Reclining on the sumptuous Freudian couch or answering a tsunami of incredibly similar questions about your interpretational distortions in Cognitive Behavioural Therapy? Just when your life is in chaotic meltdown, you have to evaluate this choice, as if you're informed and capable of making the best decision. This has been a theme to which we have wanted to return since our episode in season four, CBT vs Freud, in which we outlined some of the main differences. In the middle of the 20th century, Carl Rogers and the humanists evolved the experimental work of Freud and Jung, but their therapy was not analytical problem-solving. CBT, meanwhile, is more of an evidence-based formula developed later on, and it's undeniably effective and worth further exploration. But people like to use any old junk as evidence of what they're looking for, and you've listened to our recent episodes and come to the conclusion that the humanists, meanwhile, seem like a friendly gospel choir, without the bible getting in the way and yet less penis-obsessed than Freud. So, isn't the decision easy, get yourself a bit of that unconditional positive regard and just keep one eye out for psychopaths? 

Well now you have Dan the professional and James the provocateur to complicate things and walk you through the minefield of cognitive distortion analysis—over several episodes—until you don't know anything any more. Don't pretend that's not what you want. There are ten recognised cognitive distortions, and yes, James thinks there are five… PLUS! Was Machiavelli woke?

Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.