There's an interesting essay by Benedict Carey in the New York Times (August 10/04, at http://www.nytimes.com/2004/08/10/health/psychology/10ther.html?pagew anted=1&ex=10931 (but not for long). It's on differing views on evidence-based psychotherapy. Title is "For Psychotherapy's Claims, Skeptics Demand Proof".
In the middle of it, a newly-familiar name pops up. Cary quotes Glenn Gabbard, described as a psychiatrist and psychoanalyst, asserting "The move to worship at the altar of these scientific treatments has been destructive to patients in practice, because the methods tell you very little about how to treat the real and complex people who actually come in for therapy." Worshipping at the altar of scientific treatments. I like that. But where have we heard from busy Dr. Gabbard before? In a recent post of mine, where I quoted him as saying (Amer. J. Psychiatry, 161, 2004, 232): "Modern neuroscience has confirmed many of [Freud�s] basic tenets. Freud predicted that psychoanalytic understanding would ultimately be wedded to breakthroughs in the study of brain mechanisms, and his dream is now coming to fruition." So is science ok when it confirms Freud (so he says, anyway) but worshipping when it doesn't? Stephen ___________________________________________________ Stephen L. Black, Ph.D. tel: (819) 822-9600 ext 2470 Department of Psychology fax: (819) 822-9661 Bishop's University e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Lennoxville, QC J1M 1Z7 Canada Dept web page at http://www.ubishops.ca/ccc/div/soc/psy TIPS discussion list for psychology teachers at http://faculty.frostburg.edu/psyc/southerly/tips/index.htm _______________________________________________ --- You are currently subscribed to tips as: [EMAIL PROTECTED] To unsubscribe send a blank email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
