The Psychology of Belief

[Farsight]

I'm looking for some advice and assistance. If anybody can offer any, I'd be grateful to receive it.

A few years ago I had a number of internet conversations with Young Earth Creationists, and was struck by the way they exhibited what appeared to be an extreme conviction. I'd offer evidence and facts, but they'd find a way to dismiss it. I'd talk about fossils, radiocarbon dating, rock strata, the half-life of  radioactive isotopes, and evolution in progress as demonstrated by skinks, sea-lions, finches, et cetera. But there always some facile rather dishonest reason why it simply didn't count. Thus they could cling to their current viewpoint, even though there was no evidence to support it, regardless of any logical argument. I ended up thinking it was as if these guys had been hypnotised, and were incapable of independent thought. I even started to wonder a little about the nature of consciousness.

That was then, this is now. And I find I'm having similar problems with physicists. I'm a systems analyst by trade, with a degree in computer science, very logical, very empirical, and very rational. I'm also an unaffiliated amateur physicist specialising in relativity. I find myself in conversations with for example string theorists who appear to exhibit the same sort of utter conviction as YECs, believing unswervingly in the existence of  ten-dimensional branes for which we have no evidence whatsover. Others involved in Quantum Field Theory are adamant that we live in a multiverse, others are adamant that time travel is  possible. I offer strong evidence and argument to counter these concepts, referring back to Einstein and others such as Feynman, Dirac, and even Newton. But it's as if the people I'm talking to are simply not listening, as if "Morton's Demon" is sitting on their shoulder refusing to admit any information that challenges their current ideas.   

Is there anybody here perhaps with experience of hypnosis who call tell me how I can "snap my fingers" and get these guys to wake up and enagage in rational discussion? PS: I don't find there's any difficulties talking face to face. 

[SWM]

i have encountered similar minds. religious and scientist alike, both have their minds fixed towards one or other way of interpreting thir reality. neither realising that they are, just like the other, blindly fumbling in the dark with only the dim light of their own intellect. each one can only see what their own mind has focused on. and each one can only draw conclusions from their restricted interpration of reality.

in respect to belief and hypnosis. people hypnotise themselves all the time. in fact, when you begin to understand hypnosis you will realise that many people spend a large amount of time in a hypnotic state.

when you understand trance you will notice people slipping in and out of trance all the time without any hypnotic inductions.

unfortunately when engaging people at the level of "beliefs about the world" you will not find a way to bring them out of their trance. dispute about the correct way to interpret reality will prove to polarise your views from theirs and remove the possiblity of rational discourse and understanding of the harmony of both perspectives.

[darkdan]

Is there anybody here perhaps with experience of hypnosis who call tell me how I can "snap my fingers" and get these guys to wake up and enagage in rational discussion? PS: I don't find there's any difficulties talking face to face. 

I wish it were that easy.  YEC experience cognitive dissonance because reality and their beliefs do not mix.  This is why they explain away everything.

[Farsight]

Thanks guys. Dan, I used to think the problem was something unique to religion, but now I feel there a whole spectrum of belief out there, and it's a people problem rather than a religion problem. People who exhibit a conviction re Young Earth Creationism or Intelligent Design do it because they're people, not because they're Christians. Here's an excerpt from something I've written to illustrate what I mean:

It doesn’t stop at religion. There’s ideology, Kafkaesque bureaucracy, and dynastic communism, all the sorts of things that can end up with starvation, murder, and Nazi death camps. There’s racism, tribalism, and insane conspiracy theories, all leading to enmity and hate and violence. There's heroin, crack, and alcohol addiction where people die before their time. Moving down the scale there's anorexia and obesity, and the dieting that makes you fat as your body sets store for a rainy day. Then there’s gentler symptoms like fashion, where folk let themselves be brainwashed into thinking purple is the new black. Or swaggering around with some eco cotton bag containing the keys for the 4x4 and the plane tickets. It affects everybody to some degree, even people who consider themselves to be utterly rational and totally open minded. Everybody’s got some kind of belief about something. When you find it and hit it, whoosh, everything you say goes in one ear and out the other. They just don’t listen. They just don’t think. It’s like the shutters are down and there’s nobody home.

That last sentence is something I find a little worrying. It's like talking to an automaton rather than a person, with an unconscious barrier that prevents them from examining the evidence that counters something they think they know, but which is not in itself based on any evidence whatsoever.

