Any books on mindfulness that aren't just new age horseshit?

Not true

Mindfulness is bad for you

What does mindfulness mean?

I'm not even memeing when I say either Schopenhauer or Nietzsche.

It's something for normies who lack any will. They need to sit for hours to avoid anxiety and depression.

Mark Williams
Mindfulness: A practical guide to finding peace in a frantic world

thats not mindfullness retard

Nietzsche didn't write anything on mindfulness. He didn't like Buddhism or anything to do with it.

Yes it is. Both the Buddhist and secular sit down for it and say the longer the better.

>when you recognize thoughts as thoughts but you don't recognize b8 as b8

Clueless question.
Starting from July I'll have to glue my ass on a chair and study 10 hours everyday.
Now, I'm actually depressed and I always feel tired. Would mindfulness meditation help with that?

Could I, for example, study 2 hours, meditate 30 minutes, study another 2 hours, meditate 30 minutes and so on?
I'm pretty sure that I will get mentally tired every 1.5-2 hours, could meditation help me with that?

dude buy a fleshlight what are you doing

A 30 minute nap would be much better than meditation imo.

Veeky Forums is a christian board. A board can't read as much Dosto as Veeky Forums does without being christian.

I can't fall asleep at command, also 30 minutes naps always fuck me up for the rest of the day.

What effect would meditation have on me? Can I use it as some sort of mental restoration tool?

my diary desu

Anyone who came here post-chanology is a newfag desu

>post-chanology
Rude.
I started browsing Veeky Forums around 2016, how long til I'm not a newfag?

I unironically consider anyone who came to Veeky Forums post-/pol/ to be a newfag, so I'll give you 10-15 years.

I came here in 2006 and I'm still a newfag.

I got on Veeky Forums in 2006 or 2007 (god it has been long) yet I only really use Veeky Forums nowadays. Tumblr ca be very stupid, but I'll take teenagers misunderstanding social justice over manchild fascists any day.

How funny how people assume that teenage years spent being an edgelord online equals being a /pol/-like idiot for the rest of one's life; nah. It was a goddamn joke back in the day, a joke that sort of stopped being funny ages ago.

>that pic

Not bad. I would remove the Gaiman and the fleshlight tho.

Replace the books on the bottom left with the starter kit

Sounds like you need some good old fashioned exercise my man

Yes but it takes practice, not something you could probably get right on your first day.

Prepare beforehand, start now.

You need to be able to push past the boredom threshold. Often a mantra helps with this. Make it nonsensical, long, and pleasant to say.

It's all bad.

There's an old lady who talks about being mindful a lot. She's annoying.
Very jewey. Hopefully Trump rounds them up after removing kebab and taco

You don't really need one when you already have a vagina.

Mindfulness is a stupid fad for assholes

Also psychotherapy doesnt work

Well we can't all have gfs. can we?

i fucking hope so

>anyone who tries to help is a snake oil salesman
I have met so many people with this mindset, and nearly all of them had deep-seated traumas and/or fucked up, no-boundary relationships with their parents.

>he doesn't know

snake oil salemen were actually accused of being bad by patent medicine peddlers. the snake oil salemen were advocating chinese medicine for rheumatism, which turns out to be good science because snake oil does actually help that. over time the meaning shifted to mean all patent medicine salesmen, including the ones who had originated the phrase to kill off their competition.

a lot of mindfulness and psychotherapy doesn't work. if it did, depression and other mental illness would not be expanding at unprecedented rates and would have better outcomes now than when we lobotomised people; it doesn't.

assuming that someone must be traumatised to understand medical statistics is almost as hilarious as thinking poor parental relationships are more common among psychotherapy dissenters when it's generally accepted by psychotherapists themselves they mostly go into the business because they are deeply fucked up and their parents wronged them. mindfulness, like cbt before, like psychoanalysis before, is going through a fad. i feel kind of bad for emdr because it didn't get its full fad value before dbt took over.

underrated post

there is no self

Zen mind beginner mind.

This pic is extremely wrong and is evidently created by someone who doesn't post here. More people here supported Trump than Bernie.

Literally no one on here is a Tumblr liberal arts student.

This me except switch Bernie for write in meme, and Das Capital for Nietzche

>I started browsing Veeky Forums around 2016
you should probably kill yourself desu

Pol needs to leave.
To be honest though, I think you guys won.
So I guess you never will.

>tfw there are people who began coming here literally a decade after you did.
>tfw Veeky Forums is the only board you still go to because you've outgrown all your other hobbies in the last 10+ years.

Well, yeah, materialism is bunk, but your post is such a non sequitur it looks like user broke you with his post.

>snake oil salemen were actually accused of being bad by patent medicine peddlers. the snake oil salemen were advocating chinese medicine for rheumatism, which turns out to be good science because snake oil does actually help that. over time the meaning shifted to mean all patent medicine salesmen, including the ones who had originated the phrase to kill off their competition.
Irrelevant. I was using the term in the colloquial sense and you knew that. Good to know your main motivation is to show off, though.

>a lot of mindfulness and psychotherapy doesn't work
True. A lot does.

