam, or Hitler, or Lindsay Lohan as a role model will not lead to mental health. It may be less obvious that having, say, some of our parents, our civic/political leaders, our religious leaders, or our business leaders will also not lead to mental health. Indeed, it may be shocking to consider that having some of the most respected and revered members of society as our models might contribute to mental illness, foolishness or even insanity, rather than to health.
Without looking for perfection, we might still be on solid ground in looking for some sustainable commitment to integrity, to compassion, to tolerance and to genuine caring about others and about the world at large, in our healthier heroes.
We might do well to look for heroes who have the capacity to make sacrifices in the service of humanity. We might look for heroes who even make service to humanity a real priority in their lives. When I say service to humanity, I don't mean service to a privileged few - that ever touted but highly suspect value of "enlightened self interest". I mean something more along the lines of a real consideration of what some Native American peoples are said to call the well being of the next seven generations. All of humanity, not merely me and mine.
It is my opinion, professionally and personally, that the latter possibility is much more likely to lead in the direction of health, happiness, wisdom and well being than is the former.
Psychotherapy And Values, Part Two
1) Mental health, in the way I wish to explore it, is not something that is defined by a majority vote; that is, consensus does not define health, it only defines agreement (and the emperor may still, indeed, have no clothes on, regardless of his kowtowing subjects agreement to the contrary).
2) Mental health may not be a given in any set of cultural or social circumstances.
3) Mental health may exist only relative to what is True, regardless of opinion.
4) If this is so, then it becomes necessary to search for and to discover what is True, and then to align oneself with this Truth in order to become mentally healthy.
5) Since what is True is not variable from culture to culture, mental health takes on a larger meaning than previously thought.
6) It is therefore possible to be situated well within cultural norms and expectations, and at the same time to not meet criteria for mental health. Hence the state of the world.
"An eye for an eye makes the whole world blind", said Mahatma Gandhi. This is a succinct expression of the difference between consensus and health; and of the foolishness - we might even say of the insanity - of merely following the crowd, or the cultural norm, or the prevailing value, when these are contrary to Truth.
The thing about the Truth is that, while it is the same everywhere, it becomes confused with relative, local, specific cultural forms of expression, and then these forms of expression are mistaken for the Truth, defended to the death, and imposed upon others. Confusion, rather than Truth, prevails.
mdavid-lpcc.com
2) Mental health may not be a given in any set of cultural or social circumstances.
3) Mental health may exist only relative to what is True, regardless of opinion.
4) If this is so, then it becomes necessary to search for and to discover what is True, and then to align oneself with this Truth in order to become mentally healthy.
5) Since what is True is not variable from culture to culture, mental health takes on a larger meaning than previously thought.
6) It is therefore possible to be situated well within cultural norms and expectations, and at the same time to not meet criteria for mental health. Hence the state of the world.
"An eye for an eye makes the whole world blind", said Mahatma Gandhi. This is a succinct expression of the difference between consensus and health; and of the foolishness - we might even say of the insanity - of merely following the crowd, or the cultural norm, or the prevailing value, when these are contrary to Truth.
The thing about the Truth is that, while it is the same everywhere, it becomes confused with relative, local, specific cultural forms of expression, and then these forms of expression are mistaken for the Truth, defended to the death, and imposed upon others. Confusion, rather than Truth, prevails.
Monday, September 13, 2010
Psychotherapy And Values
How do you combine/reconcile spirituality with psychotherapy, I was recently asked.
What's the problem, I wanted to know. To me, they seem to be moving in the same direction; asking the same, or similar questions; aiming at the same, or similar conditions. Why would they be exclusive of each other? Where is the conflict?
Of course, this presupposes a rather broad and somewhat universal understanding of spirituality. I don't mean religion, or religiosity. I don't mean a dogmatic belief system. I don't mean particular rituals or ceremonies or styles of worship, or attendance at this or that house of worship. None of these things are of any particular interest in distilling the essence of what constitutes personal spirituality or mental health, happiness and well being. If you are engaged in something along these lines, and you want to continue to be engaged, go right ahead. Only be willing to notice where and when any of them might be leading you into distress, rather than toward health and freedom.
You must believe that Jesus of Nazareth is GOD, the only GOD, that he died on the cross and rose from the dead, and was immaculately conceived, etc., etc., etc. OR ELSE!!!
Nonsense. And equal nonsense with any other set of beliefs from any other religion.
What possible difference can it make, when you get right down to it, whether you believe this or that, while you are unhappy, unhealthy, behave badly, abuse yourself and others, go to war with anyone who believes differently from you, take advantage of those "weaker" than you, steal, kill, lie, and live an inner life of hatred, jealousy, rage, greed and self indulgence?
Give me an honest thief any day over a conniving, pin striped, neatly shaved and coiffed, self centered, power addicted public pillar of society. Woe unto you, hypocrites!
Etc.
And so we have health, and we have sickness. And sometimes one has to choose. And sometimes one has to make sacrifices for the former. So would you rather be healthy and happy and genuine and living a life of integrity, and relatively "poor" financially; or would you prefer to be one of the wealthy rapers of natural resources and pillagers of people throughout the world? For example.
