CBT is only a "quick fix" because CBT has a concrete agreed-upon end goal from beginning of therapy until therapy is ended, is results oriented and takes much less time than many other forms of therapy. CBT doesn't fit the typical definition of a "quick fix" in that it is typically very effective and usually has low rates of recurrence among those treated with it.
Originally Posted by jk55299
Perhaps what you're having issues with is the idea that you don't need to know where a maladaptive process comes from in order to change it into something more beneficial.
"Pride" is a very misleading translation here, as we see in your later comment when you suggest that Aristotle's ethical system advocates selfishness. The Greek term is better rendered as "great-mindedness" or "great-souledness." The Latin-based equivalent word in English is "magnanimity," which also derives from "great-souledness." Aristotle's view on this is that a truly excellent person, one who lives well and does well, will have all of the virtues (including intellectual virtues and moral virtues), and will thereby be deserving of reputation, success, honors, etc. Given that such a person has an honest and accurate self-appraisal, the person will recognize that they are worthy of these. But this doesn't mean that they will be arrogant about it. This would be what he calls "empty vanity" and it is the vice of excess just as undervaluing yourself is a vice of deficiency in Aristotle's view.
Originally Posted by Son of Thunder
No, just being different from the next person or having more pride than the next person doesn't constitute mental illness.
Originally Posted by Devil
Please Note: Just to be clear, the following are general theoretical points, NOT an attempt to comment about any person in the thread or on the forum:
However, when someone's assessment of their own abilities, perception of their own behaviors and those of others, and understanding of their relation to other people and institutions tracks reality poorly, those are good indicators that the person may be suffering from a disorder.
In addition, when someone's narcissistic inclinations interfere with their being able to function in away that allows them to pursue their goals and to interact with the people in their life with whom they want to interact, etc., that seems to me to constitute good grounds to think that their narcissism is at the level of a disorder.
I'm not attempting a medical definition here. Rather, I'm suggesting that if one's "ego" (not in Freud's sense but in the popular sense) is bloated enough that it seriously distorts how one experiences and remembers things or interferes with one's ability to function, then that's a problem worth getting help with.
Lacan has never made any sense to me.
I don't think that CBT is necessarily a "quick fix." The way that CBT plays out in research literature is to some extent an artifact of research design (e.g. a well-controlled trial has to have operationalized goals and a set "dose" of therapy etc.). In normal practice a person might see a "CBT" therapist for 8-12 sessions or for a year or more, depending on what the individual might need.