>if it did, depression and other mental illness would not be expanding at unprecedented rates and would have better outcomes now than when we lobotomised people; it doesn't.
This is simplifying a HUGELY complex issue around measuring treatment outcomes. It's also ironic because mindfulness would not make its goal to eliminate negative symptoms, but to control their impact on your quality of life (not mere happiness or symptom reduction).

>assuming that someone must be traumatised to understand medical statistics is almost as hilarious as thinking poor parental relationships are more common among psychotherapy dissenters
I was talking about my own experiences with real people.

>it's generally accepted by psychotherapists themselves they mostly go into the business because they are deeply fucked up and their parents wronged them.
Source please.

>mindfulness, like cbt before, like psychoanalysis before, is going through a fad
Completely agree. But you don't automatically reject things BECAUSE they are popular, do you?

>Irrelevant. I was using the term in the colloquial sense and you knew that. Good to know your main motivation is to show off, though.
>knowing trivia is showing off
>this counts as a show boat in your world
Jesus.

>True. A lot does.
Are you defining working as costing money, like Freud?

>This is simplifying a HUGELY complex issue around measuring treatment outcomes. It's also ironic because mindfulness would not make its goal to eliminate negative symptoms, but to control their impact on your quality of life (not mere happiness or symptom reduction).
It's strange you think that symptom management wasn't a previous goal, or that "mere happiness" was one in depression treatment. And it's pointing to a massive crisis which results in more disability lost hours due to depression than anything else including cancer, AIDS, TB, malaria, or any of the previous major drains on human productivity, which is not so complex that its aberrant rates are justifiable or sustainable. Pretending mindfulness will protect the bubble caused by psychiatric initiatives in the west is like hoping consumer sentiment will keep a property bubble going indefinitely. Eventually the cost makes it impossible to sustain in either case, no matter how you think or feel about the situation.

>I was talking about my own experiences with real people.
You sound judgmental and fundamentalist, tbph. Just in as far as I've experienced your posts and think you might not be a bot.

>Source please.
kekekeke. How have you never heard that even in jest? There's a 2009 study the APA ran with statistically abnormal populations of anxiety, depression and suicidal ideation among psychology grad students, which would be a good starting point, but, Christ, how have you never heard that?

>Completely agree. But you don't automatically reject things BECAUSE they are popular, do you?
No, I think the popularity of the conception of mental illness is in part the cause of the epidemic levels of disability we've seen in the past 20 years which is going to be another Recovered Memory Movement SNAFU by 2050, only costing far more in both life and economic loss.

What kind of faggot honestly fits that description? Being an /a/non I must not see these types of posters very much. Guess I can thank weeb culture for that.

>>knowing trivia is showing off
>>this counts as a show boat in your world
>Jesus.
If I chose a random word out of your post and gave a paragraph about its etiology, you would have a go.

>Are you defining working as costing money, like Freud?
Come ON, dude, you call me an absolutist? I already said it was about quality of life. Like I said, the complexity is then getting evidence this has been done. But yes, I believe it can really help people change their lives.

>It's strange you think that symptom management wasn't a previous goal, or that "mere happiness" was one in depression treatment.
I never said it wasn't. But the fads you're talking about are shifting the focus.

>And it's pointing to a massive crisis which results in more disability lost hours due to depression than anything else including cancer, AIDS, TB, malaria, or any of the previous major drains on human productivity
>productivity
Maybe part of the large scale problem you're taking about relates to this being the bottom line. Therapy should not be about simply reducing symptoms enough to get back into the assembly line.

>Pretending mindfulness will protect the bubble caused by psychiatric initiatives in the west is like hoping consumer sentiment will keep a property bubble going indefinitely. Eventually the cost makes it impossible to sustain in either case, no matter how you think or feel about the situation.
You're now moving into the realm of healthcare policies, not the effectiveness of therapy

>You sound judgmental and fundamentalist, tbph.
Right back at you. Take a look at your (?) first post I responded to.

>kekekeke. How have you never heard that even in jest? There's a 2009 study the APA ran with statistically abnormal populations of anxiety, depression and suicidal ideation among psychology grad students, which would be a good starting point, but, Christ, how have you never heard that?
Ever considered that being trained in psychology is a harrowing experience? Anyway, I would argue that most people are fucked up, user. I would also argue that people switched on to psychopathology tend to overreport compared to most other people. I also don't know why, even if we took your claims as fact, that would make therapy any less effective for others.

>No, I think the popularity of the conception of mental illness is in part the cause of the epidemic levels of disability we've seen in the past 20 years which is going to be another Recovered Memory Movement SNAFU by 2050, only costing far more in both life and economic loss.
>in life
What do you mean by this? Are you actually claiming that mindfulness is life threatening? You've also shifted the goalposts, you were saying that mindfulness is a fad WITHIN psychotherapy, now you're saying that mental illness is itself a fad. Big fucking claim.

there is no self say it with me

>no one so far even mention it.
Just read this and be done with ir

this is silly

camus, marx, joyce, miles davis, stravinsky, dreyer, tarkovsky, these are all highly respected figures, coffee and glasses ? not so specific. you might as well have listed oxygen and water too and congratulated yourself the accuracy of the satire

