Useful, yes, myth no. It is there, it is a matter of science figuring out
how to accurately measure it! There was a time when "we" thought that we
could not measure or accept the existence of viruses & germs! Now we can
and in the future we will be able to measur & test many more things!
Realize that there are many philosophies of the mind and no ONE is more
correct than another until we can measure it, ect.
Chas
-----Original Message-----
From: Shlomit C. Schuster [mailto:[log in to unmask]]
Sent: Thursday, October 07, 1999 6:44 AM
To: [log in to unmask]
Subject: Re: test
Dear Dr. David Smith,
With all respect for what your doing I thought that most analysts dropped by
now at least the claim of objective, scientific proofs concerning the
existence
of an unconscious and its mechanics.
Hasn't it more become like an useful myth, something like a religion?
How can one test unconscious "matter"? Isn't it all in the mind, in the
imagination?
(see Sartre's Psychology of the Imagination, and Being and Nothingness)
Thank you.
Shlomit Schuster
==================================
David Smith wrote:
> Discussions like this one get bogged down by the failure to consider how
> we can go about considering claims and counter-claims in a reasonably
> objective fashion.
>
> I began my professional life as a neo-Reichian therapist who routinely
gave
> clients hugs. I am now a communicative (psychoanalytic) psychotherapist
> with very strong views on not touching clients. I've therefore been on
> both sides of the hugging divide, and can't reasonably be accused of
> rejecting hugging because I am squeamish.
>
> Why do I hold my present position? It is because I believe the therapy
> should be conducted in accord with clients UNCONSCIOUS supervision. I
> believe that clients unconsciously tell their therapists that the do not
> want to be hugged, that hugs come from therapists needs for merger and
> sexual grantification , etc.
>
> This believe of mine is testable. It can be tested by means of the first
> few stories patients tell after being hugged. I predict that these
stories
> will more often than not contain themes of abuse, perversity merger and
> control because this is the unconscious significance of therapist hugs for
> clients.
>
> This is a TESTABLE proposition. Perhaps other contributers to the debate
> could consider how their opinions might be empirically tested (so far the
> only contributor who has approached this has been Bob Young). In saying
how
> my opinions might be tested, I am putting myself on the line. I am
> admitting that I may be wrong and that if the evidence does not stack up
> the way I anticvipate, that I will admit that I am mistaken. To read more
> about my testing procedure and its rational see my chapter in Feltham, C.
> (ed) CONTROVERSIES IN PSYCHOTHERAPY AND COUNSELLING. London:Sage, 1999.
>
> Comments?
>
> Cheers
> David
> http://sites.netscape.net/davidsmithdavids/homepage
%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
|