Loading ...
Sorry, an error occurred while loading the content.

Sv: [existlist] Philosopher and the pschotherapist...

Expand Messages
  • claus lyngbye
    Hej alle people in this existlis group. J Want to get out. To many mail, to little time. How can J get out. Please help. Thank you Claus Lyngbye. Denmark ...
    Message 1 of 1 , Jan 20, 2002
    • 0 Attachment
      Hej alle people in this existlis group. J Want to get out. To many mail, to little time. How can J get out. Please help.

      Thank you
      Claus Lyngbye. Denmark
      ----- Original Message -----
      From: Eduard Alf <yeoman@...>
      To: <existlist@yahoogroups.com>
      Sent: Saturday, January 19, 2002 3:08 PM
      Subject: RE: [existlist] Philosopher and the pschotherapist...

      > james,
      > Nicely written ... thanks.
      > However, I take exception to your point that
      > the philosopher is in his ivory tower and the
      > therapist is active in the world. Surely
      > that depends upon the person. To my mind,
      > the objective of philosophy is to know how
      > best to interact with one's world, and if the
      > philosopher is still in his ivory tower, then
      > he is simply not being successful in
      > achieving that objective.
      > I do agree to your point about separation of
      > the subjective. Albeit the subjective often
      > comes into discussions on philosophy. It is
      > hard to escape.
      > Yes, it would be of interest to
      > discuss/debate the issue of "reality". My
      > own view is that the reality out there can
      > indeed be known by the individual. And in
      > this sense it is necessary to qualify my use
      > of the term "reality". My opinion is that
      > there are two levels of reality. The first
      > is the one which pertains to our immediate
      > action within the world. It is possible to
      > know this reality sufficient for our success
      > in the short number of years that we have
      > available to us. The second level is the
      > sort of thing that scientists are always
      > looking for. That is, the fine details which
      > really do not make any difference for the
      > average man on the street. For example, I
      > went down to the river and picked out a
      > particularly interesting rock [it is mostly
      > black but with lines of pink]. Now what is
      > the "reality" of this rock. I am sure that
      > if I took it over to someone at the National
      > Research Council offices, I could get a long
      > dissertation on what this rock was made of.
      > But none of that applies to how I view and
      > use the rock. So my "reality" is sufficient
      > for me. I am not saying that this is a
      > subjective reality, since the rock is still
      > a rock. Alternatively one could say that
      > there is a single overall reality, but that I
      > am picking only that portion of it which
      > serves me for my purposes. The selection of
      > rock attributes may be subjective, but the
      > attributes themselves are not subjective.
      > over to you now
      > eduard
      > p.s. By the way, I use "Comic Sans MS" font
      > when composing emails. Have you also
      > selected this same font? Or is my system
      > defaulting to this font when receiving your
      > emails.
      > -----Original Message-----
      > From: james tan [mailto:tyjfk@...]
      > Sent: Saturday, January 19, 2002 3:59 AM
      > To: existlist@yahoogroups.com
      > Subject: [existlist] Philosopher and the
      > pschotherapist...
      > bill,
      > indeed they are quite different. in
      > psychotherapy, the emotional and
      > existential needs (and the problems) of the
      > client is the focus. in
      > philosophy, the communication is about ideas,
      > not personal problem about
      > living of someone else. the aims are
      > different, the methods are different
      > (although some of the clients' problems are
      > pretty philosophical in nature,
      > and i find the philosophy of existentialism
      > particularly useful and relevant
      > to many of the problems clients are facing).
      > i can't tell a client he/she is
      > stupid or dumb (empathy, as in
      > seeing/perceiving the world as HE perceives,
      > not u ... so what is 'stupid' sometimes is a
      > matter of perpective), whereas
      > in philosophy i don't have such restrain (i
      > allow MY frustration, thus my
      > needs, to be vented by, maybe, calling the
      > fellow stupid. sometimes in
      > philosophical argument, the aim is to show
      > off ur ability in logic or
      > knowledge, maybe; i.e. it is to please ur own
      > needs of being looked up or
      > praised. the psychotherapists (supposedly and
      > professionally) have gone
      > beyond that, at least during the session, and
      > the focus is always on the
      > needs (whatever that is) of the clients; the
      > limelight is on the client, so
      > to speak, and when it turn out to be a
      > success, the therapist is not to be
      > given credit for, but the client who had
      > worked it out; the therapist is a
      > mere facilator, albeit a skillful one. in
      > philosophy, you respect a person
      > as a philosopher or a somebody if he has
      > established himself by writing a
      > influential book (such as sartre when he
      > wrote b&n, heidegger b&t, etc) or a
      > thesis which earned him a professorship in
      > harvard or cambridge; in
      > psychotherapy, whoever he is, u treat him
      > with positive regards,
      > unconditionally; the mere fact that he is