(You) poor dynamic user

nailed it

the key to getting rid off anxiety is too accept it, especially if like me your anxiety is the 'fear of anxiety'. as in, you fear the feelings of anxiety and like a self fulfilling prophecy it gives you anxiety. mindfulness is an effective way to teach yourself how to ignore these obtrusive and unhelpful thoughts.
if anyone suffers from 'irrational' anxiety fears i highly recommend it (i dont know if it helps depression)

>If I chose a random word out of your post and gave a paragraph about its etiology, you would have a go.
Calling user a snake oil salesman was your whole pitch why patent medicine was reasonable.
>Come ON, dude, you call me an absolutist?
No, I'm making a very obvious reference to the fact that Freud knew a lot of what improved a placebo effect was how much you paid for a placebo, and that was how he justified targeting the wealthy.
>I never said it wasn't. But the fads you're talking about are shifting the focus.
Only really fringe groups and zealots ever thought "mere happiness" was on the table, or considered happiness "mere" at all. Even mindfulness doesn't.
>Maybe part of the large scale problem you're taking about relates to this being the bottom line. Therapy should not be about simply reducing symptoms enough to get back into the assembly line.
Therapy however should not be an indicator that you will be more disabled in five years time. The current trend is worse than the RMM in debility, and not questioning therapy's role in creating the current unsustainable epidemic is frankly negligent on a larger scale than brainwashing your patients into believing aliens or daddy touched than was. Therapy should not be about convincing enough people in the world they are in need of it that it becomes a bigger disability burden than any other disease on the planet, unless you want to get rich as a therapist and hate humanity.
>You're now moving into the realm of healthcare policies, not the effectiveness of therapy
Oh no, a complex interplay, how shall you who wanted more complexity and depth to the discussion cope? Do your breathing exercises and realise if therapy were effective, it would not be creating the distress it needs to propagate itself.
>Right back at you. Take a look at your (?) first post I responded to.
Your personal anecdotes which are wholly biased in favour of a disastrous and fad and which you hold in higher regard than systemic or statistical analyses are why I think you're judgmental and fundamentalist. You however think I'm judgmental and fundamentalist for ignoring your personal feels for actual data, which is just bizarre.
>Ever considered that being trained in psychology is a harrowing experience?
Yup, and that would play right to the idea that it creates more distress than it cures. Consider those levels are abnormative against most all grad students, including ones who will have to do traumatic things like cut up a dead body, and you might see how it's creating distress.
>Anyway, I would argue that most people are fucked up, user.
Well, now they are, particularly women who are taking the brunt of this iatrogenic epidemic. I'm arguing that maybe they would be competent if we didn't insist they need therapy and must be fucked up. Heaven forfend we have confidence in the natural survival and resilience which has only led to us becoming the dominant species of the planet
>overreport
Exactly how we got here for erry1

funny but i don't think it was b8

>What do you mean by this? Are you actually claiming that mindfulness is life threatening? You've also shifted the goalposts, you were saying that mindfulness is a fad WITHIN psychotherapy, now you're saying that mental illness is itself a fad. Big fucking claim.
I'm saying you're going to cause a whole bunch of people to believe they're ill because you want to believe you have a cure. That you are necessary. And that desire for the necessity of therapy is exactly why there's a disability burden of depression which was impossible even back when losing your whole family before the age of 30 was a real probability, when there was no age of consent besides puberty if you were especially religious and when you would be so likely to contract TB (with its depressive symptoms) before your third birthday that it's near as make no odd. You might as well go back to promoting recovered memory therapy, because at least that is out there enough that less people will be hoodwinked by it.

>an brainwashing your patients into believing aliens or daddy touched than was
them not than

>Calling user a snake oil salesman was your whole pitch why patent medicine was reasonable.
Holy shit, I was greentexting this statement about mindfulness AS snake oil. How are you this confused?

>No, I'm making a very obvious reference to the fact that Freud knew a lot of what improved a placebo effect was how much you paid for a placebo, and that was how he justified targeting the wealthy.
Oh, so you're saying the only work therapists do is charge money? That's ridiculous. I could take your argument seriously if you said their work was ineffective but not this delusion.

>Only really fringe groups and zealots ever thought "mere happiness" was on the table, or considered happiness "mere" at all. Even mindfulness doesn't.
But you're talking about large scale statistical measures of treatment outcomes, which use rating formats like symptom reduction OR things like happiness ratings.

>Therapy however should not be an indicator that you will be more disabled in five years time, etc.
You are actually claiming that therapy causes problems in the long run? No. I could understand the argument that resources could be better spent, and I agree. Social inequalities seem to do way more damage than personal life events. But to say that on a large scale therapy damages people is really weird and AGAINST the kind of empirical research investigating it.

>Therapy should not be about convincing enough people in the world they are in need of it that it becomes a bigger disability burden than any other disease on the planet, unless you want to get rich as a therapist and hate humanity.
Kek, more and more people are getting depressed about their lives in a shallow capitalist shithole, and you blame the people trying to help them instead of the people propagating the shallow capitalist shithole. Nice.

>>You're now moving into the realm of healthcare policies, not the effectiveness of therapy
>do your breathing exercises and realise if therapy were effective, it would not be creating the distress it needs to propagate itself.
For the most part, it doesn't. You being told that its possible to have a better life was not the reason your life was shit in the first place. That's like saying the stoics are causing human suffering, just because they state ways to relieve it.

