它一直都是实用的:对认知行为疗法和抑郁现实主义假说的另一种理解

IF 2.6 0 PHILOSOPHY Philosophy Psychiatry & Psychology Pub Date : 2022-06-01 DOI:10.1353/ppp.2022.0013
Sahanika Ratnayake
{"title":"它一直都是实用的:对认知行为疗法和抑郁现实主义假说的另一种理解","authors":"Sahanika Ratnayake","doi":"10.1353/ppp.2022.0013","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Abstract:Cognitive behavioral therapy (CBT), one of the most popular schools of psychotherapy, associates mental illnesses such as depression, with patterns of distorted thoughts, referred to interchangeably as \"cognitive distortions\" or \"negative automatic thoughts.\" CBT's theoretical account claims: first, that these distortions involve various epistemic issues and second, that its therapeutic techniques are capable of rectifying these epistemic issues. Together these claims spell out a model of mental illness and a mechanism of action, that is, a means through which CBT's techniques act to address mental illness. In this paper, I challenge both these claims and thus CBT's epistemic characterization of mental illness and its therapeutic mechanism. I begin with the second claim and show that the ability of CBT's therapeutic techniques to address epistemic issues is likely to be overstated. In turning to the first claim, I show that even if CBT were able to rectify epistemic issues, the thinking of mentally ill individuals is not characterized straightforwardly by epistemic issues. In concluding, I suggest an alternate way in which CBTs account of mental illness and its mechanism should be understood.","PeriodicalId":45397,"journal":{"name":"Philosophy Psychiatry & Psychology","volume":"8 1","pages":"75 - 89"},"PeriodicalIF":2.6000,"publicationDate":"2022-06-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"2","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"It's Been Utility All Along: An Alternate Understanding of Cognitive Behavioral Therapy and The Depressive Realism Hypothesis\",\"authors\":\"Sahanika Ratnayake\",\"doi\":\"10.1353/ppp.2022.0013\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"Abstract:Cognitive behavioral therapy (CBT), one of the most popular schools of psychotherapy, associates mental illnesses such as depression, with patterns of distorted thoughts, referred to interchangeably as \\\"cognitive distortions\\\" or \\\"negative automatic thoughts.\\\" CBT's theoretical account claims: first, that these distortions involve various epistemic issues and second, that its therapeutic techniques are capable of rectifying these epistemic issues. Together these claims spell out a model of mental illness and a mechanism of action, that is, a means through which CBT's techniques act to address mental illness. In this paper, I challenge both these claims and thus CBT's epistemic characterization of mental illness and its therapeutic mechanism. I begin with the second claim and show that the ability of CBT's therapeutic techniques to address epistemic issues is likely to be overstated. In turning to the first claim, I show that even if CBT were able to rectify epistemic issues, the thinking of mentally ill individuals is not characterized straightforwardly by epistemic issues. In concluding, I suggest an alternate way in which CBTs account of mental illness and its mechanism should be understood.\",\"PeriodicalId\":45397,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Philosophy Psychiatry & Psychology\",\"volume\":\"8 1\",\"pages\":\"75 - 89\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":2.6000,\"publicationDate\":\"2022-06-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"2\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Philosophy Psychiatry & Psychology\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1353/ppp.2022.0013\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"0\",\"JCRName\":\"PHILOSOPHY\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Philosophy Psychiatry & Psychology","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1353/ppp.2022.0013","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"0","JCRName":"PHILOSOPHY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 2

摘要

摘要:认知行为疗法(CBT)是最受欢迎的心理治疗流派之一,它将抑郁症等精神疾病与扭曲的思维模式联系起来,这些扭曲的思维模式可互换称为“认知扭曲”或“消极的自动思维”。CBT的理论主张:首先,这些扭曲涉及各种认知问题,其次,它的治疗技术能够纠正这些认知问题。这些观点共同阐明了一种精神疾病的模式和作用机制,也就是说,CBT技术通过这种方式来解决精神疾病。在本文中,我对这两种说法以及CBT对精神疾病的认知特征及其治疗机制提出了质疑。我从第二种说法开始,并表明CBT治疗技术解决认知问题的能力可能被夸大了。在谈到第一个观点时,我表明,即使CBT能够纠正认知问题,精神病患者的思维也不能直接用认知问题来描述。最后,我提出了另一种方法,即cbt对精神疾病的解释及其机制应该被理解。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
It's Been Utility All Along: An Alternate Understanding of Cognitive Behavioral Therapy and The Depressive Realism Hypothesis
Abstract:Cognitive behavioral therapy (CBT), one of the most popular schools of psychotherapy, associates mental illnesses such as depression, with patterns of distorted thoughts, referred to interchangeably as "cognitive distortions" or "negative automatic thoughts." CBT's theoretical account claims: first, that these distortions involve various epistemic issues and second, that its therapeutic techniques are capable of rectifying these epistemic issues. Together these claims spell out a model of mental illness and a mechanism of action, that is, a means through which CBT's techniques act to address mental illness. In this paper, I challenge both these claims and thus CBT's epistemic characterization of mental illness and its therapeutic mechanism. I begin with the second claim and show that the ability of CBT's therapeutic techniques to address epistemic issues is likely to be overstated. In turning to the first claim, I show that even if CBT were able to rectify epistemic issues, the thinking of mentally ill individuals is not characterized straightforwardly by epistemic issues. In concluding, I suggest an alternate way in which CBTs account of mental illness and its mechanism should be understood.
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
CiteScore
3.60
自引率
4.30%
发文量
40
期刊最新文献
The Limits of Self-Constitution How to Measure Depression: Looking Back on the Making of Psychiatric Assessment Psychodramatic Psychotherapy for Schizophrenic Individuals About the Authors Close Enemies: The Relationship of Psychiatry and Psychology in the Assessment of Mental Disorders
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1