Suggestions Please

[_wenglund]

I refer you to your comments on the church court thread. You couldn't help but insert church agenda because that's the basis of your conscious beliefs.

Simply referring me to another thread and repeating your same claim, is of no help. Please explain where and how you imagine I would insert the Church agenda (even were it the basis for my consciouis beliefs) into the CBT process. (Hint: again, I can't. The reason being, the CBT process is about what the patient thinks and feels, and how the patient resolves his/her own issues, not the therapist.)

Thanks, -Wade Englund-

[_wenglund]

Could you go through my explanation of the CBT process above and point out where and how you imagine that I might contaminate the process with my alleged religious agenda?

Sure, Wade! I'd be more than happy to do that! See below:

Briefly, the way it works in CBT is to examine some of the more significant and troubling events that the patient has experienced in the recent past as well as currently. This examination consists of: 1) The patient briefly describing what occured just before and during the event;

Even if the patient were to cite some problems with the way the Church had presented itself, you would blow these off with some apologetic excuse. (E.g., "The Church was only acting in good faith!")

2) The patient distinguishing and naming the emotions/moods experienced during and/or after the event;

In the past, you have done little more than say, "These emotions are your own fault, and only contribute to a cycle of pain."

3) The patient rating each mood/emotion in terms of severity;

Yeah, I saw you do that in your interview with Tal.

4) The patient answering the key question: "What was going through your mind at the time" (referring, of course, to both words and images). The intent here is to dig deeper, past the obvious thoughts, and vet the near indetectable "automatic/hot thoughts" that are driving or intertwined with the mood/emotions;

The problem here is that, from your perspective, the Church could never, ever be at fault. Thus, your application of this technique would be warped by your love for your "most precious and dear" Church.

5) The patient testing the reasonableness of the "automatic/hot thoughts" by listing evidence both in support of and not in support of the thoughts;

Oddly, the Church will magically never be at fault at all. Ever. Not even in a tangential sort of way.

6) The patient formulating alternative/balanced thoughts;

Which, incidentally, will always have nothing to do with accepting the Church's complicity.

and 7) The patient rating their current moods/emotions.

In other words, Dr. Wade has successfully convinced the "patient" (read: "apostate") that all his/her emotions were his/her own fault, hence his repeated attempts to deflect every single criticism aimed at the Church back onto the person.

None of the things you suggested above pertain to the process as stated. They were merely things you have invented and interjected without actually addressing the stated process. But, that is what you do.

Perhaps, though, you have confused the inferences I have made in prior discussions on cognitive distortions, with what I am now speaking to on this thread in terms of the CBT process. While both contain the word "cognitive", they are actually quite different things (the one is a mindset, and the other is a treatment program). As it was, in the prior discussions on cognitive distortions, I didn't get the chance to introduce CBT into the mix. And, as far as my discussion with Tal is concerned, I didn't get beyond step 2. As you may surmize, the first two steps are really preliminary in nature, and the treatment doesn't really begin until the third step. In other words, you haven't seen me actually use the CBT process, and thus you haven't a clue how it works or what I would do--not that that matters to you.

Besides, CBT is all about the patient, and entails the patient correcting what he/she perceives as cognitive distortions. The therapist is merely there to fascilitate the process through educating the patient on the process and posing questions to help the patient move through the process.

Thanks, -Wade Enlgund-

[_Lucretia MacEvil]

I refer you to your comments on the church court thread. You couldn't help but insert church agenda because that's the basis of your conscious beliefs.

Simply referring me to another thread and repeating your same claim, is of no help. Please explain where and how you imagine I would insert the Church agenda (even were it the basis for my consciouis beliefs) into the CBT process. (Hint: again, I can't. The reason being, the CBT process is about what the patient thinks and feels, and how the patient resolves his/her own issues, not the therapist.)

Thanks, -Wade Englund-

Whatever, Wade. You said earlier you were planning to post some disclaimers on your site. I suggest this:



The tortoise and the Scorpion

A tortoise met a Scorpion.

'Please take me to the other side of the river' requested the scorpion.

'No, because you will sting me'

'No, I won't sting you because I can't. If I did, we would both drown.'

'Okay, then.'

They get into the middle of the river, and the scorpion stings the tortoise. As the tortoise is dying and the scorpion is sinking into the water, the tortoise cries, "why did you sting me when it means we would both drown?" The scorpion replies, "I stung you because I am a scorpion. You knew that when you agreed to take me across the river."

[_wenglund]

Whatever, Wade. You said earlier you were planning to post some disclaimers on your site. I suggest this:

The tortoise and the Scorpion

A tortoise met a Scorpion.