Is the good life the American model of ever expanding affluence for the very few and now, ever expanding hardship for the many? Is it the ownership of government by mega multinational corporations and increased power and privilege for the wealthiest one percent? Or is it something different perhaps? A more equal distribution of resources; health care for all; education for all who want it; basic decent housing for all; care for all citizens?
This is, ultimately, about fundamental values of course. So, does psychotherapy limit itself to helping people adjust better to a profoundly dis-functional social and economic system, or does it dare to concern itself with the basic values of the life well lived? Hmmm.
mdavid-lpcc.com
What's the problem, I wanted to know. To me, they seem to be moving in the same direction; asking the same, or similar questions; aiming at the same, or similar conditions. Why would they be exclusive of each other? Where is the conflict?
Of course, this presupposes a rather broad and somewhat universal understanding of spirituality. I don't mean religion, or religiosity. I don't mean a dogmatic belief system. I don't mean particular rituals or ceremonies or styles of worship, or attendance at this or that house of worship. None of these things are of any particular interest in distilling the essence of what constitutes personal spirituality or mental health, happiness and well being. If you are engaged in something along these lines, and you want to continue to be engaged, go right ahead. Only be willing to notice where and when any of them might be leading you into distress, rather than toward health and freedom.
You must believe that Jesus of Nazareth is GOD, the only GOD, that he died on the cross and rose from the dead, and was immaculately conceived, etc., etc., etc. OR ELSE!!!
Nonsense. And equal nonsense with any other set of beliefs from any other religion.
What possible difference can it make, when you get right down to it, whether you believe this or that, while you are unhappy, unhealthy, behave badly, abuse yourself and others, go to war with anyone who believes differently from you, take advantage of those "weaker" than you, steal, kill, lie, and live an inner life of hatred, jealousy, rage, greed and self indulgence?
Give me an honest thief any day over a conniving, pin striped, neatly shaved and coiffed, self centered, power addicted public pillar of society. Woe unto you, hypocrites!
Etc.
And so we have health, and we have sickness. And sometimes one has to choose. And sometimes one has to make sacrifices for the former. So would you rather be healthy and happy and genuine and living a life of integrity, and relatively "poor" financially; or would you prefer to be one of the wealthy rapers of natural resources and pillagers of people throughout the world? For example.
Is the good life the American model of ever expanding affluence for the very few and now, ever expanding hardship for the many? Is it the ownership of government by mega multinational corporations and increased power and privilege for the wealthiest one percent? Or is it something different perhaps? A more equal distribution of resources; health care for all; education for all who want it; basic decent housing for all; care for all citizens?
This is, ultimately, about fundamental values of course. So, does psychotherapy limit itself to helping people adjust better to a profoundly dis-functional social and economic system, or does it dare to concern itself with the basic values of the life well lived? Hmmm.
Tuesday, September 7, 2010
Living Sanely In An Insane World
Let's start with a premise: the world as we know it macro-cosmically is pretty messed up.
By this I mean that so called civilized humans throughout known history have not behaved much better, or at all better, than we do now. Greed, hatred, genocide, unspeakable violence, have been the rule, and not the exception. Wars are "normal" and constant throughout the world, and throughout history. Politicians are almost universally corrupt and duplicitous ("diplomatic"). Business (empire) leaders are universally corrupt and duplicitous ("self interest"). The so called strong take lethal advantage of the so called weak. None of this is new, or uncommon, or "abnormal" or aberrant. The fact that we are surprised by these things is astounding, given their virtually universal repetition throughout time and place.
So, it is perhaps not surprising then that people draw the conclusion that it is human nature that makes it impossible for things to be any different. So it would seem. I'll propose a different view: it is not human nature that leads to the repetition of all of this madness. It is in fact the shared delusion that we are in line with human nature that causes it. Human nature, if it be known, would give us the opposite of what we typically see. It would give us kindness, love, generosity, compassion, kinship, collaboration and cooperation, tolerance and appreciation.
The question then becomes: How can we live sanely, in genuine alignment with our real human nature, in an insane world? The world at large is insane. Leaders are insane with power and greed and control and avarice. Ordinary people buy into this insanity and conduct their lives as though they were models of health and goodness.
The real madness continues and spreads.
Doing something different then will not be an easy task, or a lightly assumed responsibility. Who will rise to the occasion?
mdavid-lpcc.com
By this I mean that so called civilized humans throughout known history have not behaved much better, or at all better, than we do now. Greed, hatred, genocide, unspeakable violence, have been the rule, and not the exception. Wars are "normal" and constant throughout the world, and throughout history. Politicians are almost universally corrupt and duplicitous ("diplomatic"). Business (empire) leaders are universally corrupt and duplicitous ("self interest"). The so called strong take lethal advantage of the so called weak. None of this is new, or uncommon, or "abnormal" or aberrant. The fact that we are surprised by these things is astounding, given their virtually universal repetition throughout time and place.
So, it is perhaps not surprising then that people draw the conclusion that it is human nature that makes it impossible for things to be any different. So it would seem. I'll propose a different view: it is not human nature that leads to the repetition of all of this madness. It is in fact the shared delusion that we are in line with human nature that causes it. Human nature, if it be known, would give us the opposite of what we typically see. It would give us kindness, love, generosity, compassion, kinship, collaboration and cooperation, tolerance and appreciation.
