On Alchemy and Christian Existentialism

Whence the Moral in Psychology? I. Concerns about “the good” or “the good life” a. Core concern to psychotherapy, that’s what people pay us to figure out b. But psychology’s assumptions assume certain goods and preclude examination of other goods c. Where does this come from? II. The Greeks a. Aristotle – “All of psychology is a footnote to Aristotle” i. Virtue and the civic society ii. We’ve lost this b. Christianity – “Love thy neighbor, do unto others” i. We’ve lost this, God died in the hearts of men (Nietzsche) c. Science i. Science cannot tell us what is “good” ii. I can use science to commit great atrocity iii. I can use science to undertake miracles 1. Science only helps us study what we already assume to be true about things science can’t touch (like the moral) 2. Sam Harris’ problem – he scientifically found that his moral values were “true” and not others’ iv. With the death of God we turn to anything “science” sounding because science sounds certain 1. Although no true scientist experiences science this way v. With no God, we turn to science who shrugs its shoulders and says “um, survival of the fittest?” 1. Behaviors/experiences that increase your chance of survival and the survival of your genetics are pleasurable a. Sleep, sex, eating, doing what you want 2. Behaviors/experiences that decrease your chance of survival and the survival of your genetics are painful a. Deprived of sleep, celibacy, fasting, doing what you should III. The good = pleasure, happiness, bad = suffering, unhappiness a. People come to therapy to either decrease their pain, increase their pleasure or both i. And so that’s what therapists do ii. The “I just want to help people” problem b. But this discounts the “redemptive power of suffering” (Jerome Frank) i. Suffering can be meaningful, important, and necessary ii. The condition of mortality is suffering 1. The Zen approach a. Suffering-as-experience b. Acceptance 2. The Christian approach a. Suffering-as-redemptive b. Acceptance i. Perhaps suffering is a condition of Being 1. God losing 1/3 of his children 2. God-as-Christ killed by his own (why did His God not save Him?) a. The fallacy of “why is God doing this to me?” 3. But the suffering is meaningful and important a. Compassion, and perhaps love, exist only in the face of actual or potential suffering 4. And in that comes acceptance (not happiness) c. When is pleasure problematic? i. The middle-aged man, the Porsche and the 20 year-old personal trainer ii. The narcissistic black hole iii. The counsel “do as thou wilt, and that is the whole of the law” causes more problems than it solves. d. A funny aside: The Nine Satanic Statements (LaVey, 2969) Compared to the Implicit Values of Psychology (Richardson, Fowers, and Guignon, 1999) i. Indulge instead of abstain - yup ii. Seize the day - yup iii. Know yourself, don’t deceive yourself - yup iv. Only be kind to those that will be kind to you - yup v. Stand up for yourself, don’t turn the other cheek - yup vi. Be responsible for yourself and not others - yup vii. Man is just another animal - yup viii. Pursue physical, mental, and emotional gratification – yup ix. Principles as enemy to the Church - yup Christian Existentialism and Transformational Alchemy, or Therapy as Compassionate Soul (Discussion in Draper’s PSY 4300 Counseling Class) I. Fundamental Assumptions a. We do not have free will, we live engaged in the world (the world is a part of us and we are a part of it) so we have a contextualized agency i. This means that context simultaneously provides possibilities and constraints (especially morally) b. Human behavior is teleologically caused, subsuming and including all other causes (biology, nurture, and context) c. We learn through our Being-in-the-world, mostly an epistemology of practice (a very hermeneutic assumption) d. Morally speaking, we are not separate entities, we are engaged entities to various degrees, agentically-situated with one another and co-constituting one another i. Beings-in-the-world with Others and alongside things 1. Doing this would mean cultivating in ourselves not only love and interest in others, but also a genuine curiosity—the kind of love which seeks to know. G. K. Chesterton asserts in his book Orthodoxy "how much larger your life would be if your self were smaller in it; if you could really look at other men with common curiosity and pleasure. . . . You would begin to be interested in them. . . . You would break out of this tiny and tawdry theatre in which your own little plot is always being played, and you would find yourself under a freer sky, and in a street full of splendid strangers." G. K. Chesterton, Orthodoxy. (Garden City, New York: Doubleday Image Books, 1959.), pp. 20-21, quoted in Neal A. Maxwell, More Excellent Way: Essays on Leadership for Latter-day Saints (Salt Lake City: Deseret Book, 1973), 83. ii. Communitarian ethos (I am my brother’s keeper) iii. Because of this, we are a part of one another’s hurting and one another’s healing iv. We are a part of one another, indicating that rationality is not the best foundation for morality, but compassion (love) v. This love is deeply contextualized (what loving means takes shape within a context, but love is a virtue that can fit within any situation). e. Love heals all wounds, even if it takes an eternity i. For God so loved the world . . . ii. Christ as the ultimate partner in dialogue (embodying perfect openness and perfect virtue at the same time) – Bakhtin f. Levinas – It becomes clear that with the end of traditional philosophy, the task of genuine thinking is itself an ethic. What becomes most needful is a responsibility for the world, a caring for what is as it is, a shepherding, a letting be, an allowance for Being’s generosity, an attunement to the gift-giving of worlds. Ontology becomes an indebtedness to what is, a quiet listening vigilant against its own interference, cautions of its own interventions, careful not to disturb. In a word, thinking becomes a lovingkindess. II. Christian Existentialism and Perspectives on Being a. Christ loved into the world i. His love is both: 1. Immanent a. The experience Christians have of meaning deeply, the loving and caring acts of those around us, the miracle that we love and are loved 2. Transcendent a. There are more ways to experience Him and His lovingkindness than we imagine, the more we love the more limitless we find loving to be b. Saw in others the divinity at two levels i. The actual (the loving one-ness between people) ii. The potential (people could develop this one-ness even more) c. Commanded all to do two things: i. Love God and one another 1. Faith in something/someone greater than us 2. Hope for salvation from the unnecessary suffering caused by mortality (and others within) 3. Love for the Divine, trusting and opening ourselves up to the ultimate Other d. Christ believed these principles so intensely that he died for them i. Offered At-One-Ment 1. Four models of atonement 2. Number four: Exemplar model a. Died to set the example, to bring us at-one not only with Him (and thereby His Father) but also to encourage our at-one-ness with one another b. Romans experienced this lovingness as madness i. The letter from the prison warden 1. They loved us with their hands, so we severed them. They loved us with their feet, so we removed them. They loved us with their eyes so we burned them out. They loved us with their voices so we cut out their tongues. Now they love us with their smiles, and we are helpless before it. III. Transformational Alchemy, Renaissance Christian Alchemy a. Misunderstood (modern) not about matter, but about soul b. Physical matter in-relation to spiritual i. Meaning of “stuff” co-constituted in-relation to me ii. A matter of willingness to experience differently, not just see differently iii. To coin a phrase, it’s a soulprocess, not just a mindset 1. Process = fluid, approximate, hopeful enough to move, uncertain enough to remain humble 2. Soul = deeply felt, transcending mere “mind” cognition and implicating deeply our hearts, spirits 3. As you adopt the soulprocess to experience things differently, so too do they become different a. As I experience the substance before me as possibly worthwhile, do I experience the worth with the substance as I relate to it i. What is lead good for? (lots) What purposes can it serve? (many) c. How do we do this? Relate to things differently? See the worth in what is before us? i. Reminding ourselves that we are not passive receivers of existence, but active participants with existence in a very deep and layered way (the very essence of who and what you are exists in-relation to what is not you to the point that what is/is not you becomes shared rather than isolate) 1. Manifest = the first layer – the surface that is glanced at a. Our/their obvious characteristics (gender, race, height, weight, cultural identifiers/assumptions) 2. Given = the deeper level which we can only get to if we allow what is to be given to consciousness a. See the potential valuable uses for lead b. See beyond the surface to the fundamental value in another 3. We participate in the meaning of both the manifest and the given (manifest – sexism, racism) (given – surprised at depth, appreciation for potential) ii. To experience beyond the manifest to the given requires the unity of three feelings/attitudes for our soulprocess (not categorical but always related subtly different ways of making meaning): 1. Faith – the capacity for what is to be more than what it is, the capacity for the other to be more than what they seem to be 2. Hope – the belief that things can get better a. Christ & the Tao: i. Everything turns out all right in the end ii. if it’s not alright, fear not iii. it’s not the end. 3. Compassion – the willingness to not only have empathy for the other, but to allow their experience to matter to us in a practical way (not only “I feel you” but also “here’s what I can do”) iii. The process by which we peer past the manifest and experience the given is called a reduction 1. This isn’t a reduction in the atomist or determinist sense of the word 2. Rather, a holist sense to allow ourselves to reduce not the other, but our experience of the other to what is actually fully wholly there a. In actuality b. In potentiality i. Faith, hope, compassion . . . 3. As you are willing to experience others as worthy of compassion, so too do you find that they are worthy of compassion a. In philosophical speak – as you are willing to break through the crust of what is merely manifest you can experience the limitless potential of the given i. The Other, it turns out, is both: 1. Immanent (we can see what they are and how they behave on the surface) and 2. Transcendent (there is so much more to the other than we can experience in the moment, the Other is eternal) iv. Seems soft-hearted, and often is 1. But there is a very firm core morally-speaking deep in this theory, that love is the ultimate good a. Love is eternal from this perspective, therefore as I care for others I do so in a loving way, not only what will see to their needs and their capacity to love others in the short run, but the long run as well, at-one-ment i. Can be “tough love” depending on the context ii. Worth facing any adversity for (that madness) d. Not inevitable process, but an agentic and relational one i. We are co-constituted entities, so change does not happen in a vacuum ii. Change entails openness to the event for both therapist and client 1. Openness/closedness a. For therapist b. For client IV. A Case Study on Transformational Alchemy: Hock a. Leader of a gang in prison b. Caucasian male, bald, goatee, tattooed from fingertip to jawline i. Transferred to WVCF to split him from his gang c. Glaring i. “I ain’t no bitch, I don’t need psych” ii. Manifest: a criminal’s criminal, will continue to commit crimes and will be re-incarcerated again and again so no need to feel hope or have compassion at all iii. Reduction: Fierce demeanor, protecting something . . . what? Cares about something enough to fight for it . . . what? Gang? Brotherhood? Requires care sufficient to risk his own life . . . perhaps potential there? 1. “My bad man, if you ever want to talk man-to-man shoot me a kite” d. To be honest, forgot about him until a year later he came to my office on the DL i. Held out a photo of two little boys, 2 and 4 years ii. His ice-hard glare softened for a moment “I heard you had kids doc, I don’t want that therapy bullshit, I just want to know how to be a father” e. Nobody knows how to be a father and everyone knows how fathers are i. His knowledge of fathers truncated, incomplete, damaged ii. Older of two boys, father absent, mother alcoholic, Hock dropped out of early Jr High to “hustle” to make enough money to feed his family iii. Got really good at hustling and attracted followers 1. From a group of kids trying to survive the mean streets to a gang of angry and well-armed young adults making cash in a strapped town f. One summer a Baptist church group came through doing service projects for a few weeks i. Hock smitten by one of the leaders, got his flirt on ii. She put him to work on the service projects 1. And they became friends, and then more-than-friends 2. Took Hock to a church dance a. Father fiercely objected, she ran away to be with him b. Didn’t want her on the streets, bought her a small house in the “good” part of town c. Hock became increasingly absent from the gang, preferring to spend time with her g. Discontent amongst the group i. Beta meets with rival gang and arranges for Hock’s murder ii. Delta, also in the meeting, gets nervous and tells Hock the day before the murder 1. Murder planned at a crack house in guise of a “meeting” 2. All people at meeting to be disarmed, Hock to be killed in a drive-by as he leaves 3. Hock arrives the night before, and plants 4 machetes in the crack house a. Under the cushions of the couch, under the lip of a coffee table, two in the kitchen 4. Meeting starts, participants disarmed a. As Hock negotiates he draws a machete from under the couch cushion and (still negotiating) kills the alpha of the rival gang and as the others flee, injures three others severely b. Murder-as-message 5. Hock sits on the front porch of the crack house, calls 911 on himself, and waits the 45 minutes for the police to arrive a. Pleads down to charges amounting to 10 years, 5 with good behavior, two years in h. Is Hock’s request (learning to father) appropriate? Loving? i. Yes. ii. How to father? What is essence of fatherhood? iii. Hebraic definition, av, one who brings strength 1. Explored with Hock how to bring true strength a. False strength – that which requires us to do things that will weaken our family i. Deal drugs, fight, neglect our family for our “bros” b. True strength – that which requires us to do things that will strengthen our family i. Provide security, companionship, mentorship, quality time as quantity time ii. Strength-as-love 1. How to love sons? 2. Practical demonstrations a. Food, shelter, clothing, “things” 3. Emotional demonstrations a. Listening b. Affectionate touch c. Words of affirmation and pride d. Time dedicated/sacrificed i. Hock softened but did not weaken i. Titanium vs. steel ii. He slowly withdrew from gang leadership iii. Earned a transfer to a medium-security prison 1. Received electrician training 2. Apprentice to Journeyman 3. Supports his family, loves his family V. What therapy means a. The transmutation of soul through the mutual exercise of compassion with eternal goals, should we be open to it i. Counselors bring: 1. Compassion/love 2. Outsideness (perspective) 3. Openness (hopefully)

