Quote
The Anticult
I doubt that any of the real cognitive therapy people would make any specific comments about a specific person. Its been going on for years. Ever since the hundreds of scientific studies have proven aspects of cognitive therapy do work, every Tom, Dick and Katie has been trying to steal some thunder.

What they have done many times, is to outline specifically what their kind of CT is, and how it was tested. All of that info is available.
They have also said if you want to do that kind of therapy, get a direct referral from them, someone who is licensed.
[www.beckinstitute.org]

So they have spoken out very clearly to stay away from all the unlicensed therapists out there, and Byron Katie is totally unlicensed. So they have already spoken out against her, and all of those like her for many years.

Also, many real therapists also say they do cognitive therapy. You might go, and all you do is talk therapy, no worksheets, no homework, etc. So sure in the widest sense talking is cognitive.
But CT is a very specific and tested method.

So if a person wants real CT, like the tested Dr. Aaron Beck method, they need to get a referral with a licensed person who is registered with the Beck Institute, for example.

Still, I wish those who practice the beneficial type of therapy would outline not only what it is, but also what it isn't. The primary difference I see between Beck and Burns versus Byron Katie, is that true CT helps one replace any distorted thoughts, with more accurate ones. CT does not assume that all thoughts are distorted.

CT helps one identify and replace cognitive distortions regardless of whether the distorted thought makes you feel good or feel bad. BK seeks to confuse one's thinking and replace any thought that feels bad with one that feels good regardless of how far out of reality that thought may be.

The advice to seek a licensed referral from Beck institute is a good one, it just doesn't go far enough. Many people who don't seek a therapist may read a book and do the exercises to try to help themselves. One could read and do the exercises in David Burns, "Feeling Good Handbook" or in any of BK's books. Without clear information from the pros about the differences, how is a consumer to know?

In the aforementioned book, Dr. David Burns says specifically:

Quote

"One disclaimer is necessary. There are many times when negative feelings are healthy and appropriate. Learning how to accept these feelings and how to cope with a realistically negative situation is just as important as learning how to rid yourself of distorted thoughts and feelings."

I am frustrated and dismayed by the silence of good therapists on this issue. They need not specify any particular system in order to warn against harmful distortions of their work.

In the widest sense I suppose, "The Work" could fall under the category of "cognitive therapy" when done with someone with a license, in much the same way that a lobotomy is one type of neurosurgery.



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 07/22/2008 06:27AM by question lady.

Quote
question lady
I am frustrated and dismayed by the silence of good therapists on this issue. They need not specify any particular system in order to warn against harmful distortions of their work.

In the widest sense I suppose, "The Work" could fall under the category of "cognitive therapy" when done with someone with a license, in much the same way that a lobotomy is one type of neurosurgery.

I share your frustration about the dearth of info on bogus therapy such as Byron Katie's. The thing is, one CAN file a complaint with the California Board of Psychology. That is one form of recourse. Posting on this board is another.

I do not think that "the work" (I refuse to initial cap. it!) could fall under the category of cognitive therapy AT ALL, not even in the widest sense, because it just is NOT therapy. It screws with the mind too much for that.

I do agree that it would be great if more therapists spoke out, but very few do.
But the good ones do say very clearly, for example, that if they have not trained with the Beck Institute and have an actual certification from them, then you have no idea of what you are getting.
(there are a few other streams of CT though, but the Beck variety is the most tested).

Real Cognitive Behavioral Therapy is basically the opposite to Byron Katie and The Work, even if one just focusses on the 4 Questions and Turnaround (bait) part of it.
As mentioned, its about carefully adjusting thoughts and behaviors, as explained in their materials, and one can get into Cognitive Science, etc.

There are books out there by Dr. Aaron Beck and others, that do explain exactly what has been studied in CT, and what has been shown to work. But lets face it, sadly, the public does not read books like that.
But Aaron Beck has a simple book, that he wrote many years ago which is a good introduction.

