Friendly rapport and conflict...

• A Different Slant on CMT, Part I by Vic Comello, 11/14/98
  • An Impossible Profession by Donald Smith, 11/18/98
    • Agreement, to an Extent by Vic Comello, 11/19/98
      
      

Vic, it is not clear to me whether your reply immediately above was intended as a reply to my posting ("Or falsify it...") or not. In any case, I want you to know that I was not intending my commentary in that posting to be instructive to you or to anyone in particular but to everyone in general.

I think I understand that you have a very friendly regard for the work of Joseph Weiss and for those who take most of their guidance as therapists from him. I regard your analysis of dreams as a useful contribution to the theory. I believe you also show a very high regard for the therapeutic skill and care of CMT therapists, as do I.

One of the (many) reasons I think they are so good is that their theory does not make use of the concept of resistance, a concept that I regard as one loaded with countertransference meaning and one that represents an anti-scientific outlook.

As to your continuing effort to see CMT expand to include your own emphasis on intra-personal as well as inter-personal dimensions of the human being's life, I believe you have suggested several useful ideas toward the evolution of a fully comprehensive theory of human personality. This would appear to me to be your aim.

I have been watching the development of your thinking on this forum and would like to let you know my opinion so far of your efforts here.

If you will forgive me for presuming to arrogate to myself a right to express an opinion about your motives, it seems to me that your apparent admiration and appreciation and respect for CM therapists, and for Joseph Weiss's inspired vision of human nature and dedication to empirical validation, has engaged your pordigious mental acumen as well as your desire to see CMT be the best theory possible. I believe you want to see this aim achieved both as a way of expressing appreciation, admiration and respect and as a way of being a valuable part of this really uniquely creative theory. I admire such aspirations.

Your effort so far to explain why it is important to include considerations of intra-individual conflicts are interesting and of some value. I have found such ideas as you have presented them here to be personally useful insights, too boot.

I would like to second Jessica's suggestion that you develop your ideas in the fashion of devising what may result in basically your own more comprehensive theory of human personality. Thus, I do not regard what you have suggested so far as alternatives nor as contradictions nor as improvements on what is already so good about CMT.

What I see you having is some additional ideas that may be able to address issues that CMT may not address. Thus, if your purpose is to evolve a more comprehensive theory, I believe you are moving along in that direction. So far, I think that CMT already accounts well for what it purports to account for with its inter-personal explanations. If, in trying to evolve a still more comprehensive theory (one that could purportedly account for things CMT does not already account for), it would seem to me to be necessary to show why inter-personal conflict fails to make an adeuate accounting. So far as I can tell, whatever developmental derailments that intra-personal conflict accounts for are either just as well or better exlained by CMT's inter-personal accounting.

Although the perspective you offer of also considering these developmental derailments in light of intra-personal conflict as well does add a richness of more comprehensive meaning to understanding the full significance of one's subjective world. It is in this more comprehensive personal meaning of one's developmental derailments that I have found your ideas personally helpful. Thank you for that.

The struggle to form a FULLY comprehensive theory of human nature is a tremendous but magnificent challenge that has been a daunting one for persons braver than you or I. Woops, I should speak for myself.

• This WAS Surprising by Doug William, 11/20/98