Re: psychotherapeutic conceptions of 'truth'
garyb@pics.com
Fri, 19 Apr 1996 12:44:14
Hi folks- Just got your interesting note re: truth and psychoanalysis, etc.
I'm not a therapist, per se. But I've worked with this issue myself. Perhaps
a few comments from me might be of a little help. May I....
'truth' is, itself, a sound we humans make, when we utter in certain
tongues. hence it can be said to begin and end with us (i.e., not dogs, cats,
etc.) So the real question, perhaps, is: what is the nature of 'truth,' as we
humans have come to know/agree on it, over time? That we could take as our
baseline in evaluating claims that we, or others, have come up with it, in any
given case...such as in psychotherapy, for one example.
For myself, I call 'truth ' a distinction. like all distinctions, it
enables us to see something we could not, before we invented it. In this case,
it enables us to distinguish the 'non-true' from the 'true.' At its heart, I
would suggest, because of our PCP-documented nature, we can never KNOW --- like
absolute, all-time FACT --- that something is so, or true. Hence 'truth ' must
be, ultimately, an opinion. But an opinion grounded, as best we can do it, in
the discernable current facts of the matter. And it must be, therefore, more
or less replicable, as in science and experimentation.
When our 'truth' is less than this, then I believe we must admit that it
is simply our current preferred interpretation. And my hunch is, that where
human motivation and psychotherapy are concerned, that is wgat passes for
'truth.'
Hope this is fruitful in your quest. would welcome reactions.
best wishes..... gary blanchard
%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%