>Your personal anecdotes which are wholly biased in favour of a disastrous and fad and which you hold in higher regard than systemic or statistical analyses are why I think you're judgmental and fundamentalist. You however think I'm judgmental and fundamentalist for ignoring your personal feels for actual data, which is just bizarre.
What data? Your claims that more and more people are in need of help does not prove that the methods of helping are causing the problem. The world might actually be getting more fucked up, user. Thus is not data, nor are YOUR points like "hurrr psychs are the crazy ones lol"

>Yup, and that would play right to the idea that it creates more distress than it cures.
>I'm arguing that maybe they would be competent if we didn't insist they need therapy and must be fucked up. Heaven forfend we have confidence in the natural survival and resilience which has only led to us becoming the dominant species of the planet
>humans shouldn't evolve into new levels of self understanding, just get back to work and keep things the same!

>we were fine when people lived till 30, worked in factory lines in intolerable conditions, and had a stiff upper lip! Cop it on the chin and stop complaining! The LAST thing we want is for people to stop working so they can heal psychologically, understanding themselves and others better, and support the development of a more compassionate and wise generation next time around! It's way more important to make sure the current configuration of society stays exactly the same! The old ways are best! Back to work! Back to work! Back to work!

>Holy shit, I was greentexting this statement about mindfulness AS snake oil. How are you this confused?
Apparently you didn't realise you were the patent medicine salesman, while user was selling snake oil.
>Oh, so you're saying the only work therapists do is charge money?
I'm saying Freud was known to think a large part of the benefit of therapy was the sunk cost aspect. It's not like getting mad at me is going to change what Sigmund said a century ago. Maybe you'll go down the EVERYTHING FREUD SAID CAN'T BE TRUSTED route, but that'd be really typical of a patent medicine salesman.
>But you're talking about large scale statistical measures of treatment outcomes, which use rating formats like symptom reduction OR things like happiness ratings.
No, I'm talking about M&M stats which say you're dead sooner, and more physically disabled, and more cognitively disabled. Perhaps some of them are faking being dead, but your idea that the stats must be flawed or look at flawed outcomes just suggests you've never read any of them. Fundamentalist thinking wasn't a charge I came up with because I thought you were well informed.
>You are actually claiming that therapy causes problems in the long run? No.
That categorical no when I've raised the recovered memory movement repeatedly makes me think you are charging people to convince them that the aliens touched them and see no harm in that. Ofshe did a nice report on the tangible costs of that, which is just the dollar amount rather than the lives ruined. It's really like I'm talking to someone defending a cult at this stage.
>I could understand the argument that resources could be better spent, and I agree.
Of course you agree with an argument you came up with.
>Social inequalities seem to do way more damage than personal life events.
This is not just a false dichotomy, it's just false. Years of feudalism did not cause these rates of damage, which is a far greater social inequality and far more deeply embedded than anything you will ever experience. Get some fucking sense of perspective.
>But to say that on a large scale therapy damages people is really weird and AGAINST the kind of empirical research investigating it.
m8, we're not even 40 years clear of the Satanic Panic, and like I said, Ofshe did good work on empirically proving therapy's harm throughout the 80s and early 90s. This is just plain revisionism.
>more and more people are getting depressed about their lives in a shallow capitalist shithole, and you blame the people trying to help them instead of the people propagating the shallow capitalist shithole. Nice.
They are the people propagating the system. It doesn't work without customers buying your line of bullshit. They're useful idiots in a system which deprives them further of rights and leads to further indebtedness with the bonus of shorter life expectancy and greater debility. And you're cheering them on towards that, while the system targets the most disadvantaged.

>For the most part, it doesn't. You being told that its possible to have a better life was not the reason your life was shit in the first place.
This doesn't jive with mindfulness, which often takes Schopenhauer's view that striving is the source of dissatisfaction by creating the idea of satisfaction.
>That's like saying the stoics are causing human suffering, just because they state ways to relieve it.
You might want to look up Seneca's requests for suicide to Nero and his eventual suicide at Nero's bequest and remember Nero wasn't great before using the stoics as your example of relieving human suffering. Not to mention the fascist connection, which you'll probably freak out more about.
>What data? Your claims that more and more people are in need of help does not prove that the methods of helping are causing the problem. The world might actually be getting more fucked up, user. Thus is not data, nor are YOUR points like "hurrr psychs are the crazy ones lol"
What data would one use for morbidity and mortality or DALY or disability lost hours? Oh right, there are indexes of these things that anyone with a medical degree to look at your liver would expect a first year to know about. There's also all the data Ofshe collected, the fact I've given you citations when asked for them, and the fact all you gave me was "lul some people i know k?". I'd ask for some quid pro quo but that you're not even aware how or where these things are measured and assume flawed procedures which aren't used except by shoddy psychologists tells me you're not going to explode into a font of well collected and analysed data. You're actually fucking up the world and as blind to it as a Spanish Inquisitor. Probably because there's a paycheque at the end of it for you, or because you've paid a lot in already. See Freud above.

We haven't even gotten tired of winning yet.

>There were two literature teachers in HS
>One talked about Hegel and Wittgensteint and recommended serious literature and philosophy
>The other gave out mandatory YA reads as homework
>You were teached by the YA one
It's not fucking fair

At least I got the chance to learn history under the Veeky Forums one.
He even gifted me books.

