I am thinking about doing some teaching at the local community college and I have begun to develop a curriculum based on the fundamentals of REBT, a particular form of psychotherapy. REBT has shown to be clinically effective in treating a variety of anxious and depressive symptoms and is in many ways the
Interesting read, thanks, the principles behind REBT are sound. The example given reminds me of this Gracie Breakdown on Multiple Opponents.http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Vyyrpjm49hA&feature=youtube_gdata_player. Sorry I don't know how to embed. In this Video Rener talks about the dynamics of the escalation that contributes and leads to physical confrontation. The entire video is good but about 10 minutes in Rener talks about how we (many people) take things personally. In your example the response we should have is " I have not seen Joe in a long while, his eyes must have gotten bad, if I do run into him again I will remind him of the last time I saw him and tell him to get some glasses" This simple reminder that we are not the Center of the Universe could be something that could help the right person. I think many people have beliefs and habits so deeply engrained that the negative feeling associated with said behavior is the compelling factor that keeps them coming back. So much can be said on this topic, watch the Rener Gracie Vid, everyone should it's extremely insightful.
way over my head dude. from what i understood though is that people get depressed and you have figured out why?
Posting in here to read later. I'm actually going through an intro to CBT right now, so anything related definitely piques my curiosity.
Is this like the Robert Anton Wilson thing where everything is judged on a scale from 1-10 concerning how much you believe in a thing, with the caveat one can never reach 1 nor 10 on the scale? So essentially, moderated thinking?
Good stuff. The above belief would most likely lead to less anxiety and/or depression than the examples I gave. However, REBT does not propose that we make up a nice reality, rather it instead suggests that we find out the most likely reality. If I were working with someone who had this problem, I might instead challenge them to imagine that the person who ignored them DID see them, but chose to ignore them. I would then work to help them see that it really isn't that big of a deal anyway... Humans, not the center of the universe? Pfft! /sarcasm We definitely have deeply ingrained habits that we don't dare challenge. Many of these habits are thoughts and beliefs that we adhere to very strongly and that cause of distress. 'I shouldn't make a mistake" "That person should (enter YOUR preference here)," etc, etc. Will definitely check it out, thanks for the post.
Haha. Woman or man, you will see different types of irrational thinking in almost anyone- it really is more a matter of degree... Also, just about everyone thinks irrationally, however, everybody does not need therapy and have other ways of dealing.
Don't cut yourself short, most of this stuff is mainly common sense, or as another poster called it, moderated thinking. I will admit, in academia they have a way of making simple things complicated... As for people getting depressed, in general REBT holds that the recipe for depression is demandingness- the type of thinking that says "things must be this way!" and awfulizing- "it is horrible when things aren't this way!" Throw in some type of evaluation of self worth- "I am a piece of crap because things aren't this way" and there you go, a perfect recipe for depression, at least according to REBT.
Yeah, REBT is really the first full-fledged form of CBT, however, Beck and CT get a LOT of credit, and in many ways have overshadowed Ellis and REBT. REBT certainly has an edge that many in the field are not comfortable with. For example, Ellis was famous for "telling it like it is" "arguing" with clients, and using vulgarity. Most people that I have worked with find it refreshing and more humanizing... The field in general, however, has traditionally had difficulty accepting such practices.
To be honest, you seem to be describing Dialectical Behavior Therapy (DBT) which emphasizes not moving to extremes in our thinking, emotions and behaviors. RAW's "teachings" are certainly applicable though, in particular the fact that everyone has their own "reality tunnel," which is a central tenet of REBT and most every Cognitive theory out there. All that being said, moderated thinking is what might generally be considered "healthy" thinking- not too hot, not too cold. Helping a patient to learn to control/moderate their thinking is a major goal of any therapist working with someone who experiences such extremes that lead to significant anxiety and/or depression.
There's already a pretty gaping issue here. There's nothing 'rational' per say about mental/personality disorders. It's like sitting there, watching someone have a panic attack and saying. "What your doing is irrational." It's not going to magically snap someone out of it. They usually know it's irrational but that's how a disorder works.
The focus is not on snapping them out of the panic attack, but rather in preventing and minimizing the panic attack, and also doing so for the after effects of the attack (shame, fear, guilt, etc). The impact of the irrational thinking is felt at every turn; before, during and after the attack, and can therefore be challenged/disputed at every turn as well. A common problem for a person who suffers from panic attacks is that they so fear the actual panic attack that they bring it on themselves. Their thinking may go something like this, "I can't stand to have another panic attack, it was so horrible, I was so embarrassed, it must not happen!" If I tell someone, "you must not look to your left" most will instinctively look to their left. I think a similar principle works with this type of thinking as well. I don't know why, but when someone demands that something "must not happen" they add a certain gravity to the happening or not happening, and therefore distort the reality of the situation. Then, if it does happen, it is "horrible," after all, we "couldn't stand it" happening, so it must be really bad! Then, when a panic attack hits them they tell themselves, "Dammit, I shouldn't have these panic attacks, I am weak and defective, and people think that of me too." REBT refers to this as a "secondary disturbance" or being upset about being upset. So what you do is help the person realize that the panic attack is inconvenient, not "horrible" or "unbearable." After all, the person has survived many before, right? Once they rationally consider that the attack is merely inconvenient, they can demystify the whole thing and take much of the power out of it. You can also help them cope with the attack, but that is different than addressing the underlying causes- irrational thinking. The therapist will also want to strongly challenge the self-downing, such as when a person suffers and attack and then tells themselves "I am defective for having panic attacks" or something of the sort. This further takes the power and gravity out of the situation. The therapist will also look for deeply rooted beliefs, such as "in public I am in danger" and the like, which may act as specific triggers of panic attacks, and challenge those irrational beliefs as well.
The real value REBT is not necessarily in the view it takes regarding how mental illness is developed and maintained. As I said before, most cognitive theories understand this. Ellis, however, developed a practical tool to aid both the therapist and the patient in identifying and challenging irrational beliefs. This tool is called the ABC model. A, B, and C stand for Antecedent, Belief, and Consequence, respectively. Antecedent is used to describe the event prior to any disturbance and belief is used to identify what belief is held, or what you said to yourself after the antecedent. Consequence refers to the psychological, emotional, and behavioral consequences resultant from both A and B. Again, REBT holds that in most cases B, the person's belief, is much more important than A, the event. For example, imagine yourself on the freeway when someone cuts you off close. You may experience fear and anger, and then you may act to speed around them to flip them off, or more. We will plug this into the ABC model to find out what beliefs are in play, and how they may influence your emotions (fear and anger) and actions (swerving around to flip them off). A = Being cut off in traffic. B =
