I'm interested to hear thoughts about Cognitive Behavioral Therapy. Is it what LGATs "teach"? If not, how is it different? I've just started reading "Feeling Good" by David Burns, M.D. and I see similarities with LGAT "tools". Is this another example of LGATs taking a good idea and twisting it into an unrecognizable version?

Any thoughts?

Thanks,

skeptic

LGATs teach participants to let go of critical thinking. CBT helps people recognize and change thinking that affects behavior in negative ways. For instance, if someone is not reaching a specific goal because they automatically think they're not as smart as the next person, CBT teaches people to see that automatic message, analyze where it comes from and then change the thought and the behavior. LGATs just tell you to be unreasonable.

LGATs will twist CBT and RET into bastardized versions for their own benefit and claim their methods are based on legitimate practices.

My former therapist, who practices CBT, is an introduction leader for Landmark, as I learned about a year-and-a-half into our time together. Most of what we did in therapy, as far as I can tell from retrospective research and what I can remember from our two years of sessions, was actual CBT. However, there were a lot of times when she started delving into "being present to" exercises and calling my assertiveness (one of the things I was working on developing) "enrolling" the person.

During our last session ever, she told me that I should sign up for Landmark because it would be a great "continuation of [my] growth." I just nodded and smiled politely, because I didn't want to engage my shrink in debate the last time we met--after all, she [i:cc45124c52]did [/i:cc45124c52]help me through some pretty crippling anxiety issues. Still, I'm glad that our time together is "over," so that now I feel more ready to explore the sorts of exercises she assigned me and whether or not they were actual CBT or Lekkie "technology." I'm just grateful that I didn't become a Landroid, because I have seen firsthand what happens to a person when they become too heavily involved. It's actually quite sad.

Obviously, it is quite non-kosher to be recruiting patients to programs like these, but it seems to be becoming more common--I have a friend who works in a family doctor's office, and he apparently tries to "enroll" his patients and coworkers, too. If you go to the ILovePossibility website, they have a mission statement promising world transformation by the year 2020 (sounds mighty Orwellian to me), or some such nonsense. I wonder if the workplace peer pressure is part of the 2020 "effort."

Thanks! I'm trying to discern the ways in which LGATs twist CBT. One twist: in "Feeling Good" (I'm still in the beginning), Burns' point is the issue of cognitive distortion. Isn't that exactly what LGATs "teach"? The first cognitive distortion Burns cites is: All-or-nothing, black-and-white thinking. Gee, that's what I learned to do in CONtext Associated (Randy Revell's Lifespring spin-off)!

The twisting is so tricky it's hard for me to see. The counterfeit looks like the real thing, yet I know there's a catch somewhere. I'll keep looking, and am interested in others' thoughts too.

I have used David Burn's "Feeling Good Handbook" for many years & find it very helpful.

As I see it, LGAT's use a lot of "black or white" or absolutist thinking. They may say [u:a5d83e865e]all[/u:a5d83e865e] of your problems are caused by your cognitive distortions, (or "programs" of whatever). This would be an example of black or white thinking. I think Burns would say that a more realistic "shades of gray" thought would be, "Sometimes my thinking about certain events is distorted in some way and it is useful to identify, and replace those automatic thoughts with a more realistic appraisal. Sometimes my thinking is accurate and relatively free of distortions." [b:a5d83e865e]The important thing is to discern which is which.[/b:a5d83e865e]

Burns lists 10 common forms of distorted thinking to check for, but [u:a5d83e865e]you[/u:a5d83e865e] are the one who decides whether the distortion is present. He doesn't say that all of our thoughts are distorted. He emphasizes that "Healthy negative feelings are based on a realistic appraisal of your circumstances." "There are many times when negative feelings are healthy and appropriate. Learning when 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."

When I run the tenants of The Release Technique and The Sedona Method, (which my husband got sucked in to), through the distortions list I find many of the distortions Burns identifies and I would even add a few to the list.

I would say that CBT is one of the best ways of actually getting out of the LGAT mindset.
Of course, CBT can be abused, and distorted, and I am sure people are doing it.
But proper CBT is the exact opposite of the LGAT, in that its about critical thinking, and testing your beliefs, being realistic, flexible, non-manic, etc.

David Burns, in my view, is legit.
The Feeling Good Workbook is even clearer, in my view.

A terrific, and simple CBT book is "Mind Over Mood".

For the technical minded, Dr. Aaron Beck, who is the founder of that school of CBT, has written many books. That gives the foundation, and the foundation is based on actual scientific based testing.

but I would suggest that a person finds a highly trained CBT therapist, referred from the Beck Institute, and learns how to do CBT step by step, one-on-one, if possible. [www.beckinstitute.org]

I seem to recall there was a thread in the Recovery section about CBT? anyone remember that, or know where it is?

I should have typed...

The Feeling Good Handbook, by David Burns.

these books are available now used for a few bucks.

one important difference is that cbt is well established in the scientific community. other derivative therapies are not. it seems a lot of gurus stumble onto CBT techniques and develop them into absolutist philosophy. QL, stay strong