SWM, I note your comments about hypnotic state and trance, see above. And about engaging people at the level of beliefs about the world. Interestingly enough I seem to have no problem when talking to people face to face. I was at our kitchen bar the other night with a physics guy kicking things around, also doing demonstrations involving the Falaco soliton and moebius strips. There was absolutely no problem at all, he listened to what I was saying, understood it, and agreed that it made good sense. I was able to get through to him, but it seems much more difficult to do so over the internet. I've tried using optical illusions, like this one:


^{The squares marked A and B are the same shade of grey.}
http://web.mit.edu/persci/people/adelson/checkershadow_illusion.html

..but people remain in denial and still refuse to examine the evidence. I've had people calling me a liar, saying it's a trick when it isn't, refusing to look into it to find out that it isn't. So, any tips to try and break through the barriers will be warmly received. I was wondering if I should book some time with a hypnotist and see if s/he can help at all. Or maybe somebody at a university, cognitive sciences, psychology, neuroscience, that sort of thing.   

[seekinghga]

I'm looking for some advice and assistance. If anybody can offer any, I'd be grateful to receive it.

A few years ago I had a number of internet conversations with Young Earth Creationists, and was struck by the way they exhibited what appeared to be an extreme conviction. I'd offer evidence and facts, but they'd find a way to dismiss it. I'd talk about fossils, radiocarbon dating, rock strata, the half-life of  radioactive isotopes, and evolution in progress as demonstrated by skinks, sea-lions, finches, et cetera. But there always some facile rather dishonest reason why it simply didn't count. Thus they could cling to their current viewpoint, even though there was no evidence to support it, regardless of any logical argument. I ended up thinking it was as if these guys had been hypnotised, and were incapable of independent thought. I even started to wonder a little about the nature of consciousness.

That was then, this is now. And I find I'm having similar problems with physicists. I'm a systems analyst by trade, with a degree in computer science, very logical, very empirical, and very rational. I'm also an unaffiliated amateur physicist specialising in relativity. I find myself in conversations with for example string theorists who appear to exhibit the same sort of utter conviction as YECs, believing unswervingly in the existence of  ten-dimensional branes for which we have no evidence whatsover. Others involved in Quantum Field Theory are adamant that we live in a multiverse, others are adamant that time travel is  possible. I offer strong evidence and argument to counter these concepts, referring back to Einstein and others such as Feynman, Dirac, and even Newton. But it's as if the people I'm talking to are simply not listening, as if "Morton's Demon" is sitting on their shoulder refusing to admit any information that challenges their current ideas.   

Is there anybody here perhaps with experience of hypnosis who call tell me how I can "snap my fingers" and get these guys to wake up and enagage in rational discussion? PS: I don't find there's any difficulties talking face to face. 

In my honest opinion you are better off talking with the skinks and finches.  There's a much greater chance of intellectual discourse occurring that way.

The sixth commandment is "Thou shalt not kill" (or something similar) and yet Deuteronomy 21:18-21 states:

" 18. If a man have a stubborn and rebellious son, which will not obey the voice of his father, or the voice of his mother, and that, when they have chastened him, will not hearken unto them:

" 19. Then shall his father and his mother lay hold on him, and bring him out unto the elders of his city, and unto the gate of his place;

" 20. And they shall say unto the elders of his city, This our son is stubborn and rebellious, he will not obey our voice; he is a glutton, and a drunkard.

" 21. And all the men of his city shall stone him with stones, that he die: so shalt thou put evil away from among you; and all Israel shall hear, and fear. "

How would the YEC's explain that, hmm?  They pick and choose what is convenient and are not worth the paper that their little "Book of Literal Belief" is printed on.  Now, I'm not one for denigrating another man's beliefs, but too much is, after all, too much.

[Farsight]

The trouble is, seekinghga, YECs are not unique. Other people thump other books, and they're full of snake-oil garbage with as much evidential support as heaven and hell. Things like parallel worlds. I just can't get through to them.

Help!       

[SWM]

The trouble is, seekinghga, YECs are not unique. Other people thump other books, and they're full of snake-oil garbage with as much evidential support as heaven and hell. Things like parallel worlds. I just can't get through to them.

Help!       

people believe things and have experinces that they cannot prove to others. what is it about this that bothers you so much?

