Paul Hamburg wrote:

> There are times, remarkably enough, when problems do not call for
> surgery, nor medicine, nor statistical verification. A place remains,
> and I dare say will always remain, for poetry, literature, art, and
> compassion. When I feel troubled, I would rather seek these than the
> assistance of the empiricist. And at my work, I would rather offer them,
> as best as I can, than pretend that multivariate analysis can explain
> the dilemmas of human existence and relationship.
>
> Paul Hamburg
>

Fair enough. I agree with what you say completely. It is what I would want for myself. But
I suffer no great pain and I manage my life well, although some on this list might
disagree.

But-when a patient is mentally ill and when the service offered purports to treat diagnosed
mental illnesses-then empiricism is required. Feeling troubled is one thing, but when the
issue is treatment of, lets say, borderline personality disorder, then the treatment
offered should be shown empirically to have a beneficial effect. This is particularly
important because there is a treatment extant for BPD which does have such empirical
verification. Science and empiricism aside, it would be unethical to fail to inform a
client about alternative treatments which do have such empirical validation when the
treatment one offers does not. In fact, some states have passed "truth in therapy" laws
which require that therapists inform their clients about the results of empirical tests of
the therapy being offered as well as the results of  empirical tests of other therapies.

Howard D. Eisman, Ph.D.

Our clients should have the right to decide. Many would not prefer poetry, literature, and
art if a quicker, and surer method to end their suffering exists.

Howard D. Eisman, Ph.D/


>
> Howard Eisman wrote:
>
> >  > Were I to require surgery, I would hope that the operation would be based on the
> >  > findings of that old nasty reductionistic empiricism. I'll bet that Dr. Hamburg
> >  > feels the same way. Were I to require a form of psychotherapy, should the
> >  > psychotherapy be based on looser standards that the surgery? Many Psychotherapists
> >  > would say, yes! it should. How would we feel if surgeons said the same thing.
> >  >
> >  > Howard D. Eisman, Ph.D.
> >  >
> >  > Paul Hamburg wrote:
> >  >
> >
> >>  >> It is interesting to stop for a moment and speculate: would empirical
> >>  >> science offer us an explanation for the nastiness in its defenders that
> >>  >> has so obviously wounded many list members? Or would any exploration of
> >>  >> this interpersonal experience require recourse to precisely those
> >>  >> non-empirical insights that a discipline like psychoanalysis (or
> >>  >> literary critical theory, or philosophy) offer to any of us with some
> >>  >> remnant of openmindedness to receive them? It amazes me that the social
> >>  >> pseudo-science arguments still find advocates in the 21st century----the
> >>  >> cult of reductionist empiricism is as powerful as any other close-minded
> >>  >> belief system. Alas.
> >>  >>
> >>  >> Paul Hamburg MD
> >>  >> Harvard Medical School
> >>  >>
> >>  >> L Miller wrote:
> >>  >>
> >>
> >>>  >>> Dr Eisman,
> >>>  >>>
> >>>  >>> There's no trick involved...  nor is an ad hominem attack on you intended.
> >>>  >>>
> >>>  >>> What I am trying to communicate, as tactfully as possible, is my take on
> >>>  >>> your comments--that your comments about women social workers who have
> >>>  >>> undergone psychoanalytic training, who are supported by husbands, etc etc
> >>>  >>> etc are gross generalizations, and smack of misogyny, and other
> >>>  >>> negativeness to me.  I sure don't know if there was some incident or
> >>>  >>> experience that stimulated these comments, maybe you could help us out with
> >>>  >>> that?  I am curious as to the vehemence of your comments.  I have not had
> >>>  >>> the experience that you describe and it is a mystery to me why/how you
> >>>  >>> would come to say the things that you have.  Louise
> >>