Cognitive Therapy and the Emotional Disorders (Paperback). by Aaron T. Beck
[www.amazon.com]

So lets put it to the test.
There is a recent book called:

Encyclopedia of Cognitive Behavior Therapy
(Hardcover)
by Stephanie Felgoise (Editor), Arthur M. Nezu (Editor), Christine M. Nezu (Editor), Mark A. Reinecke (Editor), Arthur Freeman (Editor)
Hardcover: 450 pages
Publisher: Plenum US; 1 edition (August 15, 2005)
Language: English
ISBN-10: 030648580X
[www.amazon.com]


Now, if according to Byron Katie's friend, David Wise Ph.D, (A Headache in the Pelvis), The Work is the best Cognitive Therapy, it should be at least LISTED in the book!
Its NOT listed.
Of course its not listed.
The Work by Byron Katie is not Cognitive Therapy, and its NEVER been tested. Ever.

So here is yet more lies, and more corruption around Byron Katie. She attracts these sleazy salespeople like flies.
Can you imagine, a guy like David Wise PhD, just making stuff up in his book on pain?
Why?
(some joke that PhD can mean Piled Higher and Deeper, in some cases)

David Wise PhD posts links to Byron Katie in his book to give her some Advertising, she posts links to his pain seminars to give him more money from his seminars.
And he is not afraid of making stuff up in print either.
As he knows people in PAIN don't have time to do some research, and see what he is saying is false.
After this, one should not believe a word that David Wise says, without triple checking it.

That is not a mistake, its carefully written, probably some type of "contra-deal" as they call it, where people promote eachother.
He knows The Work is NOT cognitive therapy, and has never been tested.
He also knows the public doesn't know any better.
And the Byron Katie referral to his seminars makes him a lot of money.

If a reporter asks Byron Katie if she is doing therapy, she says no, for legal reasons.
Then she refers to David Wise. Then if he got nailed, he would just say its a personal opinion.
But it never gets that far, as their target audience is in PAIN, and in the New Age area, where people don't seem to ask many questions.

So its yet another ugly and dishonest chapter in the book of Byron Katie.
And David Wise PhD, is getting in on the lies, it seems to fill up his pain clinic seminars, as Byron Katie targets people in PAIN, and Pain = Profit.

Of course, its also possible that David Wise PhD is completely ignorant about CT.
If that is the case, then an email to him should explain why The Work is not listed anywhere as cognitive therapy, and what is the scientific evidence for his claim in the book?
Would a college student be allowed to put that in a paper? (No!)

Why is he referring people to a website, with no evidence at all?

Does he give full disclosure about any financial arrangements he has with Byron Katie's company?
The entire thing makes him look extremely bad, and damages his credibility, even if it turns out he was duped. But in the quote being promoted by Byron Katie, he does not sound duped.
It sounds like a carefully crafted salespitch to attend his pain seminars. Cross-promotion.



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 07/22/2008 10:50AM by The Anticult.

It does appear that Dr. David Wise is in a business relationship with Byron Katie.
Where is the full-disclosure posted?

He gives her an open reference on this webpage.
So people come to them with pelvic pain, and get cross-referred to Byron Katie 9-Day and 100-Day LGAT's?
He calls The Work the best cognitive therapy, when its not listed as cognitive therapy, and has never been tested?
The red flags are flying like crazy around Dr. David Wise, and the book - A Headache in the Pelvis.

It could be a simple as Byron Katie going to see him for her own pains, and luring him into her system.
Or it could be a financial arrangement.
(notice he also refers to Fritz Perls, who was studied in great detail by the NLP guys! One day the truth is going to come out about Byron Katie...) [en.wikipedia.org]

But him saying The Work is the best cognitive therapy, shows he is either completely ignorant, or practicing persuasion and even tricking his readers with incorrect and false statements.


[www.pelvicpainhelp.com]
"Our approach is very much interested in all of these dark and negative thoughts. Why? Each negative thought perpetuates the distress of the sufferer and is rarely true when subjected to thoughtful inquiry. The method that we share in chapter four, deriving from the work of Byron Katie..."



