Experiences/thoughts on CBT

[bamboozle]

Or 'CBT and introverted judging.'

CBT seems to be fairly mainstream nowadays. Just in case anyone doesn't know what it is, CBT stands for 'cognitive behavioural therapy'. As I understand it, it's a form of therapy that encourages changes mood and behaviour by assuming that action leads from thoughts and feelings. By changing thought and feelings, behavioural patterns can be changed. It seems to be encouraged for sufferers of depression, anxiety disorders and the like — things that have a strong connection to thinking processes.

I was surprised to find little mention of CBT here on the forums, particularly in the threads to do with INTPs and negative emotions, actually. CBT seems like such an introverted judging process. One acknowledges a situation or state of mind; gets at the root and assumptions of one's perspective; one questions/disputes those assumptions — and so changes behaviour. To my mind, it sounds like it trains people to flex their Fi. If Fi can be equated to self-awareness, sense of self, connection with priorities and values, then CBT encourages all those things. And yet, it's not so far off what Ti always does, is it?

Okay, it's not exactly the same — you're working with different material — but getting at the heart of a structure (of ideas) is what Ti does best, right?

So, I was wondering: are there those who have found CBT actually kind of makes sense because it's familiar? Or is it just completely alien? What are your stories? Fi-doms more than welcome to contribute, too, if they're around!



Personally (and obviously, my stance is implied by my post!), it kind of makes sense. In the same way that I've seen INFPs talk about Fi in a way that feels strangely familiar to my Ti, CBT makes a kind of sense. Bloody tiring, though, because it is asking me to think about things I don't usually.


(Noob here, by the way. Hi!)

 

[Artsu Tharaz]

It looks painful.



edit: oh wait nvm. Yeah CBT sounds pretty good. However, something was always off about it for me, and this may have to do with it being a Ji process. I wouldn't use it personally, but I can see it being of great use to many others.

 

[scorpiomover]

I've had several different types of therapy over the years. CBT was the best by far.

There is group CBT. I was given 1-2-1 CBT for some reason.

It's a very practical therapy. The one I had, looked at my thoughts, emotions and behaviour, as if they were parts of lots of different cyclical processes, with the ones that were causing me problems being a cycle that was making sense, but was going in a different direction to the way I would have wanted it to go. It was a bit like debugging an event-driven program.

The therapist started out by asking me to lay out some goals for the therapy, to measure the success of the therapy. Ironically, after the therapy, I noticed extremely high improvement in several personal problems that no other therapy had made a dent in, but not much change at all in the problems we were supposed to be solving.

It definitely worked for me, so much so, that I'd recommend anyone giving it at least a try.

 

[digital angel]

I think it can be helpful in certain situations. It just depends on the person receiving therapy.

 

[bamboozle]

Thanks for the responses .

So, would you think that it's kind of like Fi insofar as it asks you to reframe values (as opposed to ideas)? I'm curious particularly about whether other people thought it was an Fi kind of thing? And, if so, if Fi is kind of like Ti, then? I know that I have a better grasp on my friend who feels more comfortable with Fe; CBT as an idea makes more sense to me than it does her. I suppose I was wondering about my understanding of the experience of Fi, too (but I don't know if anyone here can answer that).

Or, to broaden things a little, any experiences with INTPs trying to develop Fi? What's that like?

However, something was always off about it for me, and this may have to do with it being a Ji process.

As in, it was too similar? Too different? Too familiar and too different and so just disorienting :P?

 

[Roni]

I found it extremely useful too. I've now adopted it as a normal part of my brain games.

Not an Fi thing for me at all. Quite the opposite. It allows me to manage my mood by tapping into exactly the same second guessing I've always done with my ideas. Very Ti I think.
The only issue I had at first was resistance to the idea of controlling my thoughts. I don't know if that's typically INTP or just my own stubborness.
I stopped resisting once I realised 'mood affects thought affects mood' was something I already knew about myself.
After that I observed a broadscale improvement almost identical to scorpionmover's experience.

It also helped to remind myself I don't need to reject bad thoughts completely (just because something's negative doesn't mean it isn't true), I just need to be considerate of my current mood before I decide to explore something that will bring me down.
This in itself was a bit of a life-changing revelation for me. Fi types probably do it automatically.

It did ruin my 'progress' in developing my Fi though. I realised all my emotional achievements were really just the result of my Ti objectively analysing my emotional state. Since that works just fine for me I no longer have much interest in 'developing' into something else.

 

[bamboozle]

I've now adopted it as a normal part of my brain games.

Haha, yeah. I've kinda been trying my hand at developing different functions and at least Fi is introverted, too. Not like Fe… Working on that.

Not an Fi thing for me at all. Quite the opposite. It allows me to manage my mood by tapping into exactly the same second guessing I've always done with my ideas. Very Ti I think.

I don't know about that, actually. I mean, it's understandable that an INTP employing Fi is going to look different to an INFP using it. That's why shadow functions manifest themselves differently in different types. And, besides, from the sounds of it, the INFPs do a lot of negotiating, too. This is what an INFP said about negotiating emotions:

You consider why someone upset you; often, it is NOT directly related to them. This is how emotions don't make sense; they pop up at unrelated moments. You have to dig deeper; you can't take them at face value.

(From this thread wherein a Ti-user tries to get an idea of Fi from Fi-users. Post #23. The two parties confuse one another for a bit, but they eventually come to an understanding, heheh.) Of course, the Fi-users also seem to do things that I labour very consciously over but…that's why they're Fi-doms :P. To me, the only difference seems to be where Ti-users and Fi-users focus their efforts.

