Next, Albert Ellis' essay continues, from above:
MAIN DIFFERENCES FROM OTHER SCHOOLS
1. De-emphasis of early childhood. While REBT accepts the fact that neurotic states are sometimes
originally learned or aggravated by early teaching or irrational beliefs by one’s family and by society, it holds that
these early-acquired irrationalities are not automatically sustained over the years by themselves.
Instead, they are very actively and creatively re-instilled by the individuals themselves. In many
cases the therapist spends very little time on the clients’ parents or family upbringing; and yet helps them to bring
about significant changes in their disturbed patterns of living. The therapist demonstrates that no matter what the clients’
basic irrational philosophy of life, nor when and how they acquired it, they are presently disturbed because they still believe
this self-defeating world- and self-view. If they will observe exactly what they are irrationally thinking in the present,
and will challenge and question these self-statements they will usually improve significantly.
2. Emphasis on deep philosophical change and scientific thinking. Because of its belief that human
neurotic disturbance is largely ideologically or philosophically based, REBT strives for a thorough-going philosophic reorientation
of a people’s outlook on life, rather than for a mere removal of any of their mental or psychosomatic symptoms. It teaches
the clients, for example, that human adults do not need to be accepted or loved, even though it is highly desirable that they
be. REBT encourages individuals to be healthily sad or regretful when they are rejected, frustrated, or deprived. But it tries
to teach them how to overcome feelings of intense hurt, self-deprecation, and depression. As in science, clients are shown
how to question the dubious hypotheses that they construct about themselves and others. If they believe (as alas, millions
of us do), that they are worthless because they perform certain acts badly, they are not merely taught to ask, “What
is really bad about my acts?” and “Where is the evidence that they are wrong or unethical?” More importantly,
they are shown how to ask themselves, “Granted that my acts may be mistaken, why am I a totally bad person for performing
them? Where is the evidence that I must always be right in order to consider myself worthy? Assuming that it is preferable
for me to act well rather than badly, why do I have to do what is preferable?”
Similarly, when people perceive (let us suppose, correctly) the erroneous and unjust acts of others,
and become enraged at these others, they are shown how to stop and ask themselves, “Why is my hypothesis that the people
who committed these errors and injustices are no damned good a true hypothesis? Granted that it would be better if they acted
more competently or fairly, why should they have to do what would be better?”
REBT teaches that to be human is to be fallible, and that if we are to get on in life with minimal
upset and discomfort, we would better accept this reality — and then unanxiously work hard to become a little less fallible.
3. Use of psychological homework. REBT agrees with most
Freudian, neo-Freudian, Adlerian, and Jungian schools that acquiring insight, especially so-called emotional insight, into
the source of their neurosis is a most important part of people’s corrective teaching. It distinguishes sharply, however,
between so-called intellectual and emotional insight, and operationally defines emotional insight as individuals’ knowing
or seeing the cause of their problems and working, in a determined and energetic manner, to apply this knowledge to the solution
of these problems. The rational emotive behavior therapist helps clients to acknowledge that there is usually no other way
for him to get better but by their continually observing, questioning, and challenging their own belief-systems, and by their
working and practicing to change their own irrational beliefs by verbal and behavioral counter-propagandizing activity. In
REBT, actual homework assignments are frequently agreed upon in individual and group therapy. Assignments may include dating
a person whom the client is afraid to ask for a date; looking for a new job; experimentally returning to live with a husband
with whom one has previously continually quarrelled; etc. The therapist quite actively tries to encourage clients to undertake
such assignments as an integral part of the therapeutic process.
The
REBT practitioner is able to give clients unconditional rather than conditional positive regard because the REBT philosophy
holds that no humans are to be damned for anything, no matter how execrable their acts may be. Because of the therapist’s
unconditional acceptance of them as a human, and actively teaching clients how to fully accept themselves, clients are able
to express their feelings more openly and to stop rating themselves even when they acknowledge the inefficiency or immorality
of some of their acts.
In many highly important ways, then,
rational emotive behavior therapy utilizes expressive-experimental methods and behavioral techniques. It is not, however,
primarily interested in helping people ventilate emotion and feel better, but in showing them how they can truly get better,
and lead to happier, non-self-defeating, self-actualized lives.
~~~
...
~~~
POSTSCRIPT BY JIM BYRNE:
In REBT we try to identify the beliefs (Bs) that clients are using to upset
themselves, and then we try to get the client to change those Bs to something more logical, realistic and self-helping.
This process of "disputing irrational beliefs" - or "debating the client's irrationalities" to encourage
them to change them - is a highly skilled process. It is important that new therapists are trained by skilled trainers, who
can teach them the difference between assertive and aggressive confrontations; the difference
between disputing in an "Adult" fashion, rather then a "Parent" fashion;
and who can teach them a range of skilful questioning and reflection processes. (The process
known as "Socratic questioning" is really a "blah phrase" to which nothing precise is
attached. Plato's-Socrates was not a skilful questioner in a therapeutic sense, in that his goal was to demonstrate
that his interlocutors did not know what they were talking about! Jim Byrne has begun the process of engaging
in a critical enquiry regarding questions and their use,
here).
Questions can be used for five basic functions: (1) to focus the
attention of the client on something useful/valuable/interesting, therapeutically speaking; (2) to cause
their thinking to start up; (3) to ask them for information; (4) to give
them information, indirectly, by rhetorical inquiry; and to cause their thinking to come to a conclusion.
Those question types can also be combined into two part questions, e.g. to focus attention and to collect information.
(See: Nierenberg, G.I., 1987, The Complete Negotiator, London: Souvenir Press). Asking clients for "REBT
answers" which have not yet been taught to them seems to me to be futile and abusive!
Beware: Asking questions can trigger anxious responses
in clients. Remember those years of being quizzed in school, so the teacher could "make you wrong", and your peers
could chuckle at your expense? That is still hanging around in the memory banks of many if not most therapy clients!
A bit of empathy should help here.
Some
counselling and therapy students worry about the ethical implications of the confrontation of clients with the unpleasant
reality that it is not so much the client's adversities that are causing their emotional upsets as much as it is their irrational
attitudes towards those unpleasant activating realities. (But, of course, actually it's both!) This
question was recently addressed in a Google Answer, here.
To
find out more about REBT, please take a look at the 'What is REBT?' page;
Or, the About Albert Ellis page.
~~~
Homepage
Site map
Site description
The happiness blog.
The Institute for CENT.
~~~