Causality and Epistemology

1. Your client, Jane, comes to her second session with you highly distraught. Two nights previously she arrived home early from work and found her loving husband of 10 years cheating on her with her younger sister. She states repeatedly, through heaving sobs, that she can’t understand how this could happen, that their marriage was a “good” marriage. She asks repeatedly “Why would he do this?”
a. What caused Jane’s husband to cheat on her?
i. Is his cheating behavior healthy or unhealthy?
1. How do you know you’re right?
b. What is causing Jane’s distress?
i. Is her distress healthy or unhealthy?
1. How do you know you’re right?


2. Your client, Robert, is coming in for his 33rd session with you, as gloomy and as apathetic as he’s always been. He reports the same feelings and experiences he’s reported for the previous 32 sessions. He feels worthless, like he wants to die. He’s spent every day over the past 33 weeks in bed hating himself, lacking even the energy to commit suicide.
a. What is causing your clients behavior?
i. Is his behavior healthy or unhealthy?
1. How do you know you’re right?


3. The mother of your 8 year-old client comes into your office shortly before your session with him. She appears highly distraught and explains to you that she found her son torturing puppies in the backyard of their neighbor’s home. When she confronted her son about his behavior and grounded him to his room, he promptly lit his bed on fire.
a. What is causing your client’s behavior?
i. Is his behavior healthy or unhealthy?
1. How do you know you’re right?
b. What is causing the mother of your client to feel so distressed?
i. Is her behavior healthy or unhealthy?
1. How do you know you’re right?

4. One night, while visiting your family, you note that your uncle, who has always been a part of your life, is not present at the family gathering. You ask your family about where your favorite uncle is, and nobody responds to you. After a few distressing minutes of this, your grandmother pulls you aside and tells you that your uncle is in jail for molesting his children, your cousins.
a. What caused your uncle’s behavior?
i. Is his behavior healthy or unhealthy?
1. How do you know you’re right?

Assumptions Have Implications

Theories in psychology have unspoken assumptions and implications
The “from whence” and “to whence” of the theory
Assumptions are the fundamental ideas about the nature of reality that must be true for the theory to work
Implications are the consequences that logically follow from the assumptions: If ___ then ____
Example: Assuming we’re biologically determined
1. I’m a therapist that holds fast to an evolutionary model of behavior. I assume that all of human behavior is “hard-wired” and genetically determined. I read an article of a woman proclaiming the evils of adultery and how infidelity is “destroying today’s families”.
A. What would be my reaction to this article?
B. I’m a marriage counselor for a couple with one spouse is unfaithful, much to the distress of the other member of the marriage. How does my assumption that all behavior is “hard-wired” imply whether or not I should intervene with the unfaithful spouse?
C. If I choose to intervene, how would I intervene, given the assumption that all behavior is “hard-wired”?
Example: Assuming “it’s all good”
1. I’m a therapist that holds fast to a postmodernist model of behavior. I assume that all human behavior is morally relative, and that any dogmatic worldview (political, religious, or individual) is inherently harmful. I have a client in my office for an initial consultation who feels she has “sinned” and is greatly depressed, ashamed, and guilty for her behavior. I learn that by the standards of her deeply-held religion, she did indeed violate certain tenets of her faith.
A. Given my postmodern position, what would my reaction be to her shame, guilt, and grief?
B. How might I intervene with her, given that I feel that “it’s all good” and that dogmatism is inherently a problem?
Example: Assuming behavior is caused by unconscious forces
1. I’m a therapist from an analytic tradition. I assume that all of human behavior is due to unconscious processes (factors outside of our awareness over which we have no control). I’m meeting with a client who is greatly angry at his father. He feels his father betrayed his family by leaving his mother for a younger woman and moving suddenly to another state.
A. Given my analytic position, would I agree that the father is morally responsible for his own behavior?
B. If the father is not morally responsible, are my clients feelings rational or irrational?

Assumptions and Implications are rarely discussed
Themselves embedded in other assumptions and implications


Assumed Yet Overlooked: Agency
Agency = the ability to do otherwise, all things remaining equal
A HUGE assumption in our daily lives
Love, anger, shame, guilt, joy, often built on agency
Morality is not possible without agency
No choice = “good” and “bad” cease to make sense
If I have no agency (no choice) I cannot help what I do, hence it cannot be “bad” or “good”
Free will (utterly unconstrained behavior) seems impossible
We do have history, context, bodies
Understanding of contextualized agency
Critically examining what people can do, and what they cannot
Constraints not determinism

Standards for Critical Thought:
Clarity
You need to speak or present in a way that is clear and that the listener can understand
Accuracy
What you say really needs to be true (checkable empirically, qualitatively, etc.)
Precision
Giving precise enough details is very helpful and a good sign
Relevance
The statement should be relevant to the topic, to the issue, to the question
Breadth
There may be other ways of looking at the topic that need to be addressed
Logic
What you are saying now needs to follow directly and sensibly from what you said before


A theory is a series of two or more ideas that have a meaningful relationship
The relationship between them can be
1. Hypothesized
2. Presumed
3. Factually demonstrated
Basically: Theory = thought and theories are fallible

Responses to Fear of Thinking and Theorizing
Eclecticism
No escape
Nihilism
Work ceases
Denial
No improvement
Fighting familiarity
Fear Not! You can Theorize too!
Necessity of a “meta – theory” or a way of theorizing about theory
The nature of the relationship between ideas in a theory varies
Finding categories of the various ways ideas relate can be helpful
One such meta – theory is examinations of causality

1. The four causes
a. Material
i. What causes the thing is what it is made of
(1) What are you “made” of? Your biology causes your behavior
b. Efficient
i. What causes the thing are events that led up to it through time
(1) What is your history? It is your history that causes your behavior
c. Formal
i. The context of the thing, internally and externally
(1) What is your current context? Your context causes your behavior
d. Final
i. The end to which the thing or behavior exists
(1) What is your goal? Your goal causes your behavior
(a) Also called telos, study of purpose is teleology
2. Thought Exercise #1
a. There is a chair sitting in the middle of the room
i. What is the material cause of the chair?
ii. What is the efficient cause of the chair?
iii. What is the formal cause of the chair?
iv. What is the final cause of the chair?
3. Thought Exercise #2
a. John Smith has just been convicted of murdering 16 people in 5 states
i. What is a material cause for John’s behavior?
ii. What is an efficient cause for John’s behavior?
iii. What is a formal cause for John’s behavior?
iv. What is a final cause for John’s behavior?
4. Thought Exercise #3
a. Paula Purge sits across from you seeking treatment for her eating disorder
i. What is a material cause for her disorder?
ii. What is an efficient cause for her disorder?
iii. What is a formal cause for her disorder?
iv. What is a final cause for her disorder?
5. Thought Exercise #4
a. What forms of causality are assumed in the following vignette?
i. Genetic Causes of Depression
(1) Twin Studies
(a) Much of what we know about the genetic influence of clinical depression is based upon research that has been done with identical twins. Identical twins are very helpful to researchers since they both have the exact same genetic code. It has been found that when one identical twin becomes depressed the other will also develop clinical depression approximately 76% of the time. When identical twins are raised apart from each other, they will both become depressed about 67% of the time. Because both twins become depressed at such a high rate, the implication is that there is a strong genetic influence. If it happened that when one twin becomes clinically depressed the other always develops depression, then clinical depression would likely be entirely genetic. However because the rate of both identical twins developing depression is not closer to 100% this tells us that there are other things that influence a person's vulnerability to depression. These may include environmental factors such as childhood experiences, current stressors, traumatic events, exposure to substances, medical illnesses, etc.
(b) Research has also been done with fraternal twins. Unlike identical twins who have the same genetic code, these siblings share only about 50% of their genetic makeup and do not necessarily look alike. Studies have shown that when one fraternal twin becomes depressed, the other also develops depression about 19% of the time. This is still a higher rate of depression when compared to overall rates for the general public, again pointing towards a genetic influence in the development of clinical depression.
(i) (both vignettes from http://www.allaboutdepression.com/cau_03.html)
6. Your assumptions about causality imply some treatments and not others
a. If I assume that my client’s issues are caused by their biology, what treatments would I use?
i. Which treatments would I NOT use?
(1) Consequences?
b. If I assume that my clients issues are caused by their past, what treatments would I use?
i. Which treatments would I NOT use?
(1) Consequences?
c. If I assume that my clients issues are caused by their context, what treatments would I use?
i. Which treatments would I NOT use?
(1) Consequences?
d. If I assume that my clients issues are caused by their mistaken goals, what treatments would I use?
i. Which treatments would I NOT use?
(1) Consequences?
7. Dealing with the whole person
a. In psychology, we tend to value just two causes, efficient and material
i. Most measurable, and hence most “scientific”
b. Two consequences to that value
i. It removes volition/agency
(1) A therapist that attends to your past, not to you
(2) A therapist that attends to your biology, not to you
ii. It removes moral responsibility
(1) Sometimes a good thing, sometimes not
(a) Good when behavior truly is a-volitional
(b) Bad when behavior is truly volitional

