Random Rants LXVIII: Burn it all to the ground and start over!

Status
Not open for further replies.
Why shouldnt he take it at face value?
 
Are you telling someone to stop going to therapy? :confused:

That depends on whether such a statement would violate the forum rules.

Why shouldnt he take it at face value?

I don't believe in girls 'hanging out' with totally platonic guy friends, the same way I don't believe in pixies. (I'd make exceptions for very disfigured or obese people.)
 
That depends on whether such a statement would violate the forum rules.

I think, if you're going to be telling someone to stop with a medically accepted treatment, you should be prepared to show your work. Otherwise you're simply endangering others based on an opinion that has no scientific basis.
 
Not all places on the Internet are good for playing doctor, Mouthwash.
Not here. The way the scam goes is that someone pretending to be from CRA (Canada Revenue Service) phones someone and says the person owes money. They're told if they don't pay ASAP (with gift cards, wiring money, etc.), the police will be coming to arrest them within the hour. The people targeted for these tend to be seniors and refugees/immigrants, as these people tend to be easier to intimidate. It's gotten to the point where some places that sell gift cards have warning signs posted to beware of scams. The government is absolutely NOT going to demand that people pay their income tax with gift cards.

The versions directed my way involved scam emails and phone calls from someone with a nearly indecipherable East Indian accent, claiming to be somebody with a common English name (uh-huh...), and saying there's a problem with my tax return. I'm directed to call a phone number to deal with it.

What I learned from this is that it's not safe to give CRA your email address because I never got any of these scam emails or calls before CRA got hold of it. Their security is just pathetic, so I called and told them to remove my email address from their system and the online account that had been created. I also told them that any communication between us would either be by snailmail or by phone if I initiated the call.
Dang, one things I cannot make stuff up and whatever stuff I come up for in creative writing is always dwarfed by reality.
 
I think, if you're going to be telling someone to stop with a medically accepted treatment, you should be prepared to show your work. Otherwise you're simply endangering others based on an opinion that has no scientific basis.
Why do you believe this is the wisest choice?
honest question

In general? You should only deal with people who share your risk. That means no one that you pay in exchange for any kind of advice. This principle is a filter, not a deterrent: your therapist probably isn't deliberately scamming you, but there's no selective pressure for therapists who can actually give you results. On the other hand, we can easily identify problems in sewage pipes or toilets if our plumber does a bad job, so plumbers tend to know what they're doing.

As for your personal situation: I cannot imagine paying someone for years and not getting any tangible benefit out of it.
 
Last edited:
In general? You should only deal with people who share your risk. That means no one that you pay in exchange for any kind of advice. This principle is a filter, not a deterrent - your therapist probably isn't deliberately scamming you, but there's no selective pressure for therapists who can actually give you results. On the other hand, we can easily identify problems in sewage pipes or toilets if our plumber does a bad job, so plumbers tend to know what they're doing.

This displays an extreme lack of understanding about the mental health system and the education that goes into psychological therapy. Where is your evidence that suggests psychologists, psychiatrists, and therapists act towards your detriment and that they are incapable of helping anyone due to a lack of "shared risk"?
 
This displays an extreme lack of understanding about the mental health system and the education that goes into psychological therapy. Where is your evidence that suggests psychologists, psychiatrists, and therapists act towards your detriment and that they are incapable of helping anyone due to a lack of "shared risk"?

I explained it: no skin in the game means that ineffectual non-experts can proliferate. Also, in any field, there must be the potential to falsify your beliefs. That's harder when you have more theory and less testable data.

EDIT: Please don't lecture me about my understanding of the mental health system, I was treated/victimized enough as a child to know plenty.
 
Last edited:
I explained it: no skin in the game means that ineffectual non-experts can proliferate. Also, in any field, there must be the potential to falsify your beliefs. That's harder when you have more theory and less testable data.

No evidence, then. In the future it would be wise to not tell people to cease medical treatment if your reason for doing so is "because I think you shouldn't".
 
He's been giving someone money for over a year to help fix his life by talking. That isn't evidence?
 
He's been giving someone money for over a year to help fix his life by talking. That isn't evidence?

No, it isn't. No treatment is guaranteed success. It does not mean the treatment is universally invalid.
 
No, it isn't. No treatment is guaranteed success. It does not mean the treatment is universally invalid.

I'm sure there are plenty of people who have been helped through psychotherapy. It's harder to determine how many people wasted years or hundreds of dollars with it.
 
By your logic, Mouthwash, we should not engage a brain surgeon to remove a tumour: instead we should get somebody with a brain tumour to perform the operation.
 
I'm sure there are plenty of people who have been helped through psychotherapy. It's harder to determine how many people wasted years or hundreds of dollars with it.

Is there an alternative that works better, as evidenced through statistics and scientific observation?
 
By your logic, Mouthwash, we should not engage a brain surgeon to remove a tumour: instead we should get somebody with a brain tumour to perform the operation.

I think in his logic a brain surgeon is more like a plumber. If a brain surgeon is not good at their job they will suffer consequences and thus be weeded out of the pool of available brain surgeons. I have to agree with him that there is really no such feedback process for therapists. A therapist that is not really very good at their job can, and usually will, still have a long and lucrative career.
 
Is there an alternative that works better, as evidenced through statistics and scientific observation?

There is no real treatment for depression other than actually changing your life (except in cases where anti-depressants are the only option).

By your logic, Mouthwash, we should not engage a brain surgeon to remove a tumour: instead we should get somebody with a brain tumour to perform the operation.

I don't see how this follows from my logic.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top Bottom