The question then becomes: How can we live sanely, in genuine alignment with our real human nature, in an insane world? The world at large is insane. Leaders are insane with power and greed and control and avarice. Ordinary people buy into this insanity and conduct their lives as though they were models of health and goodness.
The real madness continues and spreads.
Doing something different then will not be an easy task, or a lightly assumed responsibility. Who will rise to the occasion?
What Do People Want From Psychotherapy?
Why seek out a psychotherapist? What do people want and expect from such a thing? Here's what I think are the two reasons people seek therapy:
1) Relief of distressing emotional, behavioral or psychological symptoms; 2) help getting troubled relationships on track toward happiness and fulfillment.
That's about it. If there are no distressing symptoms (difficult/challenging/painful/confusing feelings; problematic/destructive/dangerous/self defeating behaviors; or some kind of serious and frightening distortion in one's thinking or perceptual processes), and if relationships are happy ones, people do not seek therapy. Why would they? It would be analogous to going to the doctor for treatment of a healthy body with no symptoms of illness.
In the broad field of psychotherapy generally, we like to use words like "distress", or "difficulty", or "self-defeating", rather than always saying "mental illness". This is pretty easy to understand, isn't it? People don't like to be identified as mentally ill. There's way too much stigma attached to this condition. Of course, sometimes it may be an appropriate term. I tend to think it should be reserved for extremely serious conditions. Otherwise, there is no need to overly pathologize people, or their states of being.
It is possible to expand the scope and meaning of psychotherapy to include explorations of distress from a more philosophical perspective. That is, something more analogous to wholistic healing, as distinct from conventional, symptom/crisis oriented allopathic medicine, which generally fails to consider the "whole person", and can thereby potentially create as many problems as it appears to resolve.
A more wholistic approach to psychotherapy would want to look at underlying psycho-spiritual causes of distress, as well as attempting to temporarily relieve symptoms
with partial remedies.
For example, is a person experiencing depression because of a chemical imbalance only, or might there be other important factors involved, like their world view, or unacknowledged, unrecognized, and unaddressed trauma or grief? One could take anti-depressants alone, and may or may not experience real relief, either temporarily or perhaps even more long term. Usually, however, anti-depressants alone won't do the trick. The combination of drugs and therapy has been shown in numerous research studies to provide the best outcomes.
But then we run into the problem that many people, maybe most people, want that all mighty Quick Fix, and then the prospect of self reflection, of self inquiry, of self knowledge elicits anything but enthusiasm. Oh what to do?
mdavid-lpcc.com
1) Relief of distressing emotional, behavioral or psychological symptoms; 2) help getting troubled relationships on track toward happiness and fulfillment.
That's about it. If there are no distressing symptoms (difficult/challenging/painful/confusing feelings; problematic/destructive/dangerous/self defeating behaviors; or some kind of serious and frightening distortion in one's thinking or perceptual processes), and if relationships are happy ones, people do not seek therapy. Why would they? It would be analogous to going to the doctor for treatment of a healthy body with no symptoms of illness.
In the broad field of psychotherapy generally, we like to use words like "distress", or "difficulty", or "self-defeating", rather than always saying "mental illness". This is pretty easy to understand, isn't it? People don't like to be identified as mentally ill. There's way too much stigma attached to this condition. Of course, sometimes it may be an appropriate term. I tend to think it should be reserved for extremely serious conditions. Otherwise, there is no need to overly pathologize people, or their states of being.
It is possible to expand the scope and meaning of psychotherapy to include explorations of distress from a more philosophical perspective. That is, something more analogous to wholistic healing, as distinct from conventional, symptom/crisis oriented allopathic medicine, which generally fails to consider the "whole person", and can thereby potentially create as many problems as it appears to resolve.
A more wholistic approach to psychotherapy would want to look at underlying psycho-spiritual causes of distress, as well as attempting to temporarily relieve symptoms
with partial remedies.
For example, is a person experiencing depression because of a chemical imbalance only, or might there be other important factors involved, like their world view, or unacknowledged, unrecognized, and unaddressed trauma or grief? One could take anti-depressants alone, and may or may not experience real relief, either temporarily or perhaps even more long term. Usually, however, anti-depressants alone won't do the trick. The combination of drugs and therapy has been shown in numerous research studies to provide the best outcomes.
But then we run into the problem that many people, maybe most people, want that all mighty Quick Fix, and then the prospect of self reflection, of self inquiry, of self knowledge elicits anything but enthusiasm. Oh what to do?
"Start Where You Are"
One Buddhist(American) teacher, Pema Chodron, has a book called Start Where You Are.
This title says quite a lot about the nature of a psycho-spiritual approach to well being and wisdom that is in some fundamental way radically different - and I would say much healthier - from our more familiar way of experiencing the world and ourselves.
In this Buddhist view, the implication is that we can well afford to stop and look closely at ourselves, and that if we do this, we will probably not find something essentially evil or corrupt or bad. This is very different from our Western/Christian view of ourselves, which often is precisely the opposite; that is, that if we stop and look closely at ourselves, we will indeed find something evil and corrupt and bad. In the Buddhist view, we are essentially good, though ignorance and mis-guidedness can make things appear differently. In the Christian view, often, we are essentially corrupt, evil, "fallen", and our very existence is an affront to God.