Causality, however, has direct implications for epistemology (how knowledge is "caused")

Epistemology
a. Epistemology is our theorizing about our ways of gaining knowledge
i. Episteme = theoretical knowledge
ii. Gnosis = experiential knowledge
iii. Oida = knowledge from books
(1) Different theories about ways of knowing
(a) Critical for science
(b) Critical for therapy
(c) Yet another meta-theory
b. Valuable for your first paper (potentially)
i. How do people know what they know?
ii. How does such knowledge come about?
iii. Why do some people know some things, while other people know other things?
iv. Can problems occur in the process of knowing/learning?
v. Can we know anything learned without our physical senses?
2. Lockean Epistemology (Empiricism)
a. Empiricism: From “experience” in Latin
i. Common, unquestioned
(1) Born “tabula rasa”
(a) We derive knowledge from two things:
(i) Sensation (from our seven senses)
1) Sensation is the outside world effecting our senses
(ii) Reflection (remembering that which we have sensed)
1) Reflection is developed through our experience with the outside world helping us categorize our behavior
(b) Ultimately, external forces impinge upon our senses causing sensation directly, which is then remembered
(i) What we know is at the mercy of what we sense
(ii) Our knowledge is strictly A Posteriori
ii. If my assumptions about human knowledge were predominantly empirical as a therapist, how would that affect my treatment of my clients?
(1) What sorts of interventions would I provide?
(2) What sorts of interventions would I not provide?
3. Kantian Epistemology (Rationalism)
a. Rationalism: From ratio “reason” in Latin
b. Less common, often unconsidered
i. Descartes: The use of skepticism
(1) Doubting (even doubt) = reason
c. Socratic dialogue
d. Einstein’s gedanken
i. Recognized as a scientist, but breakthroughs were non-empirical
e. Mathematics
i. No empirical referent
f. Immanuel Kant: A priori knowledge & categories of understanding
i. A priori means “before experience”
g. Division between noumenal and phenomenal realms
i. Noumenal = world as it is apart from our understanding of it
ii. Phenomenal = world as we actually experience it
h. Categories of understanding exist a priori
i. Rose colored glasses: phenomenal structuring noumenal
(1) Time, space, shape, size
(2) Ultimately, knowledge is caused by our structuring of the world
(a) We are disturbed not by events, but by the views which we take of them
(i) Epictetus
i. If I were a therapist who assumed that what people know is predominantly how they habitually construct their external and internal world, what sorts of interventions would I provide?
i. Which interventions would I not use?
4. Exercise! (But without the sweating and panting)
a. You’re seeing a client, and you assume that the client’s disorder comes from past experience. (They had a pathogenic environment)
i. What epistemology are you assuming?
b. You’re seeing a client, and you assume that the client’s disorder comes from their unconscious mind interfering pathologically with their world
i. What epistemology are you assuming?
5. Don’t we just need ONE epistemology for crying out loud?
a. Empiricism limited in its explanatory power
i. Things can be meaningful without empirical referent
(1) Mathematics, statistics, religion, virtue, duty
b. Rationalism is limited in its explanatory power
i. We cannot change our categories of understanding
(1) True creativity limited
(2) Explaining fundamental differences in understanding is problematic
c. Search continues for the “best” epistemology
6. Alternative 1: Social Constructionism
a. The process of understanding is no longer within a given individual
i. Understanding occurs within relationships
b. Humans are fundamentally language using creatures
c. What is known is constructed through language and interaction
d. Problem: Everything known is socially constructed
i. Truth, lies, right, wrong, etc. all constructed
(1) (we’ll talk about degrees of relativism next week)
7. Alternative 2: Modes of Engagement (Hermeneutic Interpretivism)
a. Fundamental assumption: We are engaged or embedded in our world to varying degrees
i. Empiricism and rationalism posit separation between self and world = subject/object distinction
ii. Constructivism makes crucial concepts items for ironic play in discourse (relativizes fundamental realities of being)
b. Hermeneutics (interpretive) partially dissolves subject/object distinction, furthers understanding
i. Present-at-hand (Present-ness) = Detached, reflective mode of experimentation and math. Subject & object separate, leads to skewed (constructed) understanding
ii. Ready-to-hand (Occurrent-ness) = Active engagement, practical knowledge and learning less skewed by culture
(1) All of this knowledge is contextualized knowledge
iii. Treating a map as a real city = treating experimental results as immediately applicable in lived existence
(1) Studying “objectively” is to study an abstraction
(2) Subjectivity/objectivity fused into “the lived world”
iv. No unbiased interpretation, “interpretations are always and already interpretations of something”
(1) We understand the world both according to what it is, and what we make of it
(a) Yup. Both, at the same time
(2) We are “thrown” into a world of language, meaning, history, morality
(a) Our thrown-ness informs our interpretation of the world
(b) As does our engagement with the world
(i) Do we have time to talk about the hermeneutic circle?
c. Exercise time!
i. Often, wrapping our heads around constructivism and interpretivism can be challenging, but we’re up for it!
(1) If I’m a therapist who assumes that all knowledge is socially constructed in relation to others, what sorts of interventions would I use with my clients?
(a) Which would I not use?
(2) If I’m a therapist who assumes that all knowledge is interpreted knowledge of ourselves and our world around us grounded in our own context, what sorts of interventions would I use with my clients?
(a) Which would I not use?

Our assumptions in terms of causality and epistemology also have implications for our ethical and moral view.

