kimchi fries + capri sun

i read about cbt but never done it

we were all playing low stakes poker at this guy pankaj's house that we went to high school with. Super nice guy. Anyway at some point he was like "you guys want some "ka-purr-son" with like no spaces between the syllables kind of like cat-person without the t and we were just like wtf is kapurrson. Then we realized he meant capri sun lol. Super weird it wasnt like he was some foreign kid with an accent.

Don't think that people that do therapy would criticize any approach. Different things work for different people, if there was a single solution we'd most likely live in a utopia or dystopia, but it would certainly be an extreme.

I would criticize it. Psychology compared to the hard sciences is a crock. I am giving her some rope because I like her but I don't want to sit there each session wasting my time if CBT is bunk.

it has the largest evidence base of all therapy modalities and across a pretty wide range of issues, but like anything else - pros and cons. its pretty action oriented and problem-solvey so it might be a good fit for you, even though you probably won't get much from the didactic elements.

also mandatory +1 to kimchi fries.

Thank you PoorUser. I think I will go with it. Sorry for calling your craft a crock. I couldn't help it with the rhetoric. I, myself, cannot point to why psychology would have less rigor, exactitude, and objectivity than say physics so I should shut my mouth on that subject. I am still skeptical of all sciences. I am also suspicious of psychiatrists and therapists.

On August 12 2021 02:01 RiKD wrote: I would criticize it. Psychology compared to the hard sciences is a crock. I am giving her some rope because I like her but I don't want to sit there each session wasting my time if CBT is bunk.

Right, so I'm a hard data kind of dude as well, but with therapy decided to do a 'yolo no science just belief' kinda dive mainly due to meeting people that had benefits from therapy and reading Jung. Jung was really frustrated with the limitations of the empirical method when it comes to the unconsciousness even though he was a hard data kinda dude as well. It's a weird paradox. Psychology has had explosiveness of new data inflow the past 20 years mainly due to the advancement of technology but it is turning wild theories into real science.

I feel like men are really fucked mentally due to environmental and social factors that were passively pushed onto us since children up to the point that we can't even identify the issues. That's not something science would easily be able to measure and quantify since we're all 'victims'. It's like trying to measure the impact of porn on men... it's almost impossible since there are no men that haven't seen porn.

On August 12 2021 10:49 RiKD wrote: Thank you PoorUser. I think I will go with it. Sorry for calling your craft a crock. I couldn't help it with the rhetoric. I, myself, cannot point to why psychology would have less rigor, exactitude, and objectivity than say physics so I should shut my mouth on that subject. I am still skeptical of all sciences. I am also suspicious of psychiatrists and therapists.

its cool. maybe 'crock' is antithetical to being evidence-based, but its not far off in some respects; after all, psychology knows that a lot of things work, but not why they do (psychiatry has the same issue re: meds)