It may not be too difficult to grasp the different psycho/spiritual/emotional implications of each of these world views. I have routinely seen the devastating results of the Western view in my work. Imagine the difference inherent in a more positive view of man, or get to know someone who's world view includes a more positive view of man, and a new world of psychic possibilities opens up. It might be appropriate to actually relate lovingly toward yourself, for example, instead of being burdened with a bottom line experience of self hatred.
What would change in your world if you were worthy, and felt that you were worthy, of love? What would change in your world if you were absolutely worthy and deserving of, and felt that you were worthy and deserving of nothing less than respect and consideration?
We like to think that our psychological and emotional makeup is difficult to understand. In fact, it is rather easy to understand. A follows B, so to speak. The implications of being treated this way or that way, of internalizing these messages or those about ourselves, of believing this or that about the world and about ourselves, are very clear. If you believe that you are most fundamentally bad, cosmically bad, bad in the eyes of God, you will feel and behave in certain fairly predictable ways, and these ways will not be conducive to your health and well being or to the health and well being of anyone or anything else.
Start where you are, even if where you are is pretty awful. The implication is that you can, ultimately, trust that because you are in fact good, good will come from your humble, confused, terrified starting place.
mdavid-lpcc.com
This title says quite a lot about the nature of a psycho-spiritual approach to well being and wisdom that is in some fundamental way radically different - and I would say much healthier - from our more familiar way of experiencing the world and ourselves.
In this Buddhist view, the implication is that we can well afford to stop and look closely at ourselves, and that if we do this, we will probably not find something essentially evil or corrupt or bad. This is very different from our Western/Christian view of ourselves, which often is precisely the opposite; that is, that if we stop and look closely at ourselves, we will indeed find something evil and corrupt and bad. In the Buddhist view, we are essentially good, though ignorance and mis-guidedness can make things appear differently. In the Christian view, often, we are essentially corrupt, evil, "fallen", and our very existence is an affront to God.
It may not be too difficult to grasp the different psycho/spiritual/emotional implications of each of these world views. I have routinely seen the devastating results of the Western view in my work. Imagine the difference inherent in a more positive view of man, or get to know someone who's world view includes a more positive view of man, and a new world of psychic possibilities opens up. It might be appropriate to actually relate lovingly toward yourself, for example, instead of being burdened with a bottom line experience of self hatred.
What would change in your world if you were worthy, and felt that you were worthy, of love? What would change in your world if you were absolutely worthy and deserving of, and felt that you were worthy and deserving of nothing less than respect and consideration?
We like to think that our psychological and emotional makeup is difficult to understand. In fact, it is rather easy to understand. A follows B, so to speak. The implications of being treated this way or that way, of internalizing these messages or those about ourselves, of believing this or that about the world and about ourselves, are very clear. If you believe that you are most fundamentally bad, cosmically bad, bad in the eyes of God, you will feel and behave in certain fairly predictable ways, and these ways will not be conducive to your health and well being or to the health and well being of anyone or anything else.
Start where you are, even if where you are is pretty awful. The implication is that you can, ultimately, trust that because you are in fact good, good will come from your humble, confused, terrified starting place.
Friday, September 3, 2010
Allies Along The Way
If you are a very sensitive person, and experience yourself as fragile at times, ie., easily affected by circumstances and by people, anxious, off balance, take heart. When first you can accept that you are indeed sensitive, it then becomes possible to employ allies in your efforts to regain a more balanced and easeful stance. At this moment I'm thinking of the use of flower essences or remedies as potentially very strong allies. Of course there are pharmaceuticals, and at times these are necessary and can be welcomed also as allies. I'm also thinking about meditation practice, yoga, regular exercise, and nurturing self care that is a regular part of your daily life.
Part of what can make implementing any of these aids more difficult is the resistance to accepting oneself as a "sensitive" or (perhaps more difficult) as a "fragile" person. These can be experienced as discouraging or demeaning terms. That's unfortunate, because that makes it more unlikely that you will take the next steps to help ameliorate these circumstances.
Think in terms of the idea of suspending judgment about yourself. If you can experiment with doing this, even a little, you will then be able to take a step forward toward self care. Don't expect an all-at-once solution. This is all on the order of step-by-step, over time. This of course implies the necessity of some discipline, some perseverance. Again we run into the effects of the industry of quick-fix propaganda, and the resistance to commitment.
But try, at least. Experiment. Have support for your efforts. Love yourself.
mdavid-lpcc.com
Part of what can make implementing any of these aids more difficult is the resistance to accepting oneself as a "sensitive" or (perhaps more difficult) as a "fragile" person. These can be experienced as discouraging or demeaning terms. That's unfortunate, because that makes it more unlikely that you will take the next steps to help ameliorate these circumstances.
Think in terms of the idea of suspending judgment about yourself. If you can experiment with doing this, even a little, you will then be able to take a step forward toward self care. Don't expect an all-at-once solution. This is all on the order of step-by-step, over time. This of course implies the necessity of some discipline, some perseverance. Again we run into the effects of the industry of quick-fix propaganda, and the resistance to commitment.