>I'm saying Freud was known to think a large part of the benefit of therapy was the sunk cost aspect.
>how does this claim (true or not) prove that other therapy methods are not effective?

>Maybe you'll go down the EVERYTHING FREUD SAID CAN'T BE TRUSTED route, but that'd be really typical of a patent medicine salesman.
Kek, how can I argue against such conspiracy-tier logic where "anything you say is proof you are lying and in on it!"

>No, I'm talking about M&M stats which say you're dead sooner, and more physically disabled, and more cognitively disabled.
Please point me to any stats that say people who enter therapy have more of these problems afterwards compared to people who didn't.

>That categorical no when I've raised the recovered memory movement repeatedly
You think that movement speaks for all of psychotherapy? Weird. Should we get rid of automobile because some shitty bus drivers got into a crash?

>Of course you agree with an argument you came up with.
Im trying to demonstrate you how to actually make good ones, you seem to be really bad at it.

>Years of feudalism did not cause these rates of damage.
How are you measuring damage here? I thought you were concerned with how long people were living? Also, you have pulled this perspective out of your ass, so I don't think I will get some of it, no.

>m8, we're not even 40 years clear of the Satanic Panic, and like I said, Ofshe did good work on empirically proving therapy's harm throughout the 80s and early 90s.
How was this proven? Again, show me how people who enter therapy compare to people who don't across your criteria - and be clear about the criteria.

>>more and more people are getting depressed about their lives in a shallow capitalist shithole, and you blame the people trying to help them instead of the people propagating the shallow capitalist shithole. Nice.
>They are the people propagating the system. It doesn't work without customers buying your line of bullshit. They're useful idiots in a system which deprives them further of rights and leads to further indebtedness with the bonus of shorter life expectancy and greater debility. And you're cheering them on towards that, while the system targets the most disadvantaged.
>human suffering did not exist until psychotherapy.
Get a fucking grip, user.

>This doesn't jive with mindfulness, which often takes Schopenhauer's view that striving is the source of dissatisfaction by creating the idea of satisfaction.
This doesn't CREATE the idea of satisfaction. The fact that you think this is so indicative of your whole weird perspective on what causes human suffering. If I walked up to you and said you're suffering, you'd just tell me to fuck off (like you're basically doing now). I thought you said people were resiliant.

>You might want to look up Seneca's requests for suicide to Nero and his eventual suicide at Nero's bequest
Thanks for the tip. Perhaps it was a bad analogy, though I stand by the point.

>Ofshe is the only one with good data. All other data is rubbish and part of the conspiracy.

Freud was based. Jung is a hack.

If you disagree go back to your home

>a lot of mindfulness and psychotherapy doesn't work. if it did, depression and other mental illness would not be expanding at unprecedented rates and would have better outcomes now than when we lobotomised people; it doesn't.
implying the average fag applies mindfulness and other such bullshit. clearly very few do

>the essential Stravinsky
>implying I don't know my Stravinsky

What if the reason that mental illness rates are increasing is because of the large amounts of xeno-estrogens being consumed, the destruction of the nuclear family, the proliferation and acceptance of ideals such as miscegenation, egoism, 'sexual liberation', sodomy, and self mutilation being acceptable both socially, morally, and ethically, and the push to destabilize countries by perverting traditional national identity based on race?

No that can't be it. Thinking any of that could be it is crazy conspiritard nonsense, it belongs on /pol/!

>a lot of mindfulness and psychotherapy doesn't work.
Whilst some therapies have been shown to be ineffective, there is no doubt that there are psychotherapies which work.

>if it did, depression and other mental illness would not be expanding at unprecedented rates.
This is an oversimplification of a complex issue.

Ofshe's research is into false connfessions during police interrogations you fucking dipshit.

You fucking nearly triggered me.

Kek, you think sociologists are better researchers than psychologists.

>>how does this claim (true or not) prove that other therapy methods are not effective?
you're really shit at quoting btw. It's not about the method, it's about the cost of the method. Freud thought it was quite irrelevant what method, and a lot of good psychological research bears that out (The incentivised boring task experiments are pretty clear on this.)
>Kek, how can I argue against such conspiracy-tier logic where "anything you say is proof you are lying and in on it!"
It wasn't anything you say, it would just be if you had another black and white view which is common to people who think they are modern perfection and believe in the perfectability of human knowledge compared to the mythic wrong and imperfect past. Many people who think "science has it right now" are also quick to disavow all of Freud offhand without even basic knowledge of what it contains, when it could well contain things they agree with. Considering you didn't recognise one of Freud's most repeated quips, I think a disavowal of his work en masse would be as uninformed. That you're also not aware that many people are quick to disavow him with barely even surface knowledge makes me wonder if you've been kept in isolation or just lack all ability for critical thought.
>Please point me to any stats that say people who enter therapy have more of these problems afterwards compared to people who didn't.
I've pointed you to not just stats but also individual surveys of particularly failed methods which were defended with the same zeal and lack of basis you defend your enthusiasm for therapy. You've even quoted part of it, and if you live in a Western country, you'll see it in your national morbidity and mortality stats most likely. If that's beyond your ken, I guess I can recommend a reporter who assisted Ofshe, Ethan Watters, which isn't of the statistical standard I listed but is probably going to be easier for you to understand than actuarial tables.
>You think that movement speaks for all of psychotherapy? Weird. Should we get rid of automobile because some shitty bus drivers got into a crash?
So black and white. I'm responding to you saying categorically NO that any therapy causes long term devastation. Not only was that movement not fettered in any way by any other branch of therapy for fear of doubting the victims, it was promoted by the APA, became a major and immovable force in therapy in the US, brought therapy from being a very elite and select group of patients into being a very broad group of patients, proliferated more therapists than any other branch of therapy in the US before or since, cost hundred of lives, caused a massive moral panic, massive financial damages, and thousands of false rape claims. Thoroughout the 80s and 90s it did speak for the majority of therapy, and it's the reason why therapy and therapists are so common today, because the aftermath of the system it created is why everyone in the US has several therapists within 500miles.