Moral and Ethical Assumptions in Counseling
a. Principle ethics
i. The belief that you have to strictly codify “right” and “wrong” behavior
(1) Usually what gets codified is a socially constructed understanding that itself draws from commonly held general principles in the population
ii. Ethical codes are written very broadly, specific situations are mentioned only rarely, which can be frustrating if you need help with a particular ethical issue
(1) Scene in the Simpson’s Movie “There’s no answers here!”
(a) Same problem with ethical codes, they present a mindset, general rules for ethical behavior
(b) In essence, the ethical codes are necessary (they form a base) but not sufficient (they are necessarily broad and imprecise)
iii. Ethics specify behavioral guidelines for a given group of people
(1) Club membership
(a) You can break ethics sometimes without breaking the law
(2) Law specifies what you can’t do legally
(a) Goes for everybody, can land you in jail if you break them
(3) You know you’re in legal trouble if:
(a) Legal proceedings have been initiated
(b) Lawyers are involved
(c) You are in danger of having a complaint of misconduct filed against you
iv. Sometimes the law and the code don’t get along
(1) What you are ethically bound to do may be legally problematic
(a) Consult a lawyer (hate to say it, but it’s true)
(i) Issues due to counseling minors, ethics vs. law
(2) Some ethics codes (like APA) specify that if there is a contradiction between the law and the code, obey the law in a manner to best approximate the ethical code
b. Principle ethics is a philosophical orientation towards “right” behavior
i. Establishing a set of obligations and the methods to meet said obligations
ii. Using said method to solve a dilemma/dilemmas
iii. Use the framework to solve future dilemmas
(1) It’s very “rule-focused”
c. Virtue ethics are aspiration-al
i. Four philosophical core virtues:
(1) Prudence
(2) Integrity
(3) Respectfulness
(4) Benevolence
ii. Here’s a sample list of virtue ethics in psychology
(1) 1. Autonomy
(a) Self-determination, freedom to choose
(i) We shouldn’t interfere with that
1) But often we do
(b) This is one of the reasons why it is so important to be aware of one’s own values
(c) We won’t know we’re pushing a moral agenda unless we know we have one
(i) Always present clients options, even if you don’t like some of them
(2) 2. Nonmaleficence
(a) Avoid doing harm (actively or passively)
(i) Vindictiveness disturbingly common in our field
1) “I’m giving them what they deserve”
2) Fine line sometimes between tough love and just petty meanness
a) Be aware of cultural differences when diagnosing
i) “White man’s clinic”
(3) 3. Beneficence
(a) Promote “good” for others
(i) Defined as “dignity and welfare”
1) Loaded with assumptions . . .
(b) Note that this particular virtue is PRO-active
(i) Have you done any good in the world today?
1) Be aware of the client’s context and what “good” is for them
2) Don’t dismiss your own “good” but try to find a middle ground with them
3) One culture CAN positively inform another culture
a) What I learned about the value of extended family
(4) 4. Justice
(a) Be fair to everyone, don’t have double-standards
(i) Justice is an issue when interventions don’t work, or are harmful with certain populations
(ii) Justice is an issue when assessments work for one group, but not another (yet are claimed to be valid)
(iii) Justice is an issue when you have a double-standard in your pro-bono work
(iv) Justice is an issue when you give certain clients the benefit of the doubt and not others . . .
(5) 5. Fidelity
(a) You make a promise, you keep that promise
(i) Your word becomes FACT
(ii) You are LOYAL to your clients
(iii) You need to live up to your end of informed consent
(iv) Clients need to trust the therapeutic relationship
1) My own experience with counseling
a) My counselor no-showed to 50% of our sessions
(6) 6. Veracity
(a) Closely related to fidelity
(b) Be truthful with your clients
(i) Lies of commission vs. lies of omission
(ii) Painful honesty is sometimes required of us
(iii) Clients need to know that they can trust what you say
(iv) “I’m going to speak to medical to see if we can get you an appointment sooner”
1) By golly, you’d better go and chat with medical
2. Ethics do not arise in a vacuum
a. They are themselves philosophical ideas, loaded with assumptions
b. Note that ethical virtues (and ethical principles) focus around helping an individual, usually to feel better or behave more productively. This is a fundamental assumption of counseling theory
c. We, as a society, very much value such worthy ideas as individual freedom, happiness, and the inherent rights of the individual
i. This has HUGE positive benefits
(1) Freedom from oppression, repression, and arbitrary authority
(2) Both individually and socially
(3) The ability to choose one’s own destiny
(a) Counseling both mirrors society and magnifies it
(i) We help perpetuate both the positive and negative of these values
d. Psychology furthers the modern ethos of the importance of individual rights, freedoms, and pursuits of happiness
i. The individual, however, is seen as a “bounded, masterful self”, its own source of happiness and misery (Cushman)
ii. A “punctual” self, a singular point of consciousness, radically disconnected from other points of consciousness (also Cushman)
(1) Denies the power of relationality
(2) Denies powerful moral obligation, responsibility, etc.
(a) “Only you can make you happy”
(i) WHAT?????
e. Pursuit of individual happiness and the good life are certainly worthwhile goals
i. Possible unfortunate side-effects of this:
(1) People looking out for themselves and their own benefits first, without concern to greater societal needs
(2) Greater disconnection with others as people increasingly look within for meaning
(3) Go to psychotherapists to ameliorate the necessary anomie that accompanies this
(4) Only to have it perpetuated by individualistic therapy
f. Another effect of the individualistic nature is the centrality of meaning in the self
i. The individual knows, subjectively, what the source of his or her individual happiness is
ii. Given that happiness is the ultimate goal, and only the individual knows what will make them happy, the individual is the ultimate arbiter of what is “best”
(1) All individuals differ - what is ultimately best differs
3. The issue of Relativism
a. Constructionists object to the individualism of psychology
i. Posit instead that meaning is not located within a given individual, but rather within the meanings created by society
ii. We are, rather than completely, ontologically, separated from others, we are instead co-constructed by society, fundamentally inseparable from others in society
b. Although constructionism does a lot to explain our engagement with society and meaning, there is still a problem: If moral meaning comes from society, and societies differ, morals are relative to societies
i. Where do individual cultures end?
(1) Countries, states, counties, religions organizations, fraternities, families, even individuals
ii. Different approach, same ultimate problem
c. Disadvantages of relativism
i. It allows us to treat crucial moral concerns as items for “ironic play” in our counseling
ii. We have to treat them as serious to respect the clients, but they can’t really be serious because everything is relative - ironic
iii. Cultural clashes are inevitable
(1) “I’ll only see the counselor if she’s Catholic” (Mormon, Baptist, Buddhist, etc.)
(a) “Will he respect my values, even though the culture of psychology denies the validity of values?”
(2) “Men’s milk” – you would be legally obligated to report abuse
(3) Relativism is inconsistent
(4) Could it be that we don’t feel values are fundamentally relative?
(a) When we feel strongly about things we do not feel that our emotion is invalid or stupid
(i) If everything is relative, why fight, why advocate, why change?
1) Why is happiness “good?”
a) Why would anyone want to perpetuate happiness except for very relativistic (and ultimately invalid) reasons?
(5) Illogical “the ultimate truth is that there is no truth”
(a) The ultimate in living truthfully is to live as though truthful living was impossible . . .

Dr. Draper Recommends

Draper Recommends these Restaurants (in no particular order)

Spice Grill: Indian fusion served by very friendly people. It's an experience. NOW OUT OF BUSINESS 163 North University Ave in Provo
Pantrucas: Chilean cuisine, amazing sandwich bread (North canyon road provo)
Four Seasons Hot Pot: Traditional northern chinese, try the dumplings! (University Avenue in Provo)
Se Llama Peru: Peruvian food (Center Street in Provo)
La Carreta: Peruvian behind Sizzler on State Street by University Mall. Try the Ceviche!
India Palace: Best Indian I've had in this state (Center Street in Provo)
Lidna Maria's: Tons of food for a reasonable price (8th North in Orem)
The Jerk Shack: Jamaican - ask for the extra jerk sauce if you like it spicy! (Center Street in Orem) NOW OUT OF BUSINESS
Ginger's Cafe: The only vegetarian place I've found that I like (Main Street in Springville)
Kranky Franks: Hotdogs served by very un-cranky people. Ask for the Big Mike (Main Street in Springville)
T-Bone: This is NOT "good" food, but going there is an experience, like ordering fried rice with your chicken friend steak (South State Street Springville)
Demae: Sushi fresh and for a good price (Center Street in Provo)
Five Guys Hamburgers: The only burgers I've found that I can recommend (North of University Mall in Orem)
La Casita: Try the carnitas if you're really hungry (Main Street Springville)
Thai Drift: Best thai food I've had since moving to Utah. 16th North in Orem off State Street.
Los 2 Potrillos: South Spanish Fork. Although the fare is standard, the Albondigas en Caldo (Mexican Meatball Soup) is one of the best soup dishes I've had in a while.
Model A Cafe: Mapleton. Classic Americana. If you go, order a "Flat Tire" with butter, cinnamon, and sugar. Trust me. OUT OF BUSINESS
I'll add to the list if anything else comes to mind.

Gestalt Therapies

Gestalt Theory
Key Terms:
Experiential Epistemological Relativism Field
Field Theory Experience Here-and-now
Field Relativity Paradoxical Theory of Change Organismic self-regulation
Contact Conscious Awareness Experimentation
Figure/Ground Awareness Cycle Undifferentiation
Figure Focus Figure Sharpening Scanning
Action Anchoring Contact Interruptions
Deflecting Proflecting Retroflecting
Projection Introjection Confluence
Contact Cycle Contact Intimacy
Confluence Isolation Withdrawal
Discussion Questions:
1. What types of epistemology do you see in Gestalt theory?
2. What types of causality do you see in Gestalt theory?
3. What contradictory elements do you see in Gestalt theory?
4. What are the limitations of Gestalt theory?
5. Is Gestalt theory morally relativistic or dogmatic?
6. What are different “experiments” you could do to increase client’s contact with their experience?

Fundamental Assumption 1: Experience is relative.
Fundamental Assumption 2: We exist in a context comprised of culture, language biology, and history.
Fundamental Assumption 3: We are holistic creatures in that we are inherently growth
oriented, self-regulating, and only comprehensible in our contexts.
Fundamental Assumption 4: Only the present affects our behavior. Past and future are
irrelevant. It is only our understanding of them and our feelings about them in the
present that matter.

Experiential: The nature of Gestalt therapy is inherently experiential. It is not about offering insight into a client’s unconscious dynamics, but rather helping them attune themselves to all that they are experiencing. When we fully experience, we are better aware and more informed about how we should be living. It is all about the expansion of awareness.

Epistemological Relativism: Therapists in Gestalt do not interpret or “objectively” view a client’s situation, because reality is relative to the observer (eraser or the religious symbol of an obscene god). Instead, relativists try to understand the nature of their client’s reality and respect that reality. But, that reality is theirs, not ours, and we have no position by which we can assume that our reality is “better” or “more realistic” than theirs.