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 07/22/2008 11:29AM by The Anticult.

What a weasel! The weasel and the cockroach, quite a pair...

I really feel sickened by this stuff, when I think back to how trusting and gullible I was, and I'll bet there are quite a lot of people like me out there. I do hope some of the Oprah people will find their way here after the radio show, and hopefully will be open enough to take in the criticisms of BK (and Tolle).



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 07/22/2008 09:09PM by helpme2times.

Embarrassment Works Better than Insight

Or: 'A Cesspool of Weirdoism.'

(Problem is, what if something doesnt look weird)

(From C:This gem is from one of the early AOL threads 1995/1996 in which people discussed the impact of Liz Harris' O Guru Guru article in the New Yorker magazine, an article meticulously fact checked, that exposed the actual history and abuses within SYDA Yoga--up to the time the article was published.)

[www.ex-cult.org]

Subj: Embarrassing, isn't it?
Date: 96-03-02 19:26:01 EST
From: Howie Sm

(First paragraph omitted only for brevity. The URL for the entire thread is available to those wishing to read it in full C)

'Howie' writes:

'I, over the years, have had proved to me over and over again this fact: while knowledge of abuses seems to have little effect on disciples, the "loss of face in the eyes of others" has a big effect.

'This itself is a sad testimony on the egotism of the SYDAites, but that's another subject.) The obsession with appearances was well illustrated by the reaction to the New Yorker article.

'People who knew of certain abuses early on but didn't change their attitudes
towards SYDA, DID CHANGE their attitudes when the New Yorker article came out publicizing the VERY SAME INFORMATION.

'Why?

'Because of the embarrasmentthey felt in the eyes of others.

T'he New Yorker was a magazine that their larger social group was aware of.

'Their coworkers in offices, their extended family members, their employers,
all see the New Yorker.

'These disciples, who had perhaps once flaunted their spirituality in their SYDA honeymoon period, suddenly had to face their social group--knowing full well that their social group had been informed by a credible source that SYDA was a cesspool of weirdoism.

' The loss of face, the failure to maintain "appearances" had an effect that the simple knowledge of allegations didn't. Indeed, SYDA Foundation's obsession with maintaining appearances is a reflection of the appearance-driven engines of their disciples. (Makeup and saris for women, suits for men . . .)

(Here, Howie makes a crucial point)

'Because the SYDAesque way of discrediting critics only works on SYDAites and not on outsiders, the disciples had to just simmer in the embarrasment that followed the appearance of the New Yorker.

'They couldn't go up to their boss and say "you believe the New Yorker because of your ego." This simmering (in embarrassment and loss of face C)really cured a lot of people.

'In other words, more than the substance of the allegations, the embarrasment in the knowledge that the allegations were known by others had an effect.

(In other words Howie could be suggesting that the impact of the New Yorker article did not necessarily arouse compassion or an ethical awakening, but produced narcissitic deflation in the self image of the devotees who flattered themselves they were superior, only to find their friends, families, coworkers and bosses staring at them aghast.

Narcissistic deflation is a serious issue--the person is threatened with
severe depression, his or her inner core is under terrible stress, anxiety can be utterly overwhelming, concentration can be affected--this is beyond mere
social embarrassment--its the psychological equivalent of a major fracture. One just wants the horror to stop and it takes rare bravery to explore the roots of it--and only a non--SYDA contaminated therapist could assist someone in that predicament--assuming the person was willing to embark on such a quest.

Problem here is if someone is narcissistically deflated, it takes guts and insight to explore one's issues in depth with a professional. All too often those who are deflated seek to re-inflate their self regard at another re-fuelling point--one that might look less weird than SYDA. In the New Age/Dharma Chic social scene, these refuelling stations abound. Someone humiliated by public exposure of abuses perpetrated by their brocade clad Indian guru could just transition to a guru who uses different lingo but wears Western clothing and isnt surrounded by Bollywood/Mogul tinsel and incense. C)

(Howie continues)'Although this scenario is of course not what everyone went through, it was what A LOT OF PEOPLE went through. I know this from testimony.