But try, at least. Experiment. Have support for your efforts. Love yourself.
Wednesday, September 1, 2010
The Necessary Grounds For Happiness
Self inquiry. Self awareness. Self knowledge. Let's not confuse these endeavors with simple self indulgence, or with narcissism. The former are inescapable if we hope to have any depth of happiness or inner freedom. The latter are forms of escape from the Self, and so lead to, or compound ones' confusion and despair and entrapment by the insatiable demands of one's personality or ego. Liberation from these demands, to any degree, furthers one's well being and one's experience of contentment and peace.
What do you think freedom consists of? Is it the freedom to choose from 117 different kinds of bread in the supermarket? Is it the freedom to amass wealth beyond anything you or your descendants will ever be able to spend, at the inevitable expense of numberless other people, and the environment? Or is it the freedom to "express" yourself completely, even when to do so would be harmful either to yourself or to others?
In (north) America, we like to take certain kinds of freedom for granted, like the freedom to not be a slave. Or the freedom to vote for "the candidate of your choice" in what now amount to bought and paid for elections/illusions. Or the freedom to experience financial ruin because of a health related crisis. Or the freedom to choose the person we will marry (unless we happen to be gay, of course).
Naturally, these sorts of freedoms, what we might call political or social freedoms, are important and valuable, and yet we see all too clearly - don't you? - that they do not, in themselves, in any way at all guarantee, or create the grounds for, happiness.
So there must be something else involved. (Back to paragraph one). Without self knowledge, only the illusion of happiness is possible. Yes, it may be a luxurious illusion, with all the trappings of "success", of (physical)comfort, of pleasure.
And yet, again, we see repeatedly - this may be the greatest gift of the information age; the ability to see over and over again how material affluence alone fails to deliver the promise it makes - how these things don't deliver what we believe they will.
mdavid-lpcc.com
What do you think freedom consists of? Is it the freedom to choose from 117 different kinds of bread in the supermarket? Is it the freedom to amass wealth beyond anything you or your descendants will ever be able to spend, at the inevitable expense of numberless other people, and the environment? Or is it the freedom to "express" yourself completely, even when to do so would be harmful either to yourself or to others?
In (north) America, we like to take certain kinds of freedom for granted, like the freedom to not be a slave. Or the freedom to vote for "the candidate of your choice" in what now amount to bought and paid for elections/illusions. Or the freedom to experience financial ruin because of a health related crisis. Or the freedom to choose the person we will marry (unless we happen to be gay, of course).
Naturally, these sorts of freedoms, what we might call political or social freedoms, are important and valuable, and yet we see all too clearly - don't you? - that they do not, in themselves, in any way at all guarantee, or create the grounds for, happiness.
So there must be something else involved. (Back to paragraph one). Without self knowledge, only the illusion of happiness is possible. Yes, it may be a luxurious illusion, with all the trappings of "success", of (physical)comfort, of pleasure.
And yet, again, we see repeatedly - this may be the greatest gift of the information age; the ability to see over and over again how material affluence alone fails to deliver the promise it makes - how these things don't deliver what we believe they will.
Tuesday, August 31, 2010
Psychotherapy As Applied Philosophy
Philosophy: literally, the love of wisdom. Wouldn't this seem to be a natural component of "mental health"; of a happy life; of relationship well being? I sometimes think of the practice of psychotherapy as "applied philosophy"; that is, translating the insights and questions of philosophy into the practical domain of a lived psychology of health and happiness.
I'm depressed, one person says. I feel anxious, says another. My relationships don't work out the way I want them to, says a third. I can't stop drinking. I can't get over the death of my spouse. I'm afraid all the time. I lack direction. I'm consumed by anger.
To the extent that any of these conditions are not simply chemical imbalances that can be successfully and happily treated with allopathic, herbal, homeopathic or other medications, or with changes in diet, or with other bio-chemical or neuro-biological interventions, we are left with the necessity to engage in some form of self inquiry in order to seek out and discover where we are lacking in wisdom. Where we are living our lives in ways that promote psychological (and emotional and spiritual) imbalance and distress instead of balance and well being.
So let's think of psychotherapy - applied philosophy - as dealing essentially with self inquiry, and inquiry into the nature and experience of wisdom, along with the methods for translating the discoveries of these inquiries into pragmatic action and behavior in the service of providing the lived experience of happiness. Some actions are likely to produce unhappiness, and others are likely to produce the opposite. And more than that, we encounter the subtleties of "not black and white", or the art of happiness, alive, dynamic, shifting, vital and vibrant and complex.
Wisdom is more than mere knowledge. It is not enough to have information at our disposal (even, I'm afraid, in this, the great Information Age); it is necessary to truly understand, to truly see into the nature of Reality, so that we can live our lives in accordance with this Reality, in harmony with It. This is wisdom, and this is the way to happiness and well being.
mdavid-lpcc.com
I'm depressed, one person says. I feel anxious, says another. My relationships don't work out the way I want them to, says a third. I can't stop drinking. I can't get over the death of my spouse. I'm afraid all the time. I lack direction. I'm consumed by anger.