>Im trying to demonstrate you how to actually make good ones, you seem to be really bad at it.
Arguments you argee with being the standard of good argument is exactly why I think you're a fundie.
>How are you measuring damage here? I thought you were concerned with how long people were living? Also, you have pulled this perspective out of your ass, so I don't think I will get some of it, no.
You do realise that white US people are dying at rates which are lower than the life expectancy of someone in the middle ages who had survived the first five years of life. Infant mortality accounts for the shortened average life expectancy in the middle ages; now what accounts for the shortened life expectancy is depression. This is a rise which is very recent, and you can google the disability burden of depression since 1990, and see an increased which is unprecedented in humanity. Reality painfully disagrees with your ideals.
>How are you measuring damage here? I thought you were concerned with how long people were living? Also, you have pulled this perspective out of your ass, so I don't think I will get some of it, no.
Years lost to disability, hours lost to disability, mortality, you know the stuff we use to see whether we're doing better or worse at fighting a disease.
>How was this proven? Again, show me how people who enter therapy compare to people who don't across your criteria - and be clear about the criteria.
I gave you the main source which correlates all the data and you don't even want to google his name? I'm not spoonfeeding you Ofshe's full research on the RMM line by line because he got at least one mass market book out of it to explain it in detail to the public and I'm already hitting character limits, while you provide no evidence whatsoever, besides how you feel. Which, lulz.
>>human suffering did not exist until psychotherapy.
>Get a fucking grip, user.
Not the iatrogenic kind of suffering which is currently the world leader in causes of disability. Your black and white thinking so far and your hilarious antistrawmen for you to agree with really does make you seem fundie as fuck, user. I'm still holding you responsible for every soul you feed to the machine in my moral schema, while you're hoping sticking your fingers in your ears and humming loudly is moral teflon to your actions. I bet you judge good Germans though.
>This doesn't CREATE the idea of satisfaction. The fact that you think this is so indicative of your whole weird perspective on what causes human suffering. If I walked up to you and said you're suffering, you'd just tell me to fuck off (like you're basically doing now). I thought you said people were resiliant.
m8 it's not my fault you don't understand Schopenhauer or Buddhist mindfulness' reasoning, or that you need their reasoning to be mine for your tiny brain to not explode. This is like getting mad at me for shit Freud said.

>Whilst some therapies have been shown to be ineffective, there is no doubt that there are psychotherapies which work.
This assumes they're treating real problems and not just a social ceremony.
>This is an oversimplification of a complex issue.
It's going to get pretty simple when insurance says fuck this bubble.
There's an entire book called Making Monsters which he wrote with a journalist for public consumption which deals exclusively with the RMM, since apparently navigating his scholarly work was too much for you and you quit after one paper or a quick look at wikipedia, windowlicker.
Depending on the methods they use, there have been some. There's also good psychologists and psychiatrists who are worried about what the current epidemics are creating, most notably both Spritzer and Frances (authors of previous editions of the DSM).

Spitzer seems to cause autocorrect problems.
is a continuation of but character limits wouldn't allow for linking.

>you're really shit at quoting btw
I know, it's mainly that I'm bad at multitasking.

>Freud thought it was quite irrelevant what method
He absolutely fucking did not, then you have the gall to say shit below.

>and lot of good psychological research bears that out (The incentivised boring task experiments are pretty clear on this.)
I'm not at all convinced based on any of this that you have any idea what constitutes what is good research, or what conclusions can be drawn from any of the studies you're referencing. In fact I'm quite sure you are really bad at both.

>It wasn't anything you say
Easy to say that now.

>it would just be if you had another black and white view which is common to people who think they are modern perfection and believe in the perfectability of human knowledge compared to the mythic wrong and imperfect past. Many people who think "science has it right now" are also quick to disavow all of Freud offhand without even basic knowledge of what it contains, when it could well contain things they agree with. Considering you didn't recognise one of Freud's most repeated quips, I think a disavowal of his work en masse would be as uninformed. That you're also not aware that many people are quick to disavow him with barely even surface knowledge makes me wonder if you've been kept in isolation or just lack all ability for critical thought.
All of this paragraph is strawman. You have no idea what I know or don't about these subjects.