[Farsight]

Physics is in trouble. A-levels are down 56% in 20 years, departments are closing. I set out to do something about it but I'm meeting huge resistance.

[SWM]

Physics is in trouble. A-levels are down 56% in 20 years, departments are closing. I set out to do something about it but I'm meeting huge resistance.

ok, so people are not as interested in phsyics as they used to be, what is important about this for you? what is important to you, in getting more people interested in physics?

Other people thump other books, and they're full of snake-oil garbage with as much evidential support as heaven and hell. Things like parallel worlds. I just can't get through to them.

Help!   

what bothers you about people who believe in things without evidential support?

[Farsight]

ok, so people are not as interested in phsyics as they used to be, what is important about this for you? what is important to you, in getting more people interested in physics?

It's not just physics, it's engineering too, even handicrafts. Fewer people know how to make things any more, or maintain things. I consider this to be an example of what appears to be a downhill trend in civilised society, and I don't like it.   

what bothers you about people who believe in things without evidential support?

It isn't rational. In extremis we're on the way back to the dark ages believing in mumbo jumbo. 

[SWM]

It's not just physics, it's engineering too, even handicrafts. Fewer people know how to make things any more, or maintain things. I consider this to be an example of what appears to be a downhill trend in civilised society, and I don't like it.   

how is this connected to what people believe in and how they support their beliefs. surely this is more to do with individual laziness, societal values, consumerism and capitalist ideals.

It isn't rational. In extremis we're on the way back to the dark ages believing in mumbo jumbo. 

it is not rational to believe something which you cannot prove to another?? can you prove to me that you know what an orange tastes like? you have experience of the taste of an orange? can you show that experience to me? by way of proof?

and what is "mumbo jumbo" how can anybody say that something is mumbo jumbo if they have no experience first hand of that mumbo jumbo thing?

sorry, i dont mean to give you a hard time, but your posts do ask for rational discussions, i would just like to try to make the point that what is rational and logical for you may not be rational and logical for another and vice versa.

[RisingSun]

I recently purchased the book The Self by Dr. Jonathan Brown. I'm currently trying to figure out why people believe what they do, e.g., why some people are liberal and others conservative, why there are so many disagreements of opinion in social studies over what is true or false. I hope the book sheds some light on the topic.

[Enigma]

how is this connected to what people believe in and how they support their beliefs. surely this is more to do with individual laziness, societal values, consumerism and capitalist ideals.

Exactly.  The state of the US today is a result of globalization, overpopulation, and Capitalism.

[Farsight]

how is this connected to what people believe in and how they support their beliefs. surely this is more to do with individual laziness, societal values, consumerism and capitalist ideals.

It is to do with those things. I said it was an example. It's an example of where these things lead.

it is not rational to believe something which you cannot prove to another??

Agreed.

can you prove to me that you know what an orange tastes like? you have experience of the taste of an orange? can you show that experience to me? by way of proof?

No I can't prove this quale.   

and what is "mumbo jumbo" how can anybody say that something is mumbo jumbo if they have no experience first hand of that mumbo jumbo thing?

Mumbo jumbo is unfounded belief for which no evidence exists.

sorry, i dont mean to give you a hard time, but your posts do ask for rational discussions, i would just like to try to make the point that what is rational and logical for you may not be rational and logical for another and vice versa.

Thank you for your input.

[anaklio]

>It's not just physics, it's engineering too, even handicrafts. Fewer people know how to make things any more, or maintain things. I >consider this to be an example of what appears to be a downhill trend in civilised society, and I don't like it.   

This concerns me as well, but it's the nature of things: skills change. I can't build a house, but my grandfather can't build a webpage.

[Bill Hemphill]

Rising SUN; Farsight, Torsion is something rarely talked about and typically at the higher understandings of the mind.  It is spoken of in regard to Oedipus and Electra complexes. If a persons torsion is their parents people at low level psychology call that Oedipus or Electra complex. God should be your  torsion.  Otherwise we run the risk of all the symptoms of these complexes. The people you are trying to communicate with but failing could have a torsion much different from your own.
   Some people put themselves at their torsion thereby whatever you say can't penetrate and stick with their thought process. After years of studying psychology I realized that the Bible is a mind and body manual. Beware of existentialists. They think their thoughts are created by themselves. Remember that the mind and body respond and we only enhance the manner in which it responds.
   When we are cunning, we sabotage our thinking process as though we had been given Lithium. The center of their torsion does not explain to them your theory and your theory does not align with their synaptic process.
   Farsight, I like the example you used with shades of squares. Paradoxes are unsolvable to some minds. Others take the time to take them apart. Then we get the ahah! It sure appears to be different but not.

