Read Turning Freud Upside Down: Gospel Perspectives on Psychotherapy's Fundamental Problems by Aaron P. Jackson Online

turning-freud-upside-down-gospel-perspectives-on-psychotherapy-s-fundamental-problems

Latter-day Saints often worry about psychotherapy negatively affecting their souls—for good reason. Even religious therapists may promote anti-gospel principles. This hazard is particularly extreme when therapists are unaware of their practicing assumptions. Now counselors—and their clients—can go to Turning Freud Upside Down for a gospel corrective to that problem.No mereLatter-day Saints often worry about psychotherapy negatively affecting their souls—for good reason. Even religious therapists may promote anti-gospel principles. This hazard is particularly extreme when therapists are unaware of their practicing assumptions. Now counselors—and their clients—can go to Turning Freud Upside Down for a gospel corrective to that problem.No mere Freud basher, this book indicts basic concepts riddling much of traditional psychotherapy.“If you want to think about psychotherapy in dramatically new ways, read Turning Freud Upside Down. As its title suggests, this book upends traditional psychological dogma. Far more important, it also advances alternative, gospel-based views of human behavior and personality. LDS and other Christian clinicians who feel lost in the trenches will find this book an indispensable map for moving further away from secular assumptions and techniques to a more spiritual base. I eagerly await the forthcoming volumes in this series.”...

Title : Turning Freud Upside Down: Gospel Perspectives on Psychotherapy's Fundamental Problems
Author :
Rating :
ISBN : 9780842525947
Format Type : Paperback
Number of Pages : 256 Pages
Status : Available For Download
Last checked : 21 Minutes ago!

Turning Freud Upside Down: Gospel Perspectives on Psychotherapy's Fundamental Problems Reviews

  • Scott
    2018-11-27 16:14

    I haven't read the entire book, but the chapter by Brent D. Slife and J. Reber (also available at http://brentdslife.com/article/index.... in .pdf format) is one of my favorites.Slife's ideas in this chapter have revolutionized the way I think about truth, ethics, and my relationship with Diety. He is one of the brand of postmodernists in psychology that heavily fight the "anything goes" more popular brand of postmodernism--he's not a relativist. Instead, he tries to argue for a postmodern ethics based on relationships--how the connection between people demands responsibility toward and for one another. So rather than being based on moral absolutes that are free from context, he proposes (like Levinas, Gergen, Bauman, Warner, and some of my other favorite philisophical/ethical writers) an ethics that is based on relationships.I appreciate the distinction (between absolutist ethics and relational ethics) because I think that it can be easily adapted to refect the unique LDS understanding of morality. Let me set up the context first. I feel that there is a strong moralistic faction in the LDS community that seems to believe that there are "eternal principles" that are absolute, exist independent of God--even exist above God (I've heard my own mother say that God is God because He follows eternal principles, not the other way around)--and that we, like God, have an eternal destiny that is dependent on how well we learn to live by these "eternal principles."But I perceive that there is also a lot in the Gospel that suggests that a "relational ethics" (which Gergen and others describe) is more appropriate for our unique LDS understanding of God and truth, rather than an absolutist ethics.For example, we follow Jesus not because He points us to the truth, but because He actually IS "the way, the truth, and the life." If we want to know what is true for us, we don't need to consult abstract principles (i.e., "what would 'honesty' dictate," or "what would 'responsibility' suggest is the right path?"). Instead, we can actually go to the Truth-giver and find out from Him what is true and right--that is a very relationally-contexted idea of truth, and very different from the relativism and absolutism that are battling it out for dominance in contemporary Christianity.If "eternal principles" are the highest truth out there, then we should be worshipping them, rather than God. It's just another form of idolatry.But if we have an LDS understanding of truth (truth that is constantly being revealed, not just static in an unchangeable canon), which is impossible to separate from our unique epistemology (revelation: we believe that we can receive direct answers to prayer, that we can be lead daily--and even hourly--by the Spirit, that God is always mindful of us and interested in directing us, and we aspire to having a prayer in our heart at all times--essentially a two-way open line of communication), then I believe that it is not "eternal principles" that we look to for guidance or inspiration, but a living, responding, relationally-connected Father in Heaven (and the Son and Spirit that are indistinguishable from Him in every meaningful aspect except that of being separate personages).I'd rather find Jesus in a Sunday School lesson than "eternal principles" any day--Jesus saves, not abstract ideas. And it's when I'm most connected to Him that I behave most ethically--not when I'm doing my darndest to follow "correct principles."

  • Martha Smith
    2018-11-27 12:02

    I love the chapter on Agency by Richard Williams PhD. Latter-day Saints will gain tremendous insight and clarity on gospel principles in relation to psychology and counseling today.If you want to think about psychotherapy in dramatically new ways, Turning Freud Upside Down. As its title suggests, this book upends traditional psychological dogma. Far more important, it also advances alternatives, gospel-based views on human behavior and personality. LDS and other Christian clinicians who feel lost in the trenches will find this book an indispensable map for moving further away from secular assumptions and techniques to a more spiritual base. I eagerly await the forthcoming volumes in this series.

  • Beck
    2018-12-09 17:52

    I am not a therapist, nor do I ever intene to be. So this read, while interesting at times, was beyond my enthusiasm. Favorite passage: "When we experience pain, we often cry out for a variety of validating responses from our environment or, more specifically, from God. We want to know that our suffering is understood and of consequence. Our search for validation includes a call for justice or striking out against the cause of our inquiry (sometimes foolishly escalated to the desire for revenge). We call out for a repair of the damage and the recovery of our losses. We also seek measures and assurances that the event will be prevented in the future (with the assumption that it should have been prevented in the first place).

  • Jeffrey Howard
    2018-12-14 13:01

    An essential read for any Christian considering the field of psychology, particularly Latter-day saints considering psychotherapy. It provides one many of the necessary tools to critically understand the assumptions in mainstream psychology and gives one a strong introduction to providing alternative to perspectives that are congruent with the Gospel. For those who have become disillusioned with mainstream psychology due to its assumptions generally being contrary to Gospel perspectives, this book gives hope to those wishing to stay in such a secular field and make a difference in the lives of many suffering people.

  • Aaron
    2018-12-10 15:55

    This is a very thought provoking book. However, be warned if you are looking for official church doctrine on this subject this book does not contain it. The authors of this book examine the basic principles of psychopathology and use scriptures to say what Christ taught was wrong with it.

  • Benjamin
    2018-11-28 17:10

    if your mormon going into a field in behavioral science, this book will help with shaping your opinion on the matter.

  • Autumn
    2018-11-18 15:16

    I wanted this book to be so much better than it was. It was too narrow minded. And the authors thought way too much of themselves.