Abstract
Three fault lines traverse inquiries into empirically supported therapies, along which pro and contra positions can be taken. First, failure to distinguish scientific from artistic properties of therapy has lead to neglect of pervasive personological and cultural variables that are implicated in this field of inquiry. Second, scientific anomalies result from focusing more on what ESTs are than on how they effect change. Psyche is portrayed as a humanistic Cartesian place-holder for an encroaching neuro-endocrinological and systemic understanding of human experiencing. Third, the EST movement is seen as a socio-political and business model, confounded with and eroding scientific objectives.
Talk to us
Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have
Schedule a callDisclaimer: All third-party content on this website/platform is and will remain the property of their respective owners and is provided on "as is" basis without any warranties, express or implied. Use of third-party content does not indicate any affiliation, sponsorship with or endorsement by them. Any references to third-party content is to identify the corresponding services and shall be considered fair use under The CopyrightLaw.