Context is very important in gestalt theory.
1. Gestalt theory is very Formal-Causal
a. Two faces or a vase?
b. A desk or a table?
c. Sexual harassment or joking between coworkers?
2. Experience occurs in context and is sensible in context
a. These contexts are called fields
b. Fields are defined as a combination of mutually interdependent elements that are so interconnected that the slightest change in one leads to a change in the whole.
1. Society is a field
2. A family is a field
3. A therapy context is a field
4. An individual is a field
A. Our understanding of our past and present is greatly influenced by our current context.
B. Field theory postulates that there are fields in fields in fields, mutually contextualizing and “causing” each other. You cannot understand an individual without understanding their context as completely as you can.
1. Born of philosophy, but only tested by science . . .
C. Experience is very important, because it is the experience, or the subjective thoughts and feelings that exist in the present moment which are informative and therapeutic. Hearing a person’s story of their past does not inform about the past, but rather informs their experience of the past in the present moment. As the context of the present changes, so does their experience of their past.
D. Experience takes place in the here-and-now, the present absolute moment that cannot be transcended. Our understandings are determined by the field in the here-and now. All of our experiences are then relative to our field, and all of our fields differ.
3. Paradoxical Theory of Change: The more one tries to become what one is not, the more one stays the same. (Existentialism anyone?) This perpetuates fragmentation of personality and disorders of thought and mood.
4. Organismic self-regulation: Knowing and owning what our experience is. We must identify with what we sense, feel, emote, observe, need, want, and believe. True growth starts with conscious awareness of our experience, both in terms of how people effect us and how we effect others. This growth is furthered by being in contact with what is really happening, and being honest with yourself about what you will do and what you won’t. (For absolutely relative reasons.)
A. Living in the “should be” or “might be” or “better be” distracts from the immediacy of being and hampers growth. One isn’t aware of where one is, one is elsewhere. Quote from Yoda?
1. Gestalt therapy aims at self-knowledge, self-acceptance, and growth by immersion in current existence, aligning awareness, and experimenting with what is actually happening in the moment.
5. Gestalt therapy emphasizes Contact, conscious awareness, and experimentation.
A. Contact is being in touch with what is and what is emerging here and now, moment by moment, experiencing it more fully or deeply.
B. Conscious Awareness: All that we are aware of in an explicit way in the here and now. All that we are in touch with and “know” in a conscious way.
1. Awareness is our focused attention to a situation we are already conscious of. This typically happens interpersonally, when contact occurs, we focus our awareness on that contact, what is going on, and what our experience is more fully.
a. My wanting to strangle BJ. Feeling the frustration, focusing on the feeling, increasing contact with it, my awareness of old habits surfacing again after so many years, furthering my growth, understanding, and need to clarify with him.
b. Feelings of anxiety, distance, anger, aggression, all need to be focused on so that contact with them is possible and awareness can be fostered (especially with therapists).
C. Experimentation: The techniques we use to further our awareness, trying something new to feel or experience more fully. We may be doing something we’re not aware of, unable to articulate a feeling coursing through us, or snap into a response habit (aggression) that we need to be aware of. So, the therapist helps us experiment to increase our awareness of them.
D. Figure/Ground: The figure becomes that which we’re aware of in the ground (background) that contextualizes it.
1. Singer/Schacter study on epinephrine: The feelings of increased heart-rate, respiration, emotional upset, and sweating was the figure. The ground was the context of who the participant was sitting with. If they were sitting with a calm person, they interpreted the feeling in terms of anxiety. If they were sitting with an angry person, they attributed their own feelings to anger. The ground contextualizes the figure in terms of thought, emotion, and bodily processes.
E. Clients and therapists can become more aware of what is going on (can make better sense of the figure) if they go through what is called an awareness cycle. Many clients are stuck somewhere in the awareness cycle, and as counselors we need to help them through the process.
1. Undifferentiation: No problem present, everything’s kosher, you’re fully engaged in the “ground”
2. Figure Focus: You’re aware that there might be a problem, and you begin to focus on it so it stands out from the ground.
3. Figure Sharpening: You define the problem and your awareness of it, so the problem become “figural” i.e. it stands out more sharply from the ground.
4. Scanning: You scan the environment for solutions to the problems or resources to meet your needs.
5. Action: You find a solution to the problem or a resource to meet your need and you act upon it.
6. Anchoring: You enjoy the feeling of having met your needs, having solved the problem, and you disengage with the figure.
7. Undifferentiation: Then you’re back engaged in the “ground”
F. One of the issues that happen is contact interruptions, or those things that we use to block our awareness from unpleasant or intense affect. These are particularly noticeable in the interpersonal realm.
1. Deflecting: Disengaging from, and pushing away the full meaning of an event or the weight of the affect associated with an interaction.
a. Refusing a compliment, laughing at a tragedy
2. Proflecting: Doing for yourself what you wish others would do for you, but you won’t ask.
a. Taking care of yourself, giving yourself gifts or soothing compliments
3. Retroflecting: Doing for others what you wish others would do for you, but you won’t ask.
a. Taking care of others, serving others, soothing others, feeding/nurturing others, with the subtle wish that others would do the same for you.
4. Projecting: Just like the psychoanalytic term, you interpret other’s thoughts and behaviors in terms of your own issues, desires, and motivations.
a. Avoid contact by viewing others as hostile, weak, etc.
5. Introjecting: Absorbing what others have to say without critical reflection or responsibility. This could be issues of identity, morality, or culture
a. Those that go to the same church their parents did without ever thinking about doctrines.
b. Those that swallow other’s definitions for them and live accordingly
6. Confluence: Paradoxical over-contact that involves the dissolution of two or more egos into one another.
a. There can be no contact if two egos are undifferentiated.

G. Many clients go through what is called the Contact Cycle that the counselor would be
well advised to help them break. It perpetuates interpersonal difficulty both for the
therapist as well as in the lives of the client.
1. Contact: This is where there is a meaningful and affect-laded moment
connecting two (or more) people
a. “From the moment I met her, we felt so strongly about each other we
knew we were soul mates”
2. Intimacy: The intensity of the contact and affect-laden togetherness increases,
and each member of the dyad/group share ever increasing intimate activities or
information and become far closer
3. Confluence: This is where the problem starts to come in. Both/all parties
begin to dissolve into one another, losing their personal identity feeling what the
other feels, thinking what the other thinks (or trying to)
a. The “undifferentiated ego mass”
4. Withdrawal: This is where the confluence becomes overwhelming and the
organismic processes rebel at the subsumption of identity.
a. Usually there’s lots of sparks and nastiness here
5. Isolation: Post-relationship loneliness with the feeling “it’s better to be alone
than to go through rejection/drama like that again”
a. It never seems to last very long . . .

Existentialism
Key Terms:
Transcendence Being Alienation Authenticity
Will-to-power Nothingness Activity Bad Faith Anxiety/Dread/Despair Absurd Being-in-the-world Umwelt Miltwelt Eigenwelt Atemporality
Death Freedom Responsibility Willingness
Impulsivity Compulsivity Decision Isolation Meaninglessness

Thought Questions:
1. Existentialism comes from the writings of Hegel, Husserl, Nietzsche, Jaspers, Heidegger, and Kierkegaard. What problems may have surfaced in translating philosophy into a system of therapy?
2. If the responsibility is to “be oneself” then can we have legitimate moral understanding beyond “Do whatever is true to you?”
3. What about the assumption that our feelings of the truthfulness of our behavior are “absurd”? What about the assumption that our being is itself absurd?
4. What about existentialist’s assumptions about love? Is that an adequate definition? Are you comfortable with the implications?
5. Are death, freedom, isolation, and meaninglessness really existential realities potent enough to cause disorders in mood, thought, or personality? Why or why not?
6. What do you think of the idea that there is no truth, and that everything is subjective, yet schizophrenics are viewed as “irresponsible” because they are denying their existential freedom and refuse even to be responsible to themselves? Do you see the conflict between “no truth” and “irresponsible”?
7. How do you feel about Yalom using “Betty” to confront his own issues? Is this an ethical reason to engage in therapy?
8. What are existential theorists’ primary assumptions in terms of causality?
9. What are existential theorist’s primary assumptions in terms of epistemology?
10. What are existential theorist’s primary assumptions in terms of morality?

Fundamental assumption 1: People have choice about who they are, what they do, and what they mean.
Assumption 2: People can transcend their past, present, and future assuming normalcy.
Assumption 2: We both learn the meanings of society, and can use those meanings in new ways.
Assumption 3: Because we learn and further these meanings and can use them in our own ways, we are responsible for what we do and what we create.
Assumption 4: There is no absolute truth.

Philosophy: (From the Rychlak text)
Being: Being is the subjective realization of one’s experience, one’s experience of being alive. This is a core idea in existentialism, positing that we exist, we are, and we are beings.
To whit: Alienation. Alienation is the process by which the ideas we create become foreign to us, and lose their legitimate power over us. For example, both Kierkegaard and Nietzsche criticized religious dogma, because people mindlessly nod their heads at dogmatic principles in agreement to religious principles they never understood. The religion ceases to be a living force in their lives, and they are alienated from it.
There is an extension to this: Any time we parrot the thinking of others (like psychological theorists) without doing the hard thinking we need to do, we are alienated from our own capacity to reason.
This alienation can also be demonstrated in how we twist words.
Man in a gang-rape trial “I’m not a rapist”
Authenticity: We are inauthentic if we let the group or culture define who we are, without doing the hard work of finding out who we are and expressing it. In other philosopher’s eyes, authenticity is also fulfilling one’s possibilities. Some posit that because we can never be free of group pressures we need to find out the way of being that is most accurate to who we are, given the constraints of society/family/group.
Will-to-power: The human person’s fundamental capacity to be self-creative and hence authentic. We must base our lives on what we are, the entirety of our being.
The consequence to this is that guilt occurs, not when we do something wrong, but when we do not assume our responsibility for being but let others define who we are.
Nothingness: Approaching human beings objectively, like objects of scientific study, takes the subjectivity out of life. When we treat ourselves and others objectively we rob them of their subjectivity, so everything they are and everything they think they’re doing becomes nothing. We’re mindless ants on the treadmill of life. (Something-ness requires meaning, the rich affect-laden inherently subjective process of being human. If you take away that meaning, you take away the very thing that makes humans human.)
Activity: A fundamental characteristic of human beings is activity. It takes deliberate and constant effort to become a subjective self. When we face the fact of becoming human is when we feel alive. It is a hot and risky endeavor. Merely being without becoming is a dead, flavorless existence. (This echoes a little bit of Adler. Who you are is more important than who you were, who you will become is more important than who you are.) Never have an end-spot for becoming. If you become what you have planned and hope for nothing else, you will be disappointed when you arrive at your destination.
Bad Faith: This is a way of living by which we let ourselves down by not really fulfilling the possibilities open to us in life. If we choose to do nothing or to blame another’s behavior we are acting in bad faith because we have already chosen. The individual is responsible for their activity, and if they act in bad faith they are not living up to their responsibility. “There is no escaping the existential predicament of having to be.”
Anxiety/Dread/Despair: These are all the consequences of ceasing to be active, of failing to be authentic. Anxiety is “sickness unto death” resulting from alienation and in- authenticity, of failing in one’s will-to-power. Sometimes rather than depression or anxiety an inauthentic life manifests as boredom. We demand that life entertain us rather than going forward and creating the world we want. We are not malleable to the world, the world is malleable to us. We can latch on to other things in an effort to escape the emptiness and confusion in our own lives (clubs, organizations, religions), but we only further our anxiety and dread if we fail to face the emptiness of our lives head-on (which may explain why some people join then jettison religions, clubs, organizations or breathlessly preach the word of the religion while failing to live the principles).
Absurd: Two notions of absurd, the positive and the negative.
Absurd put positively: We have to believe something as true in order to have rational reasons for doing and thinking as we do. But, because everything is ultimately subjective and relative, our adherence to truth is absurd.
Absurd put negatively: Human life and existence is and of itself absurd. Our death, the destruction of the highest creation of nature, the wars people fight in the name of “right” and “wrong”, the absurdities of the partitioning of wealth, etc.

Assumption: The human world is the structure of meaningful relationships in which a person exists and in the design of which he or she participates (from the Corsini chapter). Because we are part of the world we are already and always constituting the world, designing it, being-in-the-world. We are part of the world and it is part of us in a way that is inseparable.