>I've pointed you to not just stats but also individual surveys of particularly failed methods
You've pointed me to fucking sociological theory not supported by any empirically controlled studies.

>if you live in a Western country, you'll see it in your national morbidity and mortality stats most likely.
Your ability to believe false correlations in on par with
>Ofshe
And
>Ethan Watters
Who fucking worked together, one a sociologist and the other a journalist. Where do you get your confidence in acting like the research is behind you?

>I'm responding to you saying categorically NO that any therapy causes long term devastation
My "no" was in response to your categorically saying all therapy (and fucking mindfulness) causes long term devastation. That is retarded. I never said nobody has ever been harmed by shitty psychologists.

>Not only was that movement not fettered in any way by any other branch of therapy for fear of doubting the victims, it was promoted by the APA, became a major and immovable force in therapy in the US, brought therapy from being a very elite and select group of patients into being a very broad group of patients, proliferated more therapists than any other branch of therapy in the US before or since, cost hundred of lives, caused a massive moral panic, massive financial damages, and thousands of false rape claims.
I agree newer focuses of therapy are better than that particular cherrypicked one. I do not think we have reached the pinnacle, I do NOT agree that means others are not helped by different methods, or that we should stop trying.

>Thoroughout the 80s and 90s it did speak for the majority of therapy and it's the reason why therapy and therapists are so common today, because the aftermath of the system it created is why everyone in the US has several therapists within 500miles.
Did Ofshe's and Watters' book tell you that crap?

>Arguments you argee with being the standard of good argument is exactly why I think you're a fundie.
>agree with me or you're a fundie.

>now what accounts for the shortened life expectancy is depression. This is a rise which is very recent, and you can google the disability burden of depression since 1990, and see an increased which is unprecedented in humanity
>And I and a bunch of sociologists decided this rise was because people were being TOLD they were depressed by psychologists, dammit.

>Years lost to disability, hours lost to disability, mortality, you know the stuff we use to see whether we're doing better or worse at fighting a disease.
>and all of this stuff is being CAUSED by helpers because they started HELPING more at the same time the problems were getting bad. Coincidence!? I think NOT!

>I gave you the main source which correlates all the data and you don't even want to google his name? I'm not spoonfeeding you Ofshe's full research on the RMM line by line because he got at least one mass market book out of it to explain it in detail to the public and I'm already hitting character limits, while you provide no evidence whatsoever, besides how you feel. Which, lulz.
Stop assuming I don't know what you're talking about just because I think you and your sources are misleading and ignorant.

>Not the iatrogenic kind of suffering which is currently the world leader in causes of disability.
>and did you not HEAR me say CORRELATION?

>Your black and white thinking so far and your hilarious antistrawmen for you to agree with really does make you seem fundie as fuck, user.
Nice buzzwords.

>I'm still holding you responsible for every soul you feed to the machine in my moral schema, while you're hoping sticking your fingers in your ears and humming loudly is moral teflon to your actions. I bet you judge good Germans though.
>Projecting this fucking hard.

>m8 it's not my fault you don't understand Schopenhauer or Buddhist mindfulness' reasoning, or that you need their reasoning to be mine for your tiny brain to not explode. This is like getting mad at me for shit Frued said.
None of those things happened. You're living in a fantasyland.

>This assumes they're treating real problems and not just a social ceremony.
This is an assumption in itself, one much less based on evidence than psychotherapy.

>It's going to get pretty simple when insurance says fuck this bubble.
I'm not quite sure what you're implying here.

>I know, it's mainly that I'm bad at multitasking.
>Quoting is multitasking
>either that or user's going to feed me some sob story about how their lack of focus and extraneous events are why they're shit, because responsibility's for other people
uhhu.
>He absolutely fucking did not, then you have the gall to say shit below.
He absolutely fucking did. He thought that treating patients for free was going to cause transference and counter transference that would doom any treatment. Do you really believe that if you type some shit it magically becomes true?
>I'm not at all convinced based on any of this that you have any idea what constitutes what is good research, or what conclusions can be drawn from any of the studies you're referencing. In fact I'm quite sure you are really bad at both.
Oh, you do think typing shit makes it true. Your opinion leaves me unmoved.
>Easy to say that now.
I specified the case that would be typical of a fundie is outright disavowal without any knowledge, which considering you haven't checked up the Freud thing and just decided your fantasy about what Freud said would count as fact, isn't far wrong at all.
>All of this paragraph is strawman. You have no idea what I know or don't about these subjects.
I know you don't know shit about Freud but think you can masquerade as a greater authority on him than someone who's read him. See the opening of this post. The part of the paragraph that refers to you specifically is conditional on you adopting a flawed analysis, and the rest is dealing with a common flawed analysis. It's not my fault you're not familiar with the common flawed analysis, nor how conditionals, or argumentation works. Likewise, it's not my fault you're demanding to be spoonfed fact while providing nothing in kind, though I will take responsibility for indulging an idiot who also bumps with their shit posts with responses. I just have standards for myself that mean I'm putting studies and basic information into my posts even if my interlocutor isn't and can't.

