On Aug 4, 10:52 pm, turtoni
fastmail.net> wrote:> On Aug 5, 1:38 am, Immortalist
yahoo.com> wrote:
>
>
>>> "The 'couch,' or, more generally, long-term psychoanalytic
>> psychotherapy, was for so long a hallmark of the practice of
>> psychiatry. It no longer is," Mojtabai said.
>
>> Today's psychiatrists get reimbursed by insurance companies at a lower
>> rate for a 45-minute psychotherapy visit than for three 15-minute
>> medication visits, he explained.
>
>> ...the percentage of patients' visits to psychiatrists for
>> psychotherapy, or talk therapy, fell from 44 percent in 1996-97 to 29
>> percent in 2004-05. The percentage of psychiatrists using
>> psychotherapy with all their patients also dropped, from about 19
>> percent to 11 percent.
>
>> ...As talk therapy declined, TV ads contributed to an "aura of
>> invincibility" around drugs for depression and anxiety...
>
>> ...By contrast, there's almost no marketing for psychotherapy, which
>> has comparable if not better outcomes...
>
>> ...Psychotherapy uses verbal methods to get patients to explore their
>> emotional life, thoughts or behavior. The goal is to ease symptoms,
>> sometimes through getting the patient to change behavior or mental
>> habits.
>
>> Its benefits can be seen in brain imaging studies, said Dr. Eric
>> Plakun, who leads an American Psychiatric Association committee
>> working to restore interest in psychotherapy by psychiatrists.
>
>> ...other professionals are picking up the slack, ...Psychologists and
>> social workers provide counseling but most cannot prescribe drugs, so
>> it's possible that for patients who require both talk and pills, some
>> coordination in care may be lost, Mohr said.
>
>
> The drugs are a cheap fix. All "material" things are "drugs" when you
> think about it. The Stories.
>
You need to define "drug" else you -equivocate- me
The article was talking about pharmaceutical prescription drugs your
talking about general influences upon neural activities;
Fallacy of four terms
The fallacy of four terms (Latin: quaternio terminorum) is the logical
fallacy that occurs when a categorical syllogism has four terms.
Valid categorical syllogisms always have three terms:
Major premise: All fish have fins.
Minor premise: All goldfish are fish.
Conclusion: All goldfish have fins.
Here, the three terms are: "goldfish," "fish," and "fins."
Using four terms invalidates the syllogism:
Major premise: All fish have fins.
Minor premise: All goldfish are fish.
Conclusion: All humans have fins.
The premises don't connect "humans" with "fins", so the reasoning is
invalid. Notice that there are four terms: "fish", "fins", "goldfish"
and "humans". Two premises aren't enough to connect four different
terms, since in order to establish connection, there must be one term
common to both premises.
In everyday reasoning, the fallacy of four terms occurs most
frequently by equivocation: using the same word or phrase but with a
different meaning each time, creating a fourth term even though only
three distinct words are used:
Major premise: Nothing is better
than complete happiness.
Minor premise: A ham sandwich is
better than nothing.
Conclusion: A ham sandwich is better
than complete happiness.
The fallacy of four terms is a syllogistic fallacy. Types of syllogism
to which it applies include statistical syllogism, hypothetical
syllogism and categorical syllogism, all of which must have exactly
three terms.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fallacy_of_four_terms
http://philosophy.lander.edu/logic/four_fall.html
http://www.huxley.net/soma/somaquote.html
> Johns (our) culture is setup to promote "independence".
>
> John would like to choose his beer and weed.
>
> Why the hell would he want to listen to his "relatives" ?
>
> Fuck 'em. What do they know.
>
> Go it alone brothers and buy your own stuff. Your own fix. Reinvent
> the wheel.
>
> Back in our boxes..
>
>
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XrQudR_lZGM