      > human, with or without worldly
      > achievement and possession, is enough of a
      > reason for the therapist to show
      > him respect. even the criminals are
      > respected, for their being a person,
      > though not necessarily for their behaviours
      > (the person and the behaviours
      > is separated, though sartre seems to think
      > the person IS his actions; for
      > the psychotherapist, it is more useful to
      > separate these two entity).
      > philosophy (except for existentialism) aim
      > for objectivity, psychotherapy
      > aim at the client's subjectivity (the way he
      > impute meaning, why he impute
      > meaning that way, the pros and cons of that
      > way of imputing meaning, his
      > beliefs, experiences [conditioning], the
      > things he hold on to, cling to,
      > which color his world in terms of the way he
      > give meaning to events in his
      > life, its link to the basic moods and emotion
      > he is in, how he constructs
      > the world (what constitute good and bad,
      > beautiful and ugly, pleasurable and
      > painful, etc, etc, for HIM, not u), how to
      > change it if it needed to be
      > change (coping devices and resources), his
      > environment, as in the quality
      > and type of the people he interact with, his
      > developmental history, his
      > personality and physiological
      > characteristics, his intelligence,)... as u
      > can see, being a pychotherapist need
      > patience, knowledge of the mechanism of
      > mind, some theory of personality as well, all
      > for one purpose, that the
      > client is able to work and love (freud). u
      > suspend ur own perspective and
      > needs, at least for a while. the aim of
      > philosophy is just knowledge.
      > whereas the philosopher is concerned
      > primarily with the nature of reality
      > (whether eduard is real or just a figment of
      > my imagination), the nature of
      > right and wrong, the psychotherapist is
      > concerned with how to make the
      > client lead a more happy, abundant and
      > manageable life. the philosopher
      > might see the need for the client to change
      > his thinking (because what the
      > client perceive as the reality simply isn't
      > the reality, lets argue and
      > debate about it), but it is the
      > psychotherapist who know HOW that can be
      > done. while the philosopher scorn, praise,
      > and be cleverly sarcastic, the
      > therapist empathise and mirror. while the
      > philosopher use only his neocortex
      > (responsible for intelligence, sophisticated
      > problem solving ability,
      > reasoning), the therapist realise that the
      > primitive limbic system
      > (responsible for ur emotion such as fear,
      > anxiety, sadness, happiness, etc)
      > is just as used, if not more (at least for
      > his traumatised clients). as to
      > ur qn whether the therapist is only treating
      > symptoms depends on which
      > therapist u go to... we have many school of
      > thoughts, the psychoanalysts
      > (freudian and neo freudian), the cognitive
      > (albert ellis, aaron beck, etc),
      > the behavioural (watson, pavlov, skinner,
      > etc), gestalt (perls, zinker,
      > wertheimer, koffka, kohler, etc), humanistic
      > (maslow, rogers, etc),
      > existentialist (frankl, rollo may,
      > binswanger, kelly, etc), the biological
      > based therapy as well (mainly used with
      > psychiatrist). all these different
      > perspective each give a angle of the human,
      > and what is used depends on the
      > nature of the problems of the clients, which
      > take expertise and experience
      > for the therapist to know. but the therapists
      > do make use of philosophical
      > knowledge,.. sometimes, the origin of a
      > client's problems is clearly in his
      > (irrational) belief about the world, and such
      > beliefs can have enormous
      > influence in the way he would concretely
      > behave (behave is used in the
      > widest sense of the word; gee, i must qualify
      > all the time...). there is
      > some kind of challenge and debates as well,
      > but it is done in a very subtle
      > way...u lead very patiently and skilfully for
      > the client to challenge his
      > own beliefs... the client also do some
      > exercise and pracitise based on his
      > 'new' beliefs or outlook. but really, it is a
      > long story... anyway,
      > philosopher give me the impression of someone
      > smart, clever, knowledgable,
      > living in a ivory tower thinking about the
      > nature of reality (all his life),
      > whereas the therapists are out there IN the
      > world actively engaged with the
      > world; while the philosopher's life is
      > reflective, the therapist's is
      > active. it is almost as if the philsopher
      > know for the mere sake of knowing
      > (except for existentallism), while the
      > therapist know so that he can apply
      > it in practical affairs. so although i have
      > interest in philosophy (esp in
      > its relevance to psychology), i have my
      > degree in psychology.
      > james.
      > Our Home: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/existlist
      > (Includes community book list, chat, and more.)
      > TO UNSUBSCRIBE from this group, send an email to:
      > existlist-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com
      > Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
    Your message has been successfully submitted and would be delivered to recipients shortly.