'Please take me to the other side of the river' requested the scorpion.

'No, because you will sting me'

'No, I won't sting you because I can't. If I did, we would both drown.'

'Okay, then.'

They get into the middle of the river, and the scorpion stings the tortoise. As the tortoise is dying and the scorpion is sinking into the water, the tortoise cries, "why did you sting me when it means we would both drown?" The scorpion replies, "I stung you because I am a scorpion. You knew that when you agreed to take me across the river."

I am not sure that disclaimer is necessary, since I, as the tortuose who is willing to help the so-called scorpians to the other side of the therapeutic river, have taken care to innoculate myself against the poison. In fact, the journey across the river is intended to remove the poison and sting from the scorpians. So, no worries. ;-)

Thanks, -Wade Englund-

[_Lucretia MacEvil]

Whatever, Wade. You said earlier you were planning to post some disclaimers on your site. I suggest this:

The tortoise and the Scorpion

A tortoise met a Scorpion.

'Please take me to the other side of the river' requested the scorpion.

'No, because you will sting me'

'No, I won't sting you because I can't. If I did, we would both drown.'

'Okay, then.'

They get into the middle of the river, and the scorpion stings the tortoise. As the tortoise is dying and the scorpion is sinking into the water, the tortoise cries, "why did you sting me when it means we would both drown?" The scorpion replies, "I stung you because I am a scorpion. You knew that when you agreed to take me across the river."

I am not sure that disclaimer is necessary, since I, as the tortuose who is willing to help the so-called scorpians to the other side of the therapeutic river, have taken care to innoculate myself against the poison. In fact, the journey across the river is intended to remove the poison and sting from the scorpians. So, no worries. ;-)

Thanks, -Wade Englund-

Fine, but maybe then you should put a note on the board letting your potential "patients" know from the startthat you think they are poisonous scorpions. Or just come right out and call them bigots. They'll figure you out eventually anyway, you know.

[_Mister Scratch]

Could you go through my explanation of the CBT process above and point out where and how you imagine that I might contaminate the process with my alleged religious agenda?

Sure, Wade! I'd be more than happy to do that! See below:

Briefly, the way it works in CBT is to examine some of the more significant and troubling events that the patient has experienced in the recent past as well as currently. This examination consists of: 1) The patient briefly describing what occured just before and during the event;

Even if the patient were to cite some problems with the way the Church had presented itself, you would blow these off with some apologetic excuse. (E.g., "The Church was only acting in good faith!")

2) The patient distinguishing and naming the emotions/moods experienced during and/or after the event;

In the past, you have done little more than say, "These emotions are your own fault, and only contribute to a cycle of pain."

3) The patient rating each mood/emotion in terms of severity;

Yeah, I saw you do that in your interview with Tal.

4) The patient answering the key question: "What was going through your mind at the time" (referring, of course, to both words and images). The intent here is to dig deeper, past the obvious thoughts, and vet the near indetectable "automatic/hot thoughts" that are driving or intertwined with the mood/emotions;

The problem here is that, from your perspective, the Church could never, ever be at fault. Thus, your application of this technique would be warped by your love for your "most precious and dear" Church.

5) The patient testing the reasonableness of the "automatic/hot thoughts" by listing evidence both in support of and not in support of the thoughts;

Oddly, the Church will magically never be at fault at all. Ever. Not even in a tangential sort of way.

6) The patient formulating alternative/balanced thoughts;

Which, incidentally, will always have nothing to do with accepting the Church's complicity.

and 7) The patient rating their current moods/emotions.

In other words, Dr. Wade has successfully convinced the "patient" (read: "apostate") that all his/her emotions were his/her own fault, hence his repeated attempts to deflect every single criticism aimed at the Church back onto the person.

None of the things you suggested above pertain to the process as stated. They were merely things you have invented and interjected without actually addressing the stated process. But, that is what you do.

They all pertain. You attempting the blow them off does little to support your case, my dear friend Wade.

Perhaps, though, you have confused the inferences I have made in prior discussions on cognitive distortions, with what I am now speaking to on this thread in terms of the CBT process. While both contain the word "cognitive", they are actually quite different things (the one is a mindset, and the other is a treatment program).

Of course I would conflate the two! You know why? Because tis is the star you've bee aiming for all along, my friend. You want to use CBT to eliminate the "cognitive distortion" that the Church is in any way at fault. You absolutely refuse to acknowledge this, and why? Is this one of your own, personal "cognitive distortions"?