From the Corsini text:

Three types of world:
Umwelt: The objects around, the natural world. This is the world of our being to which we must adjust, the natural environment around us and the natural environment that constitutes us. We all have biology, we all have genes, hormones, hunger, the need to breathe. We all live, we will all die. These are all aspects of being that we must deal with every day, a deterministic aspect of our creation we must take into consideration, but understand it as a finite and limited aspect of our being that does not determine the whole of our being.
Eigenwelt: This is our “own world”, our self-relatedness and our self-awareness. It is the “for me-ness” of reality. Our subjective experience of our own thoughts, world, meaning.
Love: Now we have a model of love wherein people can intend and to mean their love for another. However, Kierkegaard and Nietzsche assume that the only real love is the love that is unfettered by the outside world in order for it to be true. You must be a fully authentic being for love to be real.
Miltwelt: This is our being with one another, the world of social engagement, social understanding, social contact. This is the world of culture, a world of words, touch, conversation, and engagement.
Atemporality: One of the big things that the existentialists put on our plate is freedom from “clock time”. So much of what goes on in our lives that is meaningful has nothing at all to do with time, or does not fit in with a model of linear time. The power and strength of my love, the depth of my devotion, the strength of my courage, the passion of my beliefs can in no way be adequately captured by linear assumptions of time; the brief instant of intense feeling for another, the split-second sacrifice of self for another, all are powerfully meaningful events that escape linear time. The image of a loved one framed in the sun can have a powerful influence on us years after they were standing in a sunbeam. When we lose ourselves in a conversation, a movie, or a therapy session, this is atemporality in action. We transcend time, as it is understood by our limited thinking.

Thinking in terms of therapy:
Death: We are all living unto death, and we are terrified of it. Death is the ultimate end of being, the end of everything we are and everything we could have been. Because death is so terrifying, we erect defenses. A big defense is to deny our fear of death. Many personality disorders have their roots in the fear of non-being, the fear of death.
Freedom: The human being is responsible for, and the author of his or her own world, own life design, and own choices and actions (from the Corsini text). There is no one to blame our behavior on but us. We must confront the limits of our existence, and accept the limitations of our being. Freedom is terrifying because we need structure in life, a reason to be, and there is nothing authentic out there that will provide it for us. We are forced, due to existential freedom, to construct a world for ourselves, to determine our own subjectivity.
Responsibility: Because we are ontologically free, we are also responsible for what we make out of life. We cannot blame our feelings or behavior on anyone else. Even thought disorders are seen in responsible terms, in the sense that schizophrenics are overwhelmed by the terrible freedom of existence and retreat into psychoses as to avoid being responsible even to themselves.
Willingness: To be willing is to move from knowledge of responsibility to action, to see that we can change and to actually take steps to make the change a reality. However, facing the freedom to choose is terrifying, so many people suffering from symptoms lose the ability to even wish for change.
Impulsivity: Impulsivity avoids wishing by failing to discriminate among wishes, instead the individual acts on all wishes in a disorganized way, irresponsibly failing to make a consistent change.
Compulsivity: Compulsiveness is characterized by not acting proactively, instead one is trapped by internalized standards that are exacting and absolute. They irresponsibly fail to change because they hold to outside standards.
Decision: Once faced with the reality of a wish, and once the wish is felt, the person is faced with a decision. They can either choose to act on the wish they feel so clearly, or they can choose to do nothing. The second the wish is known, a choice is made. They may try to abdicate the responsibility to choose by having their therapist, parent, spouse, friend choose for them. It can create a great deal of anxiety to make a decision to change.
Isolation: Isolation is the reality that we constitute others and that we can never fully share a consciousness with another. This is a terrifying experience because everything we are, everything we feel, and everything we think we do so alone. We fundamentally have a wish to be connected to another, to the larger whole of reality, but we are instead isolated specks on the backside of reality. We are fundamentally alone, and we can panic and latch onto others in hurtful ways, using them for their companionship, sex, protection, or comfort, without relating to them as an individual being. Only when we face the dread of isolation can we truly relate to one another in a healthy way.
Implication for counseling: Dissociative disorders occur when individuals are experiencing overwhelming existential isolation. They have are unmerged with another, so they “check out” and must feel something to bring them back into their bodies. Many of these people also attempt to fuse with another human being, to become part of them, so that the terrible feeling of isolation is ameliorated. This fusion occurs in an inappropriate, non-consensual way. Fusion can also happen in a more healthy way when two people honestly love each other when we have faced the existential reality of isolation. Regardless, nothing protects us from the fact of isolation.
Meaninglessness: We construct our own being, or own realities. There is no purpose for being other than what we create. Under the thin veneer of our subjectivity is the abyss of meaninglessness. Unfortunately, humans appear to require meaning, contrary to the fact of their existence. We arbitrarily adopt values to give us a blueprint for life to tell us why and how to live, but ultimately we must embrace the meaninglessness of reality and accept our values as ironic or absurd.

CBT and REBT

Cognitive –Behavioral and Rational Emotive Therapies: Beck and Ellis
Key Terms:
Schema Cognitive Shift Cognitive Vulnerability
Primal Mode Conscious Mode Collaborative Empiricism
Guided Discovery Cognitive Model Core Belief
Intermediate Belief Automatic Thoughts Cognitive Triad
Cognitive Distortions Arbitrary Inference Selective Abstraction
Overgeneralization Magnification/Minimization Personalization
Dichotomous Thinking
Innate Suggestibility Innate Irrationality Demanding/Desiring
Emotional Disturbance Activating Event Belief
Consequence Grandiosity Perfectionism
Musturbating Awfulizing Shoulding
rB iB


Thought Questions:
1. What are the implications regarding morality/agency given these forms of causality and epistemology?
2. Is there tension in the theory regarding determinism (the formation of schemata) and the “non-determined determiner” of the therapist?
3. Does the therapist know better than the client?
4. When the therapist is indoctrinating the client, who’s philosophy is being taught?
5. Can things actually be terrible, awful, horrible in a rational way?
6. Are there times when we (or our clients) should be ashamed? Is shame always bad?
7. Can people change their irrational beliefs without a therapist?
8. What assumptions do you see in this theory in terms of causality?
9. What assumptions do you see in this theory in terms of epistemology?
10. What assumptions do you see in terms of morality?

CBT
Schema - A schema is a cognitive, behavioral, affective and motivational structures stored in the brain. Schemas are caused by evolution, development, genetics, and experience. These schemas control our perception of ourselves, others, and our world in every temporal dimension, past, present, and future. Schemas, ultimately, are only changed by the environment. Cognitive theorists posit that we can change our schemas, but when we ask them how, they respond that “something in your environment caused you to change your schema in that way.” So, what we think and what we do is determined by our schemas, which in turn are determined by evolution (genetics) and past experience (personal history). So, although CBT looks like a panacea (it is an excellent and consistent theory), it is just as deterministic as behaviorism, only the determinism applies to the mind as well as empirically observed behavior.
Cognitive Shift - Sometimes, people have schemas that cause them to interpret the world in a consistently skewed fashion because of experiences they have had. They might perceive others as hostile or the world as a hopeless unsafe place. Their whole way of thinking has shifted in one direction.
Cognitive Vulnerability - Cognitive vulnerabilities are those problems in thinking which leave us prone to cognitive shifts. If we can’t handle loss, or if we’re desperately terrified of death, we overreact to the vicissitudes of life. Such reactions can become characteristic cognitive shifts. What causes people to have cognitive vulnerabilities? You guessed it: genetics and past experience.
Primal Mode - A network of cognitive, affective, motivational and behavioral schemas that are universal and tied to survival. These modes are stimulus-response modes that occurred due to evolution to help our species survive. These are genetically pre-programmed and cause our responses in a hard sense. These are “unconscious” in a sense, in that they are not in our awareness but influence our behavior greatly.
Conscious Mode - A network of cognitive, affective, motivational and behavioral schemas that are part of our everyday conscious life. When we put ideas together that we read or hear, when we daydream to ourselves as we walk across campus. What causes these thoughts when we’re in conscious mode? The interplay of various schemas, each caused by evolution or past experience.
Collaborative Empiricism - The assumption that both the counselor and the client are empirical scientists, in other words, that the only “real” reality is what can be seen objectively. They work together collaboratively to find out where the mis-perceptions lie. Intuition, wisdom, compassion, are all epiphenomenal to the real curative agent: getting in touch with “objective” reality.
Guided Discovery - Both client and counselor weave a narrative together that articulates the patterns of a client’s beliefs that are hurting them. Much more interpretive and engaged, but contradicts the assumptions above. How can we “weave a narrative” if our interplay of schemas are determined?



Big Question: How can we re-work CBT to fit with such cherished ideas as agency, morality, meaning, or spirituality?


Beck Handout

Cognitive Model involves examining core beliefs, intermediate beliefs, automatic thoughts
and the emotional consequences to those thoughts. In a nutshell: “The situation itself does not directly determine how they feel; their emotional response is mediated by their perception of the situation” (Beck, 1995).

Core Belief: These are the most basic and fundamental beliefs that people have. These beliefs
Become problematic when they are global, rigid, and over-generalized.

Automatic Thoughts: What people think when they’re actually in the situation, they’re very context-specific and involve words and images regarding the situation they’re in. Beck considers this to be the most superficial level of cognition, what “pops to mind” without analytic or careful thought.

Intermediate Belief (also known as conditional assumptions): Intermediate beliefs are those beliefs that mediate between the core belief and the automatic thought. These generally take the form of rules, attitudes, and assumptions that the patient has about matters of import, usually about parts of the cognitive triad. These usually take the forms of shoulds, musts, oughts, or catastrophizing statements.
Cognitive Triad: This consists of people’s core beliefs about themselves, their world and their future. If any of these become rigid and over-generalized, problems may occur.

The model:

Core Belief
l
V
Intermediate Belief
l
V
Situation  Automatic Thought  Emotion

Cognitive Distortions

Arbitrary Inference: ------------- Drawing a specific conclusion without supporting evidence or even in the face of contradictory evidence. An example of this is the working mother who concludes after a particularly busy day, “I’m a terrible mother.”

Selective Abstraction: ------------ Conceptualizing a situation on the basis of a detail taken out of context, ignoring other information. An example is a man who becomes jealous upon seeing his girlfriend tilt her head towards another man to hear him better at a noisy party.

Overgeneralization: -------------- Abstracting a general rule from one or a few isolated incidents and applying it too broadly and to unrelated situations. After a discouraging date, a woman concluded, “All men are alike. I’ll always be rejected.”

Magnification/Minimization: -- Seeing something as far more significant or less significant than it actually is. A student catastrophized, “If I appear the lease bit nervous in class it will mean disaster.” Another person, rather than facing the fact that his mother is terminally ill, decides that she will soon recover from her “cold.”