To the extent that any of these conditions are not simply chemical imbalances that can be successfully and happily treated with allopathic, herbal, homeopathic or other medications, or with changes in diet, or with other bio-chemical or neuro-biological interventions, we are left with the necessity to engage in some form of self inquiry in order to seek out and discover where we are lacking in wisdom. Where we are living our lives in ways that promote psychological (and emotional and spiritual) imbalance and distress instead of balance and well being.
So let's think of psychotherapy - applied philosophy - as dealing essentially with self inquiry, and inquiry into the nature and experience of wisdom, along with the methods for translating the discoveries of these inquiries into pragmatic action and behavior in the service of providing the lived experience of happiness. Some actions are likely to produce unhappiness, and others are likely to produce the opposite. And more than that, we encounter the subtleties of "not black and white", or the art of happiness, alive, dynamic, shifting, vital and vibrant and complex.
Wisdom is more than mere knowledge. It is not enough to have information at our disposal (even, I'm afraid, in this, the great Information Age); it is necessary to truly understand, to truly see into the nature of Reality, so that we can live our lives in accordance with this Reality, in harmony with It. This is wisdom, and this is the way to happiness and well being.
Monday, August 30, 2010
Depth Of Feelings And The Fear Of The Inner World
I was told by a friend this morning that my voice on a phone message I had left him recently sounded so sad! So sad in fact, that he was certain upon hearing it, and before hearing the rest of the message, that someone must surely have died. This morning also, when I called to wish my mother a happy 90th birthday, she told me that I sounded "better" than I had a few days ago when we spoke.
I'm sharing this with you because I see these two feedback offers as indicative of something larger than themselves. It's true that a few days ago I was feeling more
emotionally challenged. That is to say, my mood was not effusive, or up beat, or light. It was instead internal, tired, suggestive of needing a break from some personal health challenges that I've been dealing with for the past two months. On one level it might be correct to say that I was not a "happy camper". This, however, would be a shallow interpretation of my experience.
From the inside, I was simply feeling what I was feeling. It didn't happen to project a fun or jovial energy. This is important because it points to a powerful cultural bias against feelings that are other than ebullient. We worry about, and we don't know how to related with "heavier" feelings, like sadness, or frustration, or even with insights that may carry with them strong feelings of any kind.
One way of understanding this bias is through the lens of the extrovert/introvert dichotomy. Culturally, we prize and reward extroverts and extroverted behaviors. We tend to condemn and fear introverts and introverted behaviors. Introverts tend to be more comfortable with feelings in general, whereas extroverts may spend a lot less time with themselves and with their internal experiences, and are therefore less familiar with and less inclined toward these experiences. Hence the judgment and the fear of the unknown, and the generally less developed skill sets when dealing with internal states, and with feelings.
You introverts, please learn to appreciate your inner lives without fear or judgment, and you extroverts, please learn to appreciate not only your own, but others inner lives, also without fear and judgment.
mdavid-lpcc.com
I'm sharing this with you because I see these two feedback offers as indicative of something larger than themselves. It's true that a few days ago I was feeling more
emotionally challenged. That is to say, my mood was not effusive, or up beat, or light. It was instead internal, tired, suggestive of needing a break from some personal health challenges that I've been dealing with for the past two months. On one level it might be correct to say that I was not a "happy camper". This, however, would be a shallow interpretation of my experience.
From the inside, I was simply feeling what I was feeling. It didn't happen to project a fun or jovial energy. This is important because it points to a powerful cultural bias against feelings that are other than ebullient. We worry about, and we don't know how to related with "heavier" feelings, like sadness, or frustration, or even with insights that may carry with them strong feelings of any kind.
One way of understanding this bias is through the lens of the extrovert/introvert dichotomy. Culturally, we prize and reward extroverts and extroverted behaviors. We tend to condemn and fear introverts and introverted behaviors. Introverts tend to be more comfortable with feelings in general, whereas extroverts may spend a lot less time with themselves and with their internal experiences, and are therefore less familiar with and less inclined toward these experiences. Hence the judgment and the fear of the unknown, and the generally less developed skill sets when dealing with internal states, and with feelings.
You introverts, please learn to appreciate your inner lives without fear or judgment, and you extroverts, please learn to appreciate not only your own, but others inner lives, also without fear and judgment.
Sunday, August 29, 2010
Life IS An Art
If Life is a work of art (in progress), I like to think of, and relate with the various stages and episodes within that work as poems writing themselves in the daily realities of our experience. Of course Life is an art. It can be done well, artfully, skillfully, with discipline, with grace, with wisdom and insight and compassion, or it can be done poorly, lacking these qualities. Just as there are skilled and inspired artists of music, literature, painting, sculpture, performance, paper, spirituality, leadership, building, design, etc., there are those who are skilled in the art of Life. Conversely, there are practitioners of all of these who are, well, lacking; and therefore uninspiring. More importantly perhaps, these latter practitioners may be wandering lost in the inner and outer worlds, wondering why. This is usually quite a painful condition, both for the wanderer, and for those sensitive enough or caring enough to be moved by their struggles.
