[FRIAM] Natures_Queer_Performativity_the_authori.pdf

[Frank Wimberly]

Since most who have opinions won't read the Wikipedia article I copy the
paragraph at the end that I recommended to Jon here.


Numerous research studies have found that most all models of psychotherapy
are equally helpful, the difference mainly being the quality of the
individual therapist, not the theory the therapist subscribes to. Object
Relations Theory attempts to explain this phenomenon via the theory of the
Good Object. If a therapist can be patient and empathic, most clients
improve their functioning in their world. The client carries with them a
picture of the empathic therapist that helps them cope with the stressors
of daily life, regardless of what theory of psychology they subscribe to.


---
Frank C. Wimberly
140 Calle Ojo Feliz,
Santa Fe, NM 87505

505 670-9918
Santa Fe, NM

On Thu, Apr 29, 2021, 5:14 PM uǝlƃ ↙↙↙ <gepropella at gmail.com> wrote:

> To make that claim, you'd have to walk through all the medicine that's
> happening, analgesics, physical therapy, acupuncture, dentistry, etc..
> Walking through the psychiatry that's happening is a much smaller task. I
> agree there does seem to be a lot of it, though ... I just  have no idea if
> it's *most*.
>
> As long as I'm logging opinions, I'd answer Jon's question about
> psycho*dynamics* with the idea I think I got from Thomas Saaz, that it's
> fundamentally about creating a therapist-patient relationship ...
> dovetailing 2 types of raw persuasion/manipulation in order to achieve the
> ends of the therapist or patient (or both). My guess is the tone of that
> coercion depends deeply on the 2 parties. Some authoritarian therapists may
> rely on daddy-mommy-child constructs. Others may be more egalitarian,
> pushing the ethical boundaries on friendship with one's patients. Etc. Lots
> of people who lack intimate relationships might come to a better place
> through such intentional relationship forming.
>
> But it needn't be through psychodynamics. I know a few people who've done
> it with their fitness coach, or life coach. One guy I knew back in Texas
> regularly visited a round-robin of prostitutes. I joke with my bartenders
> that I pay them to be my friends ... Good jokes must have some truth in
> them.
>
> On 4/29/21 3:47 PM, Marcus Daniels wrote:
> > By that definition most of medicine is bullshit.
> >
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: Friam <friam-bounces at redfish.com> On Behalf Of u?l? ???
> > Sent: Thursday, April 29, 2021 3:27 PM
> > To: friam at redfish.com
> > Subject: Re: [FRIAM] Natures_Queer_Performativity_the_authori.pdf
> >
> >
> >
> https://www.researchgate.net/publication/306068036_Psychiatry_as_Bullshit
> >
> > On 4/29/21 3:21 PM, Frank Wimberly wrote:
> >> Jon,
> >>
> >> I am sorry I disappointed you.  My understanding of object relations
> theory is like swiss cheese and I chose not to provide an inadequate
> response by humming a few bars.  By the way, object-relations theory
> provides a non-Oedipal alternative to your interpretation as explained by
> the Wikipedia article.  I became the withholding bad object to you.  I hope
> you will be able to integrate that with the good object I have been at
> times.
> >>
> >> Good for Glen.
> >>
> >> I am not a practitioner of psychoanalytic theory but it may not be for
> you.  As for psychoanalytic /treatment, /see the last paragraph of the
> Wikipedia article.
> >>
> >> Warmly,
> >>
> >> Frank
> >>
> >> On Thu, Apr 29, 2021 at 4:09 PM jon zingale <jonzingale at gmail.com
> <mailto:jonzingale at gmail.com>> wrote:
> >>
> >>     Frank,
> >>
> >>     To some extent, your response is indicative of the psychoanalytic
> >>     ends I criticize, the mommy-daddy-me Oedipal construction. Rather
> than
> >>     pick up on the opportunity presented by the conversation to engage
> in an
> >>     act of creativity (contributing to a forum), you use your agency to
> make
> >>     an authoritative (daddy) appeal to an object away from yourself and
> your
> >>     agency (the Wikipedia article). This action strikes me as
> functionally
> >>     different than Glen's earlier reference, say. While Glen's appeal
> acts to
> >>     ground and facilitate a living discussion, yours aims to end one. I
> felt
> >>     that the question I asked was fair, to hum a few bars regarding a
> >>     connection you are making that perhaps could contribute. If this
> sort of
> >>     short-circuiting of concepts and conversation is what I can expect
> from
> >>     practitioners of psychoanalytic theory, well, maybe it's not for me.
>
>
> --
> ↙↙↙ uǝlƃ
>
> - .... . -..-. . -. -.. -..-. .. ... -..-. .... . .-. .
> FRIAM Applied Complexity Group listserv
> Zoom Fridays 9:30a-12p Mtn GMT-6  bit.ly/virtualfriam
> un/subscribe http://redfish.com/mailman/listinfo/friam_redfish.com
> FRIAM-COMIC http://friam-comic.blogspot.com/
> archives: http://friam.471366.n2.nabble.com/
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://redfish.com/pipermail/friam_redfish.com/attachments/20210429/1a7cba13/attachment.html>