Personalization: ------------------ Attributing external events to oneself without evidence supporting a causal connection. A man waved to an acquaintance across a busy street. After not greeting him in return, he concluded, “I must have done something to offend him.”

Dichotomous Thinking: -------- Categorizing experiences in one of two extremes; for example, as a complete success or a total failure. A doctoral student stated, “Unless I write the best exam they’ve ever seen, I’m a failure as a student.”
Rational-Emotive Therapies
RET = Rational Emotive Thinking
REBT (Rational Emotive Behavior Therapy) is a much later adaptation, even though the theory remains the same.

Fundamental human process:
1. Perception
2. Emotion
3. Action
4. Reasoning
a. The example of an odd brown object
All of these processes are always happening. Ellis does not fall into Bandura’s trap of linearizing them, instead, they happen concurrently. They are also always inextricably intertwined. A change to one of them affects the other three concurrently.

Interestingly, due to the legacy of modernity (technologism, spiritual distancing, etc.) human beings have less need for perception and action (which was incredibly important 2000 years ago when we were competing against animals for survival) and instead have become increasingly disabled in terms of emotion and reason, which is where Ellis sought to intervene.

Ellis described how people live emotionally troubled lives in our modern times, and proceeded to describe how it is that emotions (in general) occur.
1. Biologically (hypothalamus, autonomic nervous system)
2. Perception and motion (sensorimotor systems)
3. Desiring and thinking (conation and cognition)
a. Interesting implications for intervention. You could (as Ellis describes) intervene at any of these three levels at any time.
i. Chemicals, electricity, physical contact
ii. Exercise, ecological and aesthetic variables
iii. Psychological intervention (later spiritual, bizarrely enough)
A. Seen as superior – creates independence
B. The sources of feelings are not “unconscious” in a Freudian sense but “preconscious” in a Freudian sense. We can backtrack our own thinking to clarify our “preconscious” thoughts.
C. Emotions and thoughts go together. “Emotion is not unthinking, and thinking is not unemotional”. However, by clarifying your thinking while you’re emotional you can reach a better outcome than refusing to think while you’re emotional
1. Small spot of mold on the bread and you’re hungry. What to do?
D. Emotion is a motivating force, but it is coupled with survival.
1. They assume that everybody wants to survive. Everyone makes goals in the act of surviving, and feelings can motivate us to survive and feel happy or unhappy while surviving.
2. Emotion is defined as “(1) a certain kind of forceful thinking – a kind of strongly slanted or biased by previous perceptions or experiences; (2) intense bodily responses, such as feelings of pleasure or nausea; and (3) tendencies toward positive or negative action in regard to the events that seem to cause the strong thinking and its emotional concamitants” (Ellis, 1962, p. 24).
3. Emotion, if spontaneous, is natural and can exist without thought. Thinking, however, can often exacerbate, deflect, extend or even make emotion problematic.
E. There are such things as good feelings and bad feelings
1. Feelings that help us survive and feel happy = appropriate feelings
2. Feelings that serve to block basic goals (living and happiness) = inappropriate feelings
F. Likewise, rational thinking “assists you (1) to survive and (2) to achieve the goals or values you select to make your survival pleasurable, enjoyable, or worthwhile” (Ellis, 1962 p. 23)
1. How we think is up to us.
i. “Men feel disturbed not by things, but by the views which they take of them.” Epictetus
ii. “There [exists] nothing either good or bad but thinking makes it so” Shakespeare, Hamlet
G. “The main barriers to effective thinking and emoting include these: (1) Some people have too much stupidity to think clearly. Or (2) They possess sufficient intelligence to think straight, but just do not know how to do so. Or (3) they have enough intelligence and education to think clearly but act too disturbedly or neurotically to put their intelligence or knowledge to good use . . . [N]eurosis essentially consists of stupid behavior by nonstupid people” (Ellis, 1962, p. 37).
H. Big assumption here is that rationality leads to happiness, and that what makes an individual happy is their goal in life
i. Individualism and moral relativism

Ellis holds that people are fundamentally biological creatures with the innate abilities to construe themselves and to construct their world in a meaningful way. This sounds wonderfully agentic and creative, but quickly we see a potential problem. Ellis holds that we, as children, have innate suggestibility, meaning that we quickly learn and adopt (and take as “real”) the beliefs of others who are important to us. Because of this (in part) we are also innately irrational, meaning that we hold irrational (or illogical beliefs) and that we are as much self-defeating as self-actualizing. These self-defeating behaviors come from several sources. One is our confusing desires with demands (“I want this” versus “I have to have this” or “I would like to be this way” versus “I have to be this way”). The greater the demand, the greater the emotional disturbance, or emotional upset, that results.

It happens like this: Something happens in our lives, an activating event (he called “A”). We have certain beliefs about “A”, and he called these beliefs “B”. These beliefs about “A” have certain emotional and behavioral consequences, called “C”. B is the problem in this chain. Problematic beliefs occur when people are taught values which they then make rigid. This rigidity leads to fragile feelings of grandiosity, or the feeling that they are wonderful, godlike, or that they should be wonderful and godlike. This is also accompanied with feelings of perfectionism, or the feeling that perfection is demanded of us, that we must always be the best in everything. Because of this grandiosity and tendency towards perfectionism, people tend to musturbate, awfulize, and should all over the place. Such statements as “I must get a good grade in this course” or “It would be awful and unbearable if she broke up with me” or “I should be perfect at all times” are examples of these statements.

From Ellis’ perspective, people upset themselves by the way they talk to themselves about point B, their beliefs about a particular event. If they are perfectly rational about that event, then they will not feel the level of emotional upset that they would otherwise. An intriguing notion in early RET is that we can be rational in our misery (a perspective emphasized by R. Harper, a student of Ellis and early co-author), but that rational misery is not as intense or overwhelming as irrational misery.
1. Grief at the loss of a loved one
a. Neurotic response
b. Rational response
2. Loss of a job
a. Neurotic response
b. Rational response
3. We can diagnose our own thoughts in terms of rational beliefs and irrational beliefs
a. “I hope I do well on this exam, I’d better study and do my best because I would like a good grade”
i. This is an example of an rB, a rational belief
b. “I hope I do well on this exam. But the material is so hard and complex I don’t know if I can stand it. I’ll probably flunk this test. I’m such a loser”
ii. This is an example of an iB, an irrational belief
4. As counselors, we can help dispute irrational beliefs
a. A useful exercise would be to write down the iB’s as they surface or become clear
i. A woman who felt terrible after having gotten a divorce from a miserable marriage
A. “Married people should stay married”
B. Who says so? Objective laws of nature? God? Your mother? (Direct questioning is a primary technique in RET)
1. If the client did say that one of these entities said so, a follow-up question might be, “Who says that your mother is always right?”
5. Once the iB’s are acknowledged, disputation must continue, but some clients are too stupid to get it. The therapist is required to try until it would be irrational to continue.
6. Often, however, clients obtain a degree of insight. Ellis identified three types of insight.
a. Insight 1: “the fairly conventional kind of understanding first clearly postulated by Freud: knowledge by the individual that he or she has a problem and that certain antecedents cause this problem” (Ellis, 1962, p. 40).
b. Insight 2: “consists of seeing clearly that the irrational ideas we create and acquire in our early lives still continue, and that they argely continue because we keep indoctrinating ourselves with these ideas – consciously and unconsciously work fairly hard to perpetuate them” (p. 41)
c. Insight 3: “Now that I have discovered Insights No. 1 and 2, and fully acknowledge the self-creation and continue reinforcement with which I keep making myself believe the irrational ideas that I have believed for so long, I will most probably find no way of eliminating my disturbances than by steadily, persistently, and vigorously working to change these ideas” (ibid).

Ellis, however, in his early writings offers a window to change that few therapists of his time would: people can become rational on their own. He acknowledges that some people do need help, but it does not always hold true. “. . . [I]mprovement can occur as long as a troubled person somehow undergoes significant life experiences, or learns about others’ experiences, or sits down and thinks for himself, or talks to a therapist who helps him reconstruct his basic attitudes toward himself and others” (Ellis, 1962 p. 5 emphasis in original).

It is up to the therapist to actively challenge these irrational tendencies. Ellis went so far, in fact, as to state that without therapy it is impossible for people to become rational, contradicting his earlier writing. It is up to the rational therapist, who himself has been through therapy, to make others rational as well. In other words, it is up to the therapist to teach the client how to think rationally, and such rationality is defined by the therapist. Although the latter part of this (rationality determined by the therapist) is consistent, the earlier part (people needing therapy) is contradicted by his own theory.

Behaviorist Therapies

Behaviorist Psychotherapy
Key Terms:
Behavioral Shaping Unconditioned Stimulus Unconditioned Response Conditioned Stimulus Conditioned Response Operant Conditioning
Positive Reinforcement Negative Reinforcement Positive Punishment
Negative Punishment Removal of Reinforcement Extinction
Shaping Chaining Token Economy
Base Rates Nonverbal Operant Response Verbal Operant Response Self-Monitoring Behavioral Observation Assertiveness Training
Self-Control Procedures Implosion Therapy Flooding w/Response
Reciprocal Inhibition Systematic Desensitization

Thought Questions:
1. Is behaviorist theory Lockean, Kantian, or Constructivist in epistemology?
2. What forms of causality do behaviorists assume?
3. What forms of causality does their theory not account for or actively theorize against?
4. What forms of meaning exist in behaviorist theory?
5. What forms of reasoning exist in behaviorist theory?
6. What does it mean to you that we are inherently products of reinforcement?
7. Are you comfortable viewing clients in terms of their reinforcement history?
8. Would you feel comfortable if someone understood you strictly in terms of your reinforcement history?
9. Are warm and positive feelings between counselor and client “real”, or simply reinforcers, or simply epiphenomenal?
10. In your opinion, what disorders are explained most simply by behaviorists?
11. How can you see yourself applying behaviorist techniques?
12. According to behaviorist theory, is morality “real”?
13. According to behaviorist theory, are there “adaptive” and “maladaptive” behaviors?


B. F. Skinner on theorizing: “An effort to explain behavior in terms of something going on in another universe, such as the mind or the nervous system” (Evans, 1968, p. 88).


