It's very weird to almost have to pick between "majoring in" thoughts and emotions in psychotherapy. It seems to me that a lot of therapists consciously choose to unfamiliarize themselves with one of them (normally emotions). But shouldn't they be considering both? Since when was it wrong to feel? Sure, thoughts can lead to emotions, but does that mean that we should subscribe to one or deny ourselves the riches of the other? Emotions, I believe, can also lead to profound thought.
Thought allows us to understand the world. Thinking is what led us to create all the amazing things around us. But what if we had all our computers and video games and electron scanning microscopes, but were disallowed human contact and love? We could fill the world with the latest technology, but would it mean anything? Would the world really be full? It would be like having atomic particles without a positive or negative charge. The matter would simply float along and away.
Therapists need to allow themselves to feel. Perhaps more behavioral or cognitive-behavioral orientations are popular because they don't require the amount of emotional empathy that experiential theories do. Do we use them to avoid burnout? Maybe. Is it worth it? Better asked: Is it fair?
No comments:
Post a Comment