Calling artists and artists in training. Those of you who may have a willingness to explore as well as to wander; to discover as well as to seek; to learn as well as to study; to grow as well as to move.
mdavid-lpcc.com
Calling artists and artists in training. Those of you who may have a willingness to explore as well as to wander; to discover as well as to seek; to learn as well as to study; to grow as well as to move.
Friday, August 27, 2010
Courage And Safety In Deep Inner Work
Safety is a big concern in psychotherapy. People want to feel safe to enter into what they may well have regarded as dangerous psychological and emotional territory, and they want a guide to help them do this. They want this guide to be experienced as a safe person too, naturally. Someone who will understand and appreciate them; who won't judge them for their weaknesses or their prejudices or their "failures"; who will, if the truth be told, love them carefully and well.
All of this is appropriate and wonderful in what is sometimes and generally called a "person centered" approach to therapy. Deeply respectful of the rights and freedom of each individual. Not imposing. Patient. Welcoming.
The other side of this coin is the necessity for courage in doing any meaningful psycho-spiritual work. Courage to enter into unsafe inner terrain. This is where the importance of the therapeutic relationship comes into play. This is where the necessity to develop trust and willingness becomes important. If you're going to step into danger, or at least into perceived danger, you want the person helping you with this to be trustworthy, to guide you skillfully, to not abandon you in the wilderness. These needs are relationship needs, and they are met in the context of the therapeutic relationship.
Paradox: safety, and courage, or skillful and appropriate risk taking. Both are needed for deep psychotherapy to live up to its potential.
mdavid-lpcc.com
All of this is appropriate and wonderful in what is sometimes and generally called a "person centered" approach to therapy. Deeply respectful of the rights and freedom of each individual. Not imposing. Patient. Welcoming.
The other side of this coin is the necessity for courage in doing any meaningful psycho-spiritual work. Courage to enter into unsafe inner terrain. This is where the importance of the therapeutic relationship comes into play. This is where the necessity to develop trust and willingness becomes important. If you're going to step into danger, or at least into perceived danger, you want the person helping you with this to be trustworthy, to guide you skillfully, to not abandon you in the wilderness. These needs are relationship needs, and they are met in the context of the therapeutic relationship.
Paradox: safety, and courage, or skillful and appropriate risk taking. Both are needed for deep psychotherapy to live up to its potential.
Thursday, August 26, 2010
Simplicity, Quick Fixes, And Disillusionment
This is The Land Of Everything Is Easy And Quick. It may startle you to realize how deeply this craziness takes hold in your psyche. After all, it's everywhere you look. It's impossible to not be affected by the cultural messages. Then, this becomes your expectation. Failing to encounter basic reality that actually conforms to this insane propaganda, the natural conclusion is that something is wrong with you. A certain precursor to unhappiness. And a certain method of keeping you off balance, dis-stressed, blinded, addicted, spiritually and psychologically adrift.
How difficult it is to make a commitment. Any commitment. How difficult it is to dedicate oneself to a path of effort and longevity. Immediate gratification is what you require. The All Holy Quick Fix. To everything. And according to the propaganda, it ought to be that way. This is after all a realistic expectation. The fast buck. The "quicky" sexual encounter. The instant soup. The magical instant transformation complete with the Hollywood style dramatic "experience" that makes everything right all at once and forever.
No wonder then that the bad news, the disillusionment of how deep psychotherapy might work is hard to take. All those insurance driven managed care companies must be right, no? 3, 4, maybe 5 sessions of "brief" therapy is all that's needed, right?
Oh, woe is you. If what you want are some "tools" to help you "fix" your life, maybe you ought to read a simple self-help book and save your time and money. Having that information should enable you to make things work pretty much over night, shouldn't it? Funny how it doesn't tend to work that way, in spite of all the advertising hype.
Anyway, deep psychotherapy is transformative, and it does take time. But who has time? Time is money! Hurry up! Don't waste my time! Part of what I enjoy doing in my work is de-mystifying therapy for people. It's really a lot simpler - not quick and easy - than you think. And as we all know, or need to know if we don't yet, the simple is generally the most difficult to achieve.
mdavid-lpcc.com
How difficult it is to make a commitment. Any commitment. How difficult it is to dedicate oneself to a path of effort and longevity. Immediate gratification is what you require. The All Holy Quick Fix. To everything. And according to the propaganda, it ought to be that way. This is after all a realistic expectation. The fast buck. The "quicky" sexual encounter. The instant soup. The magical instant transformation complete with the Hollywood style dramatic "experience" that makes everything right all at once and forever.
No wonder then that the bad news, the disillusionment of how deep psychotherapy might work is hard to take. All those insurance driven managed care companies must be right, no? 3, 4, maybe 5 sessions of "brief" therapy is all that's needed, right?
Oh, woe is you. If what you want are some "tools" to help you "fix" your life, maybe you ought to read a simple self-help book and save your time and money. Having that information should enable you to make things work pretty much over night, shouldn't it? Funny how it doesn't tend to work that way, in spite of all the advertising hype.
Anyway, deep psychotherapy is transformative, and it does take time. But who has time? Time is money! Hurry up! Don't waste my time! Part of what I enjoy doing in my work is de-mystifying therapy for people. It's really a lot simpler - not quick and easy - than you think. And as we all know, or need to know if we don't yet, the simple is generally the most difficult to achieve.