'When someone catches a glimpse of themselves as others see them, often that is a turning point. Embarrasment from the New Yorker gave many that glimpse.

'Anyway, just holding a mirror up to SYDAites is certainly a responsible way
of engaging the issues of SYDA. (H now speaks of himself)Why Howie's rhetoric?: to accurately conjure up the ludicrous appearance of SYDA calls for strong rhetoric. Now is certainly not the time for euphemism and whitewash. (end of quote)

C ponders it all. Problem is, what about human potential projects that do NOT look as obviously wierd as SYDA Yoga? I remember when Werner Erhard's EST was all the rage. The chairman of my graduate school department pushed me and other students to take it. Dr. X had a Ph.D and taught at a major US university--and yet respectable and well trained as he was, he was suckered by EST. Fortunately, none of the students took EST, so there was no one who could be favored at the expense of the rest.

(Shit, when you're overworked, low on money you have better things to do than pay a couple hundred bucks to give up a weekend and be yelled at and called an asshole, let alone denied bathroom breaks.)

Dr. X's behavior had consequences. Our administrative assistant refused to do it and her contract was not renewed. She quickly found other comparable employment within the University and has maintained it, indicating that her actual job performance was not likely an issue. Decades later she still suspects that her refusal to do EST could have led to her termination. But EST and its clones do not look from the outside, obviously weird...someone embarrassed by the New Yorker expose could have slunk off from SYDA, missed the buzz and then gotten involved in something that didnt look weird but...gave the same buzz and the same ready made social circle C)

Howie optimistically stated 12 years ago that perhaps the social embarrassment produced by the New Yorker article cured a lot of disciples who found themselves looked at askance by their larger social circle.

(Corboy speculates: Maybe the embarrassment was not enough to effect a cure. First, note on the Hindu/LGAT thread that quite a few SYDA people reportedly had a prediliction for LGATs and that according to a couple of old veterans, Werner Erhard sponsored Muktananda to the US and Muk incorporated features of EST Lgat tech into the SYDA intensives--which cost a pretty penny to attend.

So, even if devotees skulked away from SYDA because of social embarrassment triggered by the glare of exposure from the New Yorker article, they could still had lingering effects from SYDA was entrenched by use of LGAT tech concealed from them.

(Rather like contracting herpes simplex and then being vulnerable to flares if put under stress later on, after the relationship is over.)

So some devotees at least might have abandoned SYDA as a result of social embarrassment. Others might have left because they were fed up that after years of service as lowly sevites they were never invited to join the guru's inner circle.

For whatever reason--social embarrassment or frustrated ambition, or burnout, some who left SYDA and had done the intensive may have left not knowing they still had an implanted introject-- installed by elements of modern American LGAT 'tech' covertly used during the seemingly ancient Hindu rituals of the Intensive.

(A hypothesis) an implanted introject of the sort installed during the guru in your body phase of the SYDA intensive described above in an earlier post quoting another AOL correspondant...de lurker...that introject could still be in someone who left SYDA due to social embarrassment from the NYr article or left due to frustrated ambition at never being promoted within SYDA, or who was extruded and dumped in middle age--that introject could possibly serve to preformat the person to hunger and ache for another external guru, even if its one wearing business suits or Ralph Lauren casual garb, rather than gold brocade. )

Persons in such a predicament could then have gravitated toward another entity that gave nice 'buzzes', a built in social circle, and above all, looked reassuring because it looked LESS WEIRD--no saris, no guru-on-a-throne just nice reassuring people in sweaters, or sperry topsider shoes, or business suits.

Its like changing screen saver designs on your computer but still using the same virus infected operating system.