[Farsight]

It's not really my theory Bill, it's Einstein's. But I can't even get people to look at the Einstein papers and quotes which are contradicted by what's called the "modern interpretation" of relativity. In 1911 and 1916 he talked about the non-local non-constant speed of light in general relativity, and in 1920 he talked about the "ether" of general relativity that is space itself. There's so much conviction and denial that they won't even look at what Einstein actually said. I find it rather shocking that rational scientists are trapped in the same self-justifying closed loop that we see elsewhere. They will not entertain any discourse that involves some challenge to belief.  

For the record, I wouldn't describe myself as an existentialist, I'm more of a realist, since I focus on objective empirical ontological evidence rather than subjective experience. Nor would I describe myself as a total atheist, since I do have some pantheistic leanings, perhaps related to "sense of wonder". Whilst I'm confident that the Christian ethic of co-operation is a good one, that's as far as it goes. I'm afraid I don't share your views as regards God and the bible.    

This concerns me as well, but it's the nature of things: skills change. I can't build a house, but my grandfather can't build a webpage.

Noted anaklio. Yes, there is more specialism than there used to be. But as regards your two examples, there's a lot of pople who can do neither.

[Bill Hemphill]

Farsight, if God is not your torsion, then you are as lost as the people you can't get to stand on your leaning.  God is truth. If you find anything in quantum mechanics or psychology that does not align with Gods word it is wrong.

After over 30 years of examining the workings of the mind, I know that the psyche is constant. It is the social components attached to the dendrites that change. Gods word is constant. The Bible is a mind and body manual. You can use it to begin a fantastic voyage into how the mind works.

To anyone who reads this: HAVE A FANTASTIC VOYAGE!

[Farsight]

Here's an excerpt that hopefully explains the problem a little. Can any of you psychologists offer any advice on how I can overcome conviction?

THE PSYCHOLOGY OF BELIEF

When I analysed my basic concepts, I found things that weren�t real, that don�t exist, that we never actually see. But we assume they�re real, we take them for granted, and we believe in them. Because we have holes in our understanding, holes that we�ve all grown up with. We�ve lived with them for so long that we don�t know they�re there. We cover them up with ignorance of our ignorance, with blindness of our blind spot, and we shield ourselves with a peer pressure that persuades us there are no alternatives to consider. We do it because we are social animals, we follow the herd, we're prey to groupthink. That�s the way we are. So much so, that we even place our faith in negative carpets.

What�s a negative carpet? Well, let�s say that the wife is so impressed with the new lounge carpet, that she now wants a new carpet for the baby's bedroom. The room is square, and we need sixteen square metres. What�s the square root of sixteen? There are two solutions, four and minus four. So wise guy that I am, I opt for the latter solution, and get down on my hands and knees to cut a big fat square out of our brand new living room carpet. I roll it up, put it over my shoulder, and take it to the carpet shop, walking backwards for dramatic effect. I hand it over to the proprietor and pay him a minus ten pound note, which I stick in my pocket, then go back home to crack open a bottle of wine and greet my guests. We're standing in the living room talking about my negative carpet and discussing its negative mass when the wife walks in. She stands there open-mouthed for a heartbeat or two as I begin to explain the merely technical details of relocation to the baby�s bedroom. Then all hell breaks loose.

The thing about all this, is that a solution is sometimes crazy, but it's not always plain. People just don't spot it. So we talk about it quite seriously without examining whether it�s a real solution. We end up taking it for granted and using it to search for further solutions. Then when we struggle, we forget to track back to the beginning and look at the things we took for granted. We don�t realise we�re riding a negative carpet to never-never land, and that�s why we�re getting nowhere. What it all boils down to, is that a negative carpet doesn�t exist. It isn�t real. It�s just a figment of our imagination, an abstraction, a belief. And beliefs can cause all sorts of problems. Some people believe in Santa Claus, and some people believe in fairies, despite that fact that there is absolutely no material evidence to support the existence of these things. We smile at the gullibility that foolish people show, but we forget that we too believe in things for which there is no material evidence. Things like time travel, unseen dimensions, and parallel worlds.

