Newsgroups: bit.listserv.psycgrad
Date:         Mon, 13 Apr 1992 15:30:48 ECT
              <PSYCGRAD@UOTTAWA.BITNET>
Comments:     Resent-From: Brian Burrell <BA02073@BINGVMB>
Comments:     Originally-From: Network Mailer <MAILER@ACADVM1.UOTTAWA.CA>
From:         Brian Burrell <BA02073@BINGVMB.BITNET>
Subject:      mail delivery error

Subject: mail delivery error

 Sorry folks, due to an error on my part, I've been informed that not
everyone got this message- so here it is again.  Sorry if you've gotten it
twice.       -Brian.
----------------------------Original message----------------------------
Original message follows:

Received: from BINGVMB by ACADVM1.UOTTAWA.CA (Mailer R2.07) with BSMTP id 5793;
 Fri, 10 Apr 92 16:19:53 EDT
Received: from BINGVMB (BA02073) by BINGVMB (Mailer R2.07) with BSMTP id 3658;
 Fri, 10 Apr 92 16:11:00 ECT
Date:         Fri, 10 Apr 92 15:14:47 ECT
From:         Brian Burrell <BA02073@BINGVMB>
Subject:      a few things...
To:           psychgrad@uottawa

Hi all:

      Maybe as an experimental psych, cognitive-type person I should stay out
of this, but it seems that if a plumber uses a wrench to fix your pipes and
the plumbing is bad because the wrench is damaging your pipes, the legitimacy
of using that wrench is called into question. (This is not to speak to
regression therapy per se.) The 'tools' used in psychotherapy are not so
straightforward as wrenches, as there are direct and indirect effects of
"twisting a screw" which need to be discovered and evaluated.  Perhaps
the therapies themselves should not be considered as tools but as an organized
procedure for changing the system.  The instruction booklet, if you will, that
says "use wrench A on screw 23".  Perhaps the tools are "what the therapist
does" according to Matthew's (and that ingenious professors) definition.
Just a thought...  Perhaps "therapies" should be abandoned altoghether
and the proper use of tools and understanding of the system should be taught,
to the extent that this is known.  -But I begin to ramble.

The idea that anything can be done to a person as long as it is legal (as
defined by the governing bodies) and ethical (usually a set of rules establishe
d by some "professional" group) without being subject to scrutiny... Well,
I just don't know about all that.  Psychotherapeutic techniques are simply not
refined enough to go unquestioned. Research is useful, tho' its often poorly
done in this context (there I said it), note thatI certainly don't buy into the
idea that research is truly objective- but that's another story. Basically,
therapies AND therapists should be evaluated for their merit.  Therapies
should be revised or discarded when new info or "better" models are obtained.
Neither therapies nor therapists should operate with impunity.

Brian Burrell. A Houstonian in Binghamton (where the skunks hang out at the
grad community)

PS. Science should not be dictated by political correctness but the motives of
certain research questions should be critically evaluated,as results and interp
retations frequently follow the biases of the experimenter.
And: Good research must be noticed for science to advance. See Kuhn's ideas on
paradigms, etc.. (Sorry this is so long.)
Comments: Gated by NETNEWS@AUVM.AMERICAN.EDU