Wednesday, August 25, 2010
Unhappiness In Troubled Times
These are difficult, dramatically changing times. It may seem as though personal unhappiness - frustrations, dis-satisfactions, confusions - is increased without understanding why. Part of what is happening is much beyond the merely personal. The entire world is in upheaval, from economic crisis, to environmental crisis, to human rights crises, to wars upon wars and abuses upon abuses. These realities effects your personal equilibrium whether you are aware of it or not, and increase your experiences of dis-stress.
Why is it so difficult to befriend oneself? To treat oneself with deep respect and love? To truly care for oneself? To honor one's heart's longings and callings? What do we imagine the risks of doing these things to be? What do we fear losing if we did? How far might you be willing to go in the service of your truth? How do conflicting desires prevent you from serving your true purpose?
Who are you, anyway? What are you doing here? What master are you serving? How are you contributing to the welfare of the world? Or are you? If you're not, you'll no doubt be diminished within yourself, and will feel this in any number of self diminishing ways. The reality of happiness and sanity requires an orientation that is not merely selfish. The reality of happiness and sanity requires something other than the worldly wisdom of dog eat dog, and every man/woman for him/herself.
This is, of course, risky business. It does, of course, go against the grain. It does not conform to the "norm". It requires a certain courage, a certain willingness to swim up stream, if you will. Oh, this is nothing new, yet translating this understanding into "mental health" reality is and always has been a challenge, seemingly reserved for the relatively few. Yet in these times, there seems to be the necessity of expanding from the few into something more. Maybe it always seems that way.
mdavid-lpcc.com
Why is it so difficult to befriend oneself? To treat oneself with deep respect and love? To truly care for oneself? To honor one's heart's longings and callings? What do we imagine the risks of doing these things to be? What do we fear losing if we did? How far might you be willing to go in the service of your truth? How do conflicting desires prevent you from serving your true purpose?
Who are you, anyway? What are you doing here? What master are you serving? How are you contributing to the welfare of the world? Or are you? If you're not, you'll no doubt be diminished within yourself, and will feel this in any number of self diminishing ways. The reality of happiness and sanity requires an orientation that is not merely selfish. The reality of happiness and sanity requires something other than the worldly wisdom of dog eat dog, and every man/woman for him/herself.
This is, of course, risky business. It does, of course, go against the grain. It does not conform to the "norm". It requires a certain courage, a certain willingness to swim up stream, if you will. Oh, this is nothing new, yet translating this understanding into "mental health" reality is and always has been a challenge, seemingly reserved for the relatively few. Yet in these times, there seems to be the necessity of expanding from the few into something more. Maybe it always seems that way.
Tuesday, August 24, 2010
Know Thyself: Depth Therapy And Basic Life Skills
Know Thyself. After all, this is what depth psychotherapy has to offer. Related to the classical quest for the good life, for wisdom, for happiness. It is in knowing oneself that one enters the possibility of true happiness, of liberation from the pettiness of selfish ambitions, and of escape from the tyranny of egoistic demands.
To know thyself is to know God, to know Truth, and, as one master told us, the Truth will set you free.
Psychotherapy has the potential to blend an understanding of basic life skills, with the exploration of deep identity. Making relationships work well; learning to work effectively with one's own mental processes; developing insight about and understanding of one's behaviors, language, thinking, and feeling; having and making choices beyond what one thought was possible or available; addressing "symptoms" and manifestations of distress and unhappiness; accessing real meaning and value in one's life; re-connecting with the lost deep ecology of one's right place in, and one's right relationship to the (natural) world; being able to love.
Basic life skills: how to relate properly to oneself; how to relax and renew; how to align one's behaviors with true (ie., substantive, satisfying, grounding, beneficial) meaning and value; how to be effective in controlling oneself, rather than trying to control others; how to most effectively and beneficially change thoughts and feelings; how to develop humility, courage, and trust; how to release attachment to what one thinks one needs; how to experiment and explore intelligently and beneficially; how to cultivate the true precursors of happiness; how to surrender.
mdavid-lpcc.com
To know thyself is to know God, to know Truth, and, as one master told us, the Truth will set you free.
Psychotherapy has the potential to blend an understanding of basic life skills, with the exploration of deep identity. Making relationships work well; learning to work effectively with one's own mental processes; developing insight about and understanding of one's behaviors, language, thinking, and feeling; having and making choices beyond what one thought was possible or available; addressing "symptoms" and manifestations of distress and unhappiness; accessing real meaning and value in one's life; re-connecting with the lost deep ecology of one's right place in, and one's right relationship to the (natural) world; being able to love.
Basic life skills: how to relate properly to oneself; how to relax and renew; how to align one's behaviors with true (ie., substantive, satisfying, grounding, beneficial) meaning and value; how to be effective in controlling oneself, rather than trying to control others; how to most effectively and beneficially change thoughts and feelings; how to develop humility, courage, and trust; how to release attachment to what one thinks one needs; how to experiment and explore intelligently and beneficially; how to cultivate the true precursors of happiness; how to surrender.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)