We�ve all got our beliefs. That�s the way we are. I�ve got them, and so do you. It was Feynman who said �The first principle is that you must not fool yourself, and you are the easiest person to fool� [20]. This is more true than you realise. It�s true because when you�ve fooled yourself, you don�t know it. You convince yourself that you haven�t fooled yourself, and you develop a conviction, a faith, a belief about it. You'll be quite irrational in defence of this belief. You won't test your belief in an empirical scientific fashion. Instead, when challenged, you'll become defensive or incredulous. If you don�t behave this way, that�s fine, you�re not a believer. You merely have an opinion, and an open mind. But let me demonstrate something: You don�t have an open mind. You�re fooling yourself. At which point I imagine you're bristling already. See how it works? If you really believe something and I challenge it, it's all too easy to construe the challenge as an insult, and then become hostile and unreasonable. That's human nature. Everybody likes to think they have an open mind, and very few understand that about some things at least, they don't. The truth is this: you�re not quite as open minded or as rational as you think. This is hard to accept, but that�s the way it is. It�s like that because if you believe something, you don�t need to think about it. Because you already know the answer. Hence you're less receptive than you should be. And so you don�t look at the out-of-the-box solutions that solve the problems that have troubled you all your life.  

Stop a minute and think about it. Why do you think we have suicide bombers? What on Earth possesses them to think that there�s seventy two virgins waiting for them in paradise? What possesses them is something called The Psychology of Belief [21]. And they don�t think, that�s just it. This thing is far more powerful and far more prevalent than you know. There�s a whole spectrum of belief out there. Think about Young Earth Creationists and their Intelligent Design friends. You can talk to these people until you�re blue in the face, but they're totally immune to logic because they believe that they're right. You can say anything and everything, but they duck and dive and dismiss every last scrap of evidence you throw at them. Everything you say goes whoosh, in one ear and out the other. They just aren�t listening. They just aren�t thinking. The weird thing is that they don�t know they�re immune to logic. These guys aren�t lying to you. They don�t have a rational open mind, but they don�t know it. They think they�re being perfectly rational, and you�re just some crazy fool who just doesn�t know.

It doesn�t stop at religion. There�s ideology, Kafkaesque bureaucracy, and dynastic communism, all the sorts of things that can end up with starvation, murder, and Nazi death camps. There�s racism, tribalism, and insane conspiracy theories, all leading to enmity and hate and violence. There's heroin, crack, and alcohol addiction where people die before their time. Moving down the scale there's anorexia and obesity, and the dieting that makes you fat as your body sets store for a rainy day. Then there�s gentler symptoms like fashion, where folk let themselves be brainwashed into thinking purple is the new black. Or swaggering around with some eco cotton bag containing the keys for the 4x4 and the plane tickets. It affects everybody to some degree, even people who consider themselves to be utterly rational and totally open minded. Everybody�s got some kind of belief about something. When you find it and hit it, whoosh, everything you say goes in one ear and out the other. They just don�t listen. They just don�t think. It�s like the shutters are down and there�s nobody home.

[SWM]

Farsight, Thank you, a very honest and interesting read.

[Farsight]

Thanks, SWM. I got the email this morning, and thought I ought to say a little more about myself and my work. The excerpt above is from this:


http://www.amazon.co.uk/RELATIVITY-Theory-Everything-John-Duffield/dp/0956097804

This is what's called "taking the popularization route", which is fairly common in physics these days. No review copies have gone out to the general media, but it is getting out to the physics community. There is however a great deal of resistance from some quarters. People who talk glibly about ten-dimensional branes and parallel worlds find it very difficult to accept that relativity can be combined with quantum mechanics to formulate what's called a "unified model". They suffer from so much conviction that they utterly believe in things for which there is no evidence whatsoever, and find a way to dismiss evidence that threatens such beliefs. Whilst this is complicated by an element of competition, there are some uncomfortable parallels here with religion, superstition and ideology.
     

[Bill Hemphill]

I am fascinated with this relativity stuff but not knowledgeable.

In examining life particularly my own, I decided to read as many books on success that I could find, because I was so unsuccessful. It stated in different books that successful people are careful to travel the well paved paths that were paved by great people and be very careful not to step outside of the path. Einstein was great.

