Nolan, very intriguing article, thanks. The whole idea of psychotherapy, introduced, as it was, by Freud, naturally reflects a 19th century western Austrian-German cultural bias toward an objective scientific rationalism as the solution to mental health challenges. Modern research subsequently has also validated the benefits of eastern meditation as a way “in” to managing the unknown emotional landscape. Both the eastern holistic meditative path and the western analytic deconstructionist path can be helpful, in different ways, for different conditions, and ironically, reflect the major philosophical universal binary of yin/yang, Dionysus/apollo, heart/mind, male/female, nature (DNA)/nurture (culture), etc. But all of our human challenges, mental health included, might best be addressed by first admitting to the failure of this fundamental binary, and to finding methods that allow the full spectrum between the binaries.
Maybe my use of “failure” is too strong a word. I think what I’m trying to say is that seeing things, including solutions to human problems like mental health, through this either/or prism of duality limits our options: the “solution” is always more revealing of its binary roots than its ability to succeed in its mission. Once we take the requirement of being either “this” or “that” away (ie, seeing the whole spectrum, not just either end), I believe new solutions can emerge. It’s about the spectrum, not just the poles.
Absolutely. I think this "failure" is also due to the need to categorize. It's much easier to put people into boxes than to view people on a spectrum. This is a bit of a different direction, and I haven't done a deep dive into the DSM lately, but I remember one of my professors criticizing the DSM because it didn't put enough emphasis on dimensions. If you meet a certain amount of requirements, you get labelled a certain way, which isn't always accurate and is also one of many reasons people can get misdiagnosed.
Absolutely! The need to categorize is what happens when you perceive from the western pole, and it succeeds brilliantly in wonderful ways (ie, naming a problem puts us on the path to cognitively understand it); but it also takes other alternatives off the table such as those that emerge from the eastern pole (also limiting when taken as the one-and-only solution), such as holistic contemplative meditation, which is completely antithetical to categorization!
Nolan, very intriguing article, thanks. The whole idea of psychotherapy, introduced, as it was, by Freud, naturally reflects a 19th century western Austrian-German cultural bias toward an objective scientific rationalism as the solution to mental health challenges. Modern research subsequently has also validated the benefits of eastern meditation as a way “in” to managing the unknown emotional landscape. Both the eastern holistic meditative path and the western analytic deconstructionist path can be helpful, in different ways, for different conditions, and ironically, reflect the major philosophical universal binary of yin/yang, Dionysus/apollo, heart/mind, male/female, nature (DNA)/nurture (culture), etc. But all of our human challenges, mental health included, might best be addressed by first admitting to the failure of this fundamental binary, and to finding methods that allow the full spectrum between the binaries.
Thank you, Dean. And that's really well said. I'm curious: How do you see the failure of this fundamental binary?
Maybe my use of “failure” is too strong a word. I think what I’m trying to say is that seeing things, including solutions to human problems like mental health, through this either/or prism of duality limits our options: the “solution” is always more revealing of its binary roots than its ability to succeed in its mission. Once we take the requirement of being either “this” or “that” away (ie, seeing the whole spectrum, not just either end), I believe new solutions can emerge. It’s about the spectrum, not just the poles.
Absolutely. I think this "failure" is also due to the need to categorize. It's much easier to put people into boxes than to view people on a spectrum. This is a bit of a different direction, and I haven't done a deep dive into the DSM lately, but I remember one of my professors criticizing the DSM because it didn't put enough emphasis on dimensions. If you meet a certain amount of requirements, you get labelled a certain way, which isn't always accurate and is also one of many reasons people can get misdiagnosed.
Absolutely! The need to categorize is what happens when you perceive from the western pole, and it succeeds brilliantly in wonderful ways (ie, naming a problem puts us on the path to cognitively understand it); but it also takes other alternatives off the table such as those that emerge from the eastern pole (also limiting when taken as the one-and-only solution), such as holistic contemplative meditation, which is completely antithetical to categorization!