As it was, in the prior discussions on cognitive distortions, I didn't get the chance to introduce CBT into the mix. And, as far as my discussion with Tal is concerned, I didn't get beyond step 2. As you may surmize, the first two steps are really preliminary in nature, and the treatment doesn't really begin until the third step. In other words, you haven't seen me actually use the CBT process, and thus you haven't a clue how it works or what I would do--not that that matters to you.

Okay.

Besides, CBT is all about the patient, and entails the patient correcting what he/she perceives as cognitive distortions. The therapist is merely there to fascilitate the process through educating the patient on the process and posing questions to help the patient move through the process.

Thanks, -Wade Enlgund-

So, what "cognitive distortion" do you most want to get people to see, Wade?

[_wenglund]

Whatever, Wade. You said earlier you were planning to post some disclaimers on your site. I suggest this:

The tortoise and the Scorpion

A tortoise met a Scorpion.

'Please take me to the other side of the river' requested the scorpion.

'No, because you will sting me'

'No, I won't sting you because I can't. If I did, we would both drown.'

'Okay, then.'

They get into the middle of the river, and the scorpion stings the tortoise. As the tortoise is dying and the scorpion is sinking into the water, the tortoise cries, "why did you sting me when it means we would both drown?" The scorpion replies, "I stung you because I am a scorpion. You knew that when you agreed to take me across the river."

I am not sure that disclaimer is necessary, since I, as the tortuose who is willing to help the so-called scorpians to the other side of the therapeutic river, have taken care to innoculate myself against the poison. In fact, the journey across the river is intended to remove the poison and sting from the scorpians. So, no worries. ;-)

Thanks, -Wade Englund-

Fine, but maybe then you should put a note on the board letting your potential "patients" know from the startthat you think they are poisonous scorpions. Or just come right out and call them bigots. They'll figure you out eventually anyway, you know.

I was playing off YOUR analogy, not mine. In other words, I don't serious consider my potential "patients" as "poisonous scorpians", and so there is no need to post your suggested note either. (keep trying, though. You are bound to come up with a useful and relevant suggestion)

While I believe that certain former members have toxic attitudes and behaviors (both to themselves and to others), and some may even suffer from bigotry, my SELF-HELP program is not intended to address bigotry, per se. This is because: 1) not all to whom I hope to offer my services may suffer from bigotry or rightly be considered as bigots. I hope to facilitate self-help for a broad range of personal and social issues; and 2) I view bigotry as a symptom, rather than the root cause. My intent is to facilitate self-help that is directed at the root causes, which in turn may then eleviate the symptom of bigotry in those so afflicted.

I hope this helps.

Thanks, -Wade Englund-

[_wenglund]

So, what "cognitive distortion" do you most want to get people to see, Wade?

I want to help the people uncover for themsleves the cognitive distortions that are driving the moods, emotions, attitudes, and behaviors which they (the people, themselves) would like to see changed for the betterment of all concerned.

Thanks, -Wade Englund-

[_Mister Scratch]

So, what "cognitive distortion" do you most want to get people to see, Wade?

I want to help the people uncover for themsleves the cognitive distortions that are driving the moods, emotions, attitudes, and behaviors which they (the people, themselves) would like to see changed for the betterment of all concerned.

Thanks, -Wade Englund-

You know what, Wade? I don't believe you. You have claimed that *I* suffer from a cognitive distortion, and yet there is nothing that I would like to see changed in myself.

Are you therefore admitting that this whole CBT baloney is really just self-serving, as I observed towards the beginning of this thread?

[_Lucretia MacEvil]

I was playing off YOUR analogy, not mine. In other words, I don't serious consider my potential "patients" as "poisonous scorpians", and so there is no need to post your suggested note either. (keep trying, though. You are bound to come up with a useful and relevant suggestion)

While I believe that certain former members have toxic attitudes and behaviors (both to themselves and to others), and some may even suffer from bigotry, my SELF-HELP program is not intended to address bigotry, per se. This is because: 1) not all to whom I hope to offer my services may suffer from bigotry or rightly be considered as bigots. I hope to facilitate self-help for a broad range of personal and social issues; and 2) I view bigotry as a symptom, rather than the root cause. My intent is to facilitate self-help that is directed at the root causes, which in turn may then eleviate the symptom of bigotry in those so afflicted.

I hope this helps.

Thanks, -Wade Englund-

Which is exactly why I asked you to define a few emotions in the first place. You don't show any clue about root causes. You talk about health, environment, thoughts affecting and effecting, but what are the root causes -- or root cause (as it can be simply boiled down to one)???????