</font><blockquote><div id="quote"><font class="small">Quote:</font>
wittgenstein said:
I just think... That this can be an UNINTENTIONAL consequence of a view that places such a heavy burden on the role of cognitive factors in the production and modification of emotional responses.

</div></font></blockquote><font class="post">

Agreed. Some CBT therapists go overboard and ignore basic principles of good counseling.

</font><blockquote><div id="quote"><font class="small">Quote:</font>
CBT contradicts itself regarding whether it does or does not make a commitment regarding the primacy of cognition over emotion. I imagine that is because... Different theorists think differently. I have also found people contradicting themselves over that one...

</div></font></blockquote><font class="post">

Another factor here is that theorists and therapists tend to present the very simply A causes B causes C, etc. formula to clients because it's assumed that this is a more effective way of getting the point across, and that most people have little or no interest in exploring the ambiguos landscape of cognition/affect/physiology/behavior relationships. (And, I think the total lack of interest shown by other members to our discussion illustrates this nicely--please note: the preceding comment was aimed at my post's lack of relevance to the support mission of the forum...it was not meant to be unkind to any members. I tend to exaggerate. That's just my style of writing.)

</font><blockquote><div id="quote"><font class="small">Quote:</font>
Your fear of airplanes...

How many airplane crashes have you seen on tv?
In the newspaper?

Experience...
Can be vicarious too...

</div></font></blockquote><font class="post">

Yes, but the 95-98% of people who do not fear airplane crashes have had such vicarious experiences as well. What makes me different? That's the really interesting question. (I'm not saying CBT offers the definitive answer, just that it offers one that makes sense.)

</font><blockquote><div id="quote"><font class="small">Quote:</font>
Whats with the urge to have yourself described as 'irrational'?

</div></font></blockquote><font class="post">

No urge at all. In fact, I never called myself irrational. I said that I had an irrational fear. Big difference. In fact, it illustrates a certain cognitive distortion quite nicely. I recognize that I have an irrational fear, but if I made the jump to "I'm an irrational person" I would feel much, much worse about myself.

</font><blockquote><div id="quote"><font class="small">Quote:</font>

What is most likely to help you?

Repeat after me:

'you are more likely to crash your car than in an airplane'
'not many airplanes crash really'

or...

flooding...
or graduated exposure...
?

</div></font></blockquote><font class="post">

Flooding and graduate exposure for sure. A good CBT therapist would recommend them too--hence the 'B' in CBT. But how do these techniques work? One possible explanation is that as I'm flooded (or work through my hierarchy in graded exposure) I experience the feared stimuli and realize--and realization implies cognition--that the feared consequences do not occur. (The strict behaviorist view of these techniques don't really explain much about how they work.)

The work with acceptance is really interesting. I've done a little reading, but I have to catch up. Since most people come to therapy because they "feel bad" and they don't want to feel bad anymore, I think the idea of acceptance would be a tough sell--then again, there's an awful lot about this concept that I don't understand so I could be looking at it all wrong.

For what it's worth, my own view of things is that thoughts, feelings, behavior, and physiology are all part of an interdependent and interacting system and that when one changes, it necessarily changes the others. From a biological standpoint, I don't think it matters much what order they come in. What matters is how people experience these elements phenomenologically. What element can we work with to influence the system? It depends on the person, the problem, the context, etc.

It seems weird to me that when a person seeks treatment with a mental health professional, the most important factor in what kind of treatment they'll receive isn't the client's preference, the client's personality or temperament, isn't even the kind of problem the client is having...it's the approach embraced by the therapist. (Kind of like if I went to my doctor with a complaint about my back and hips and he responded by examining my ears because his training was in ear, nose, and throat!) Not very "client-centered" methinks.