>You've pointed me to fucking sociological theory not supported by any empirically controlled studies.
Morbidity and mortality stats, DALY and disability lost hours being called a sociological theory is a new low on your dumb shit I've said today scale. Mark it.
>Your ability to believe false correlations in on par with
Your ability to deny medical statistics is on par with the RMM. Honestly, that you think you're taking down Ofshe and Watters' account for laymen is grandiose beyond belief. I guess you need to justify a paycheque you receive and the other option is out.
>>My "no" was in response to your categorically saying all therapy (and fucking mindfulness) causes long term devastation. That is retarded. I never said nobody has ever been harmed by shitty psychologists.
Therapy is a major indicator you will be disabled in five years. (This isn't limited to psychotherapy, but it is the point you were responding to).

>What kind of faggot honestly fits that description?
This, I doubt any user actually fits it.

>I agree newer focuses of therapy are better than that particular cherrypicked one. I do not think we have reached the pinnacle, I do NOT agree that means others are not helped by different methods, or that we should stop trying.
It's not cherry picked, it was, as in the part you quoted, not just the major mode of therapy and encouraged and not dissented against at all for over a decade, it is also a massive social impact which led to further SNAFUs (such as the overprescription of drugs in the following decades, the proliferation of therapy itself to people who would have never needed it if it weren't given such social weight, and the vast boom of therapists needing to justify a paycheque which sprung out along side both those)
>Did Ofshe's and Watters' book tell you that crap?
The APA did.

Pretty much all you seem to have in your corner is rage and the conviction it must be worth the money and your fingers possess magic which makes anything your type true even though you seem adverse to citing any evidence equal to that which you demand of others. Go be a lost cause and try not to drag others with you. I suspect you're a highly undertrained therapist though, so that cheque probably means more to you than a good look at yourself

You managed to work in a whole two Veeky Forums memes into 1001 KB. Shameful. Shit bait makes me angrier than any other kind. Which I suppose makes it good bait.

>falling for the infinite bait loop
console yourself with your outstanding time dubs

>>no one so far even mention it
Because it's got fuck-all to do with the topic.

>Quoting is multitasking
>either that or user's going to feed me some sob story about how their lack of focus and extraneous events are why they're shit, because responsibility's for other people
>uhhu.
Kek, why do you care about this? You done buttblasted.

>He absolutely fucking did. He thought that treating patients for free was going to cause transference and counter transference that would doom any treatment.
I'm saying that he absolutely did not say the method was irrelevant. Your comprehension is so fucking atrocious.

>I specified the case that would be typical of a fundie is outright disavowal without any knowledge, which considering you haven't checked up the Freud thing and just decided your fantasy about what Freud said would count as fact, isn't far wrong at all.
But you are wrong about Freud, and wrong about what I said about Freud, and this is not the first time.

>I know you don't know shit about Freud but think you can masquerade as a greater authority on him than someone who's read him. See the opening of this post.
Where you confused yourself. Again.

The part of the paragraph that refers to you specifically is conditional on you adopting a flawed analysis, and the rest is dealing with a common flawed analysis. It's not my fault you're not familiar with the common flawed analysis, nor how conditionals, or argumentation works. Likewise, it's not my fault you're demanding to be spoonfed fact while providing nothing in kind, though I will take responsibility for indulging an idiot who also bumps with their shit posts with responses. I just have standards for myself that mean I'm putting studies and basic information into my posts even if my interlocutor isn't and can't.
>repeatedly spouting the name of ONE sociology book you've read again and again is spoonfeeding research.
Kek.

>Morbidity and mortality stats, DALY and disability lost hours being called a sociological theory is a new low on your dumb shit I've said today scale. Mark it.
>Therapy is a major indicator you will be disabled in five years. (This isn't limited to psychotherapy, but it is the point you were responding to).
Please tell me how correlation shows causation you fuckwit.

>It's not cherry picked
Yes it is. We originally were talking about the impact of mindfulness and therapy in general. It is completely cherrypicked.

>The APA did.
So the APA have integrity to continually improve their conduct. Nice! But they made some mistakes. You know what, let's get rid of all of medicine as well because the pharmaceutical industry exists and sometimes medical theory got things wrong.

>Pretty much all you seem to have in your corner is rage
Kek, really? You got angry about my quoting skills.

>and the conviction it must be worth the money and your fingers possess magic which makes anything your type true even though you seem adverse to citing any evidence equal to that which you demand of others
I thought you were against spoonfeeding. Go to google scholar and type in effectiveness of psychotherapy empirical research you faggot.

>Go be a lost cause and try not to drag others with you
Actually I think I'll go to bed and then wake up and continue trying to make the world a better place. But have fun spreading your cynical sob stories about how the world is getting bigger and scawwier and the only honest folk are the ones who do the job you do.

I assume you will have the last word now and convince yourself that it means you are right and that you never need to go into therapy despite having a huge amount of shit to work out that would make you less of an insufferable asshole.

>Kek, really? You got angry about my quoting skills.
not him or really interested in your conversation, but pointing out someone's shit at quoting is not them being mad but pointing out a noob. same w/ "u cant link thredz lol" or "dumbass fucked up crossboard link XDD"
you sound like the more maaaad in this b/c all the whining sounds like a girl tbhfam. he's right you talk shit more than books. his books aren't on topic but i believe he reads more you know? or lurked moar first at min
dogen really is based af. he used get mentioned a lot more here
this convo is cute and on topic, i like it.