I am currently reading a book on religious belief and subjectivity. If the two can be separated. That's the problem with our neurotic society. This is why people fail to be cured of an addiction. They can't seem to comprehend that the (energy) of their mind is (addicted TO) a (substance or act).

TO it. It is not a part of the individual so they believe the false. These people are typically maladjusted. You can determine this with a little looking into. The result is just as you have suggested Farsight. They believe what they come to believe with the support of others.

Anyone who would call someone gay or homosexual or drug addict because they thought of it are maladjusted. We live in a world of maladjusted maligned people. Maligned values is the key.

Maybe someone can elaborate and we can pin this down?

[Farsight]

I think it's something dreadfully simple, Bill. This might sound trite, but I think it says it in a nutshell: people don't think as much as they think.

[voodoo scientist]

They can't easily be convinced their beliefs are wrong because they aren't fully conscious of why they are their beliefs, and thus they can't process or alter the information underlying their conclusion. Further complicating the problem is the fact that "unbelieving" the particular belief destroys all the other beliefs derived from that one, which makes the notion of unbelieving seem quite unappealing. And there's probably a lot of other complicating factors that can't easily be deduced without being in the situation.

You can either try to raise their consciousness of why their beliefs are the way they are (lots of work), or try to mitigate the complicating factors by, for instance, presenting them with a carrot (derivative beliefs based on your belief) to counter the negative (loss of derivative beliefs based on their belief) and allow them to perceive the isolated issue rationally.

It's also possible that you're just plain wrong, in which case successfully mitigating the complicating factors will simply lead to everyone reaching the wrong conclusion.

[Bill Hemphill]

Farsight, I think it is called irresponsibility. I understand the mind to be responding. Products of our environment. The last post makes good sense. I have been very capable of figuring out things others would feel nearly impossible. I do it by considering  all types of theories and someones personal perspective. I don't have to accept them as fact. Doing this allows me to broaden my own perspective and with joy I can come to an answer.

[anaklio]

I like what you're saying here, Bill Hemphill. There are no facts really. There's only what we choose to call facts. In our society, if something is published in a scientific journal following the peer-review system, we call it a fact. But that really means nothing other than hypothesis testing is a useful way to move through the world. Most of the times it works as does the nice system you've described. Still, you need to always remain open to the possibility these systems will fail, because they often do.

[voodoo scientist]

Farsight, I think it is called irresponsibility. I understand the mind to be responding. Products of our environment. The last post makes good sense. I have been very capable of figuring out things others would feel nearly impossible. I do it by considering  all types of theories and someones personal perspective. I don't have to accept them as fact. Doing this allows me to broaden my own perspective and with joy I can come to an answer.

I like what you're saying here, Bill Hemphill. There are no facts really. There's only what we choose to call facts. In our society, if something is published in a scientific journal following the peer-review system, we call it a fact. But that really means nothing other than hypothesis testing is a useful way to move through the world. Most of the times it works as does the nice system you've described. Still, you need to always remain open to the possibility these systems will fail, because they often do.

The truth about truth is that truth doesn't exist.

[Bill Hemphill]

Sorry Voodoo, God is truth. I try to explain to others that honesty is not truth. But sometimes what a person is saying honestly is the truth. Ignorance and honesty are a bad combination.

[Farsight]

What beats me is how people who consider themselves to be scientific and rational believe in things for which no evidence exists, and believe in them so strongly that they will not examine contrary evidence.  There's some kind of lock-up at work here. Like "I know it's true so I don't need to look at the evidence".

[Bill Hemphill]

I was once challenged to admit that I was wrong because I agreed that a book exists and it does have the information that the person was trying to express as fact. After explaining that I had read several books on the same subject and why I had come to a different conclusion, my rival came into agreement with me and then said 'who would read more than one book on the same subject'.

We all have perspective. And a personal one at that. It is a difficult thing to teach Psychology in this era when the post era admitted that they did not totally know or understand the human psyche. I should note here that we actually use their beliefs to keep us inline.
   Many people get their shingle(college diploma) and post their shingle as being in business to treat people for psychiatric problems. All they really know are some knowledge's that were enough for them to pass a college exam and get a PhD. I rarely hear of a psychotherapist using psychotherapy to treat someone with a psychiatric problem.

Oh well, perspective is crucial.