Just change the Hindu motif screen saver to one with sweet nature scenes--you still have the same cyber cooties installed--unless you find a therapist/technican from Geek Squad who has NO vested interest in supporting any guru or group but cares only about your well being and his or her personal integrity and professional ethics.

Just because deosnt look weird or foreign doesnt mean it doesnt still have the same 'tech'--as TAC has been teaching us for the past few months.)

This is why it is to be hoped that a top notch journalist will get the support of a major newspaper or magazine and write about these matters. For people tend to make planned visits to blogs and websites on an as needed basis.

By contrast magazines, TV shows, and newspapers are read by a wide social circle.

At the very least people might learn enough to make an informed decision not to attend--and avoid exposure to LGAT 'tech' administered by reassuring looking people dressed in respectable, tasteful clothes and with excellent haircuts.



Edited 6 time(s). Last edit at 07/22/2008 11:00PM by corboy.

I call it "cognitive therapy in disguise" to help you love you and accept what is... Loving What Is: Four questions that can change your life by Byron Katie.

This is what the first psychologist I went to said about BK's book, and this is also part of a review on a reading list on her website. Now, she seemed like a perfectly normal, well-educated, PhD, and she specializes in abusive relationships. She is not the first licensed psychologist I've heard recommend the likes of BK, ET, Dyer, etc. AND programs like Landmark. I don't think they really know the depth of the manipulation and deception these authors and LGAT people are pulling. This particular counselor warns people to be sure the counselors they consult with have a background in abuse. It is also necessary that anyone seeking counselling, after a mindfvck like so many on RR have experienced, ask potential counselors about their background with the types of issues we post about.

Quote
Hope
I don't think they [some licensed counselors] really know the depth of the manipulation and deception these authors and LGAT people are pulling.

Hope, I agree that sometimes even reputable counselors don't know enough about these groups and the serious implications of promoting them.

At other times as we have seen on this thread they are in fact participants and may even be looking for ways to introduce clients to their own particular group. There are counselors doing 'The Work' and involved in Syddha Yoga etc.

One counselor I had even asked me if I had read 'The Secret'! Well, as a cult survivor that was the last thing I needed. Ignorance may be bliss but is it really acceptable from a licensed professional? I don't think so.

HELPME2TIMES - I read that Byron Katie interview that you posted earlier. A couple of things jumped out at me. The first was Byron Katie telling her interviewers, "I love that you get it.". So that the whole piece was a total love-fest from start to finish.

I think we have heard her use that phrase before in other interviews? It sounds canned when you hear it repeated in several articles like that. As though she is not genuinely responding to people, but has prepared answers instead. I thought that 'being present' meant responding to people genuinely and openly in each new situation. Or maybe that's too much like hard work, even for an 'enlightened' being.

The other thing was her husband saying that he 'cooked' her (he meant that he had distilled the essence of her teaching into her books). But a phrase like he 'cooked the books' has a sinister overtone and may have given away more of the truth than he intended, as in 'I cooked all this up' !

You are right, it is really awful to read people being so sycophantic with not one critical question in the whole interview. Reminds me of the way I used to think. In a New-Age mindset when you think like that, you believe you are honoring heart over intellect ... as though the mind serves no reasonable purpose whatsoever.



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 07/23/2008 02:36AM by solea13.

Oh and by the way it says in the interview that her new book is targeted towards children:

Byron Katie: "Yea. Parenting and children. I'm considering calling it Child's Play." [ ooh!s ]

Doing 'turnarounds' on children at a crucial time in their development when their identities are still fluid, being formed. This is quite a scary thought.



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 07/23/2008 05:33AM by solea13.

Oh right, there was that scary business about targeting children.

I can really freak myself out about this BK stuff, so I need to remember that just as I woke up and did an internet search for critiques of Byron Katie, so can others.

Also, children tend to have good b.s. detectors, so there's that going for them. Plus how many of them will rebel against continually doing the work?! Hopefully a lot, if not all!

I certainly got sick and tired of writing out all that stuff on those worksheets. And it got so repetitive before long. The work is a freaking lot of work!!