Evidence > from studies of > psychotherapy is that a client's suffering is increased > when confronted with > "therapeutic" responses which do not recognize > the meanings in the client's > statements.
Isn't it the goal of psychotherapy to convinve patients that their "notions" need to change? Thus one way for patients to get better is to encourage them to change their attitudes. Unreasonable and unrealistic "notions" signal psychic suffering. > > Certainly friends can converse about concepts of moderate > importance without > agreeing about their differing notions and move to > agreement on the > significance of notions. It depends on whether the > individuals involved are > suing each other regarding a contract (for example) or > passing time. > Similarly, a production of plastic art need not elicit the > same notion among > observers but if a playwright fails to estimate what words > or actions will > elicit in her/his audience, she/he is likely to be > unsuccessful in producing > a "successful" work. > Geoff C I like this because it raises the question of success. Is success a matter of social determination? Most psychologists might say yes. Like Mihaly Csikszentmialhi does in his book on creativity. Or as the much maligned Institutional Theory does. But there's still the initial declaration of success that must reside with the creator/s. For the artist, success is a matter of fantasy or projection: "This is successful" is an expression of expectation of favorable reception but no assurance. So I think success is a sliding scale, not a fixed condition, that begins with the creator and ends with long term societal approbation. However, what if the creator says "I think my/this work is not successful" but then sees it become very successful in societal terms? Who is wrong? Who is right? WC