The only issue I had at first was resistance to the idea of controlling my thoughts. I don't know if that's typically INTP or just my own stubborness.

I was actually okay with it. The only thing I'm averse to is having my thoughts shut down on me. The fact that this felt like a Ti-ish thing anyway was a kind of comfort.



Thanks for your response, Roni . Thought it interesting.

 

[naama]

My opinion about it(based on our clinical psychology class) is that its good for some disorders, but not for everyone. works especially well on OCD and stuff like that

 

[Sijov]

While I haven't had experience with CBT per se, my bible study has been working through a self help book based around it Its called telling yourself the truth by William Backus and Marie Chapian. It's a pretty bad book, with the most hokey of examples and plenty of self-help rah-rah-rah Jesus-loves-you that goes straight past INTPs, the core values are still that of CBT, however.

The extroverts and feelers in the group are getting lots out of it, but I'm really not. I find that I had already internalised the fact that I have control over what I think and feel, and that I can manipulate that to get a response that I want, so the book is travelling over ground that I've already covered. I find it quite easy to go inside and figure out how I'm feeling (Fi) and then figure out why I'm feeling that way, and what I can do about it (Ti-Ne).

My understanding if Fi is still mostly me applying Ti to the problem. I find the principles behind CBT useful, and I use them all the time, though if I were seeking therapy, I'd likely seek another method, as I'd want tools I was not familiar with rather than tools I already use.

 

[Jordan~]

I went through CBT for depression. I found it useless. As I understand it, it seeks to change ways of thinking, or 'schemata'. It seems to assume that the patient's first priority is to be cured, or at least that they have no higher priorities that are in conflict with that goal - in my case, I regarded my depression as a necessary consequence of an obligation that was more important than me.

Maybe I had a bad therapist, though - in retrospect, I can see what would have been necessary to get through to me. Her approach was to try to convince me that I should be my highest priority, which seems loathesome to me, but I can see that the greater priority required me to be well, anyway, though I'd failed to recognise that.

I'll probably need to start it again, for ADHD this time, which should at least be a far simpler problem to solve. Maybe it'll be more successful this time. Or maybe they'll give me a different sort of therapy. I can't say I liked CBT very much (I thought it was a little bit ridiculous, in fact, and I couldn't imagine how it worked for most people - it seemed they'd have to be far simpler than people ever are), but my mind's not closed to the possibility that it might work.

I can see why it might be called an Fi thing. If the process by which it's supposed to work is Fi, being used on someone with Fi in the dominant or secondary position, it would have to be aligned to the dictats of Fi to begin with or it would never work. The goal of being cured must be compatible with the principle-derived obligations the Fi feels, or else the entire mental framework that leads to those obligations has to be dismantled and rebuilt.

 

[naama]

I went through CBT for depression. I found it useless. As I understand it, it seeks to change ways of thinking, or 'schemata'. It seems to assume that the patient's first priority is to be cured, or at least that they have no higher priorities that are in conflict with that goal - in my case, I regarded my depression as a necessary consequence of an obligation that was more important than me.

Maybe I had a bad therapist, though - in retrospect, I can see what would have been necessary to get through to me. Her approach was to try to convince me that I should be my highest priority, which seems loathesome to me, but I can see that the greater priority required me to be well, anyway, though I'd failed to recognise that.

I'll probably need to start it again, for ADHD this time, which should at least be a far simpler problem to solve. Maybe it'll be more successful this time. Or maybe they'll give me a different sort of therapy. I can't say I liked CBT very much (I thought it was a little bit ridiculous, in fact, and I couldn't imagine how it worked for most people - it seemed they'd have to be far simpler than people ever are), but my mind's not closed to the possibility that it might work.

I can see why it might be called an Fi thing. If the process by which it's supposed to work is Fi, being used on someone with Fi in the dominant or secondary position, it would have to be aligned to the dictats of Fi to begin with or it would never work. The goal of being cured must be compatible with the principle-derived obligations the Fi feels, or else the entire mental framework that leads to those obligations has to be dismantled and rebuilt.

CBT for depression? sounds like its not really the right kind of therapy for that.. for adhd on the other hand its way more suitable, from my limites knowledge about the subject, it sounds like the best therapy for adhd.

For depression analytical psychotherapy(jungian), regular psychotherapy(more freudian based), client-centered therapy(might fit well for INFP), existential therapy or gestalt therapy would sound way more suitable to me.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Person-centered_therapy
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Existential_therapy
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gestalt_therapy
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Psychoanalysis#Treatment
http://www.4therapy.com/life-topics/therapists-perspectives/brief-introduction-jungian-therapy-2634

 

[legwork]

Three years and three separate forms of therapy to help with my anxiety issues. Thoughts:

CBT - Anxious and negative thoughts were discussed and disputed during weekly sessions, but emphasis placed in 1) pushing myself into anxious situations, and 2) begin challenging anxiety-provoking thoughts on my own on the spot when they occur. Therapist had me take a job as a restaurant server. Lasted only a month but made huge improvement. It works well and fast but takes up a lot of attention and motivation.

Group therapy - kinda fun, but didn't help much. It was six of us, I think one of them had prodromal signs of schizophrenia. He would tell us stories of hearing voices inside trash cans.

ACT (Acceptance and commitment therapy) - worked best for me. Therapist was great. This is very oversimplified, but basically, any anxious issues I brought up during sessions, therapist would respond with "according to who?" With ACT, thoughts are given far less importance than in CBT, and instead greater emphasis is placed on whether or not I'm aware of my thoughts (as opposed to being carried away by them). And to examine whether thoughts are helpful or not and congruent with values.