I run an outpatient psychotherapy clinic for homeless adults in Orlando. Here for the psychotherapy content, esp. the MBT and broader psychoanalytic stuff.
--are structured to promote joint reflection on the interpretation as a hypothesis, rather than structured to promote submissive acceptance on the part of the patient.
Thoughts on using interpretations in a mentalization-promoting frame. No idea how much these make sense or how much I stand by these. Just some thoughts, as interpretation is semi-frowned upon by MBT theory.
Interpretations are necessary to promote mentalizing when they...
--deepen the patient's affect--though not necessarily the affect they are feeling at the moment prior to interpretation.
--are presented as disclosures of the clinician's own mentalizing about the patient's mind, not as authoritative or distant statements.
Choices can be made where compulsions lived before.
And yet the cultural throne that therapists have willingly taken for themselves is a throne with a lot of turnover--the guru, the Wise Man, the Spiritual Leader.
We are ill-suited to this task.
There are infinite posts like this these days and I really should just ignore them. But something about this really got me.
Therapists do not know how to live a fulfilling life. We do not have a pathway to peace. We do not have a prescription for the Good Life.
In theory, what makes therapy a unique space is its aggressive refusal to prescribe the Good Life. The innovation of technical neutrality is that when another assumes (as best they can) a persistent intent to do nothing but understand, psychological change can occur.
@JohnSmithupmq Not sure how eastern/western I would want to classify it, but the whole endeavor is often baptized in a kind of pop neurology and trauma mysticism for sure.
Also a lot of folks seem to think that only attention on the body makes therapy not abstract but experiential. I call bull. There's nothing abstract about catching yourself using the same repeating phrases to describe past and current situations. It's spooky as hell.
@DrGipps Phew! Post-Cartesian stuff really feels like a "use it or lose it" sort of language. Haven't been reading it heavily since my undergrad and I'm getting lost real quick. ;)
Haven't read Merleau-Ponty in a while. Good place to pick him back up?
@DrGipps And while I'm unsure whether I agree with them, it certainly seems that some (more theistic) mystics would argue the same can be applied to desire and to love. 2/2
@DrGipps Hmm. I suppose that leads me to wonder whether the same applies to thinking. Is it not possible for the object of a thought to be thinking itself? And there are experiences where we seem close to simultaneously to have a thought and to be aware of having that thought. 1/2