Objectives:
1. To review basic concepts of behaviorist theory
2. To discuss basic concepts of behaviorist theory
3. To practice applying behaviorist theory to a case
4. To discuss techniques of behaviorist theory
5. To critically think about behaviorist theory starting with thought questions

Don’t dismiss behaviorist theory; don’t turn off your brain too quickly
Story about B.F. Skinner as told by Carl Rogers:

“A paper given by Dr. Skinner led me to direct these remarks to him: From what I understand Dr. Skinner to say, it is his understanding that though he might have thought he chose to come to this meeting, might have thought he had a purpose in giving this speech, such thoughts are really illusory. He actually made certain remarks on paper and emitted certain sounds here simply because his genetic makeup and his past environment had operantly conditioned his behavior in such a way that it was rewarding to make these sounds, and that he as a person doesn’t enter into this. In fact if I get his thinking correctly, from his strictly scientific point of view, he, as a person, does not exist.” In his reply Dr. Skinner said that he would not go into the question of whether he had any choice in the matter (presumably because the whole issue was illusory) but stated, “I do accept your characterization of my own presence here” (Rogers, 1963, pp. 271 – 272).

What do you think about this?

Fundamental assumption: We are biological organisms genetically programmed for survival. As such, any behaviors we emit are behaviors that should further our chances of survival and/or the survival of our offspring. We are genetically predisposed to seek out pleasant or life-giving stimuli and to avoid unpleasant or life-destroying stimuli. However, the environment does not always offer stimuli in a consistent manner, and problems can occur.

One of the primary ideas offered by behaviorist theory is that of Behavioral Shaping. Behavioral Shaping is the process by which reinforcers and punishments are applied to an organism to gradually and consistently elicit the behavioral response desired.
Two examples:
1. Junior and the mini-wheats
2. Teaching Jotham how to dress himself

But first, let us review some terms:
Unconditioned Stimulus: A stimulus that elicits a response physiologically and naturally, without learning having to take place.
Unconditioned Response: The natural physiological response elicited by the unconditioned stimulus without learning taking place.
Conditioned Stimulus: A conditioned stimulus is one that is paired with an unconditioned stimulus to elicit the same response that the unconditioned stimulus did.
Conditioned Response: A conditioned response is one that is elicited by the conditioned stimulus to demonstrate that learning has taken place. It is identical to the unconditioned response, only elicited by the conditioned stimulus.
1. Pavlov’s dogs
2. Nausea-inducing drugs to fight alcoholism (US = drug, UR = vomiting, CS = alcohol, CR = aversion)

But what about the gradual shaping of behavior that we talked about earlier with Junior and Jotham? For that we need to look at operant conditioning. Operant Conditioning in Skinner’s terms is the study of what used to be dealt with by the concept of purpose. The purpose of an act is the consequences it is going to have. These consequences are established by the environment in the past. Behavior is caused by the stimulus of the environment, not by any interior goal or felt intention. Another way of saying that is: “Operant conditioning focuses on the response and asserts that responses followed by reinforcers are likely to be carried out again, and the more we reinforce these responses (the operants) the more likely they will be to appear. This ties in with a fundamental assumption of behaviorist theory: People are not insane, nor are they bad, their environment merely taught them maladaptive behaviors and it is up to us to cause them to learn adaptive behaviors.
1. Anti-teleological argument

The process of operant conditioning: Operant conditioning relies on reinforcers and punishments to shape behavior. Behavior is shaped by what Skinner called “the method of successive approximation”. You encourage the behavior you want by reinforcing the behavior that approximates it. You then reinforce the behavior that better approximates it still. This is also known as shaping.

Do not confuse shaping with chaining. Chaining is the process by which entire behaviors are reinforced together to make an entire chain of behavior. For example, when driving you could shape someone to turn the wheel the appropriate amount to make a turn, and then chain that with all the other behaviors (clutch, gas, signal) so they could drive to Indianapolis safely. Shaping and chaining can take place apart or separate.

You do this by the application of reinforcements and punishments, defined as follows:
Positive Reinforcement: The application of a pleasant stimulus to encourage behavior.
Negative Reinforcement: The removal of an unpleasant stimulus to encourage behavior
Positive Punishment: The application of an unpleasant stimulus to discourage behavior
Negative Punishment: The removal of a pleasant stimulus to discourage behavior

One of the things that will happen if there is a removal of reinforcement in the environment is extinction. Extinction occurs when the behavior is no longer reinforced, so the organism no longer emits that behavior. A quick example: Children not saying “please” when they wanted something – response: ignore them.

Small Group Work
1. Think of a client suffering from Borderline Personality Disorder. Your client, Betty, exhibits the following behaviors in the comprehensive treatment clinic where you work. First, she “splits” the staff, which means that she idealizes whichever staff member she’s with (tells them how wonderful they are), while at the same token telling that staff member how “bad” the others are. She has even made hints about improprieties made by other staff members. This has the staff up in arms and fighting at staff meetings. Her other behaviors entail self-cutting “to distract from the pain” and repeated late-night calls to the on-call pager has resulted in two hospitalizations.
2. What are some reinforcers or punishments that you might try as a therapist? What behaviors would you want to extinguish by not reinforcing?

Now let’s talk about particular techniques used by behaviorist therapists.

1. Token economies: This usually takes place in residential treatment. The therapist designs a particular token and enlists the personnel of the entire staff. The staff then gives patients tokens based on their appropriate behaviors. In some places, staff even takes tokens away if the clients do not behave adaptively. The tokens are traded in for pleasant things that the patient might want. Something as simple as watching TV, getting chocolate from the hospital store, or even purchasing the opportunity to go on a field trip. In order for this to work, and end goal must be established, and base rates computed. Base rates are the measure of the frequency of a particular behavior before the token economy was established. As the token economy is implemented over time, the rates of change in behavior are compared against the base. If no change is occurring, then the system needs to change.
a. Example of work detail

2. What about talk therapy? Behaviorists have a distinct use for talk therapy as well. They distinguish between nonverbal operant responses and verbal operant responses. Nonverbal operant responses operate on the behavioral environment in some way, such as when we put a glass of soda to our lips because we are thirsty. Verbal operant responses, on the other hand, are “behavior reinforced through the mediation of other persons”. Verbal operant responses operate on the behavior of another person. For example, our putting a soda to our lips because we were thirsty is nonverbal, but us saying “Hey, grab me a soda” is verbal, because then your friend tosses you a soda. You emitted that verbal behavior and you were reinforced for it. Meaning or intention has nothing to do with this process. Verbal statements are under the control of the effects they have on other people, which is another way of saying the consequences of the verbal statements are to be noted in interpersonal behavior.
a. When you’re in the therapy room, the behaviorist counselor manipulates the verbal statements. The therapists are not the originators of this control any more than the clients are. The therapist, by behaving in an adaptive fashion, naturally responds positively to the adaptive verbal behaviors of the client, while punishing or removing reinforcement for the maladaptive verbal behaviors of the client.
i. How? By saying “mm-hmm” or “good” when the client says something that you would like to hear, such as “I think I can do this”. Behaviorist researchers have demonstrated that you can elicit certain verbal behaviors by doing this.

3. Another behaviorist technique entails both self-monitoring and behavioral observation. Self-monitoring is the process by which the client keeps meticulous track of certain behaviors as well as the context and what led up to certain behaviors. This is then followed by behavioral observation on the part of the treatment team or psychologist, who carefully tracks the patient’s behaviors. The psychologist then manipulates the environment or the behavior of the staff to elicit appropriate behaviors from the patients.
a. Inpatient obesity control program. Self-monitoring alone was effective as well as the manipulations of the psychologist.

4. Assertiveness training is another form of behavioral therapy. The therapist starts out by modeling assertive behavior, breaking it down in terms of eye contact, voice inflection and volume, as well as posture. They therapist then reinforces the client for successive approximations of assertive behavior. This works particularly well in groups where someone can get different models and different degrees of feedback from the other participants.
a. Social-skills training with someone who is socially avoidant

5. Self-Control procedures. This process is one in which the clients themselves monitor their own behavior and change their behavior when they’re away from the psychologist. The psychologist is an important ingredient for conditioning, but a good deal of the conditioning can happen outside of the therapist’s office. Self-control procedures are ones in which the client is given very detailed and very specific guidelines and even charts to monitor their behavior. Very specific goals are established for the behaviors, and charts are kept comparing the behavior of that moment to the goal by the client. For example, of someone is in an outpatient drug rehabilitation program, a specific goal might be set with the psychologist that the client will not take any illicit drugs. The client then keeps track of how they do in regards to this specific goal, and write down how well they did.

6. Implosion therapy. In the case of phobias, someone has learned that a particular stimulus creates overwhelming anxiety in them. So, they do whatever they can to avoid that stimulus. Implosive therapy requires that the client covertly expose themselves (imagine) anxiety-provoking stimulus, then interpret the stimulus psychodynamically. Seems to work more based more on extinction than interpretation.

a. Daryl, obsessively checking the clock 50 times a night to make sure that it was not turned on. If it were left on, he feared he would perish horribly in flames. He is instructed to imagine himself going home and leaving the radio on all night and to imagine that he is dying horribly in the resultant fire. This would then be psychodynamically interpreted.
7. Flooding with response prevention: This is the technique-of-choice for agoraphobia, and some would argue, for OCD. This is the process by which you expose your clients to a feared stimulus, and you prevent any response they might have to that stimulus. The conditioned stimulus (the feared object) floods them with anxiety (the unconditioned response). However, they are not allowed to leave the feared stimulus, thereby extinguishing the conditioned response (leaving).
a. Therapy for those afraid of snakes, heights, and the dark.

8. Systematic desensitization: Assumed by Wolpe’s reciprocal inhibition model which states that two incompatible responses cannot exist together (relaxation and tension, for example). In this procedure, an anxiety-provoking stimulus is paired with a relaxation response. Rather than pairing the actual stimulus with the relaxation response from the outset (which would be more like implosion therapy). Instead, the therapist pairs increasingly anxiety-provoking stimuli with the relaxation response. For example in the case of an arachnophobe, the therapist would induce a state of relaxation in the client, then show them a picture of a spider. Later, the therapist would show them a plastic model of a spider, then elicit the relaxation response. Then, still later, the therapist would have them hold the plastic spider, while inducing a relaxation response. The end goal would be to have the client hold an actual spider while perfectly relaxed. The process is one of desensitizing the client in a systematic way, making an anxiety provoking stimulus no longer salient.