External Conditions of the Mind-Body Theory
There are mental illnesses such as depression, schizophrenia, and anxiety disorders.
In psychiatry, which deals with these illnesses, the basic approach is to perform pharmacotherapy under the premise that the mind is a function of the brain. It adjusts the transmission levels of neurotransmitters in the brain using medication. This can be called materialistic. Materialism is a worldview that posits that this world is fundamentally material, and that the spirit and mind are ultimately nothing more than the actions or phenomena of matter.
Pharmacotherapy is the basis of treatment because it is effective. By changing matter (its movements), one can change the mind. From this perspective, materialism can be considered correct.
However, on the other hand, there is a psychotherapy called cognitive behavioral therapy, which has an effect comparable to medication. Recently, a treatment method called "Open Dialogue" has also been attracting attention. These treatments work by changing cognition and understanding through language, and are idealistic. Idealism is a worldview that posits that the root or essence of the world lies not in matter, but in the "mind (spirit/ideas)."
The fact that psychotherapy is effective means that by directly changing the mind through language, one can normalize the action of neurotransmitters in the brain. From this perspective, idealism can be considered correct.
For the time being, I will set aside mind-body dualism, which posits that the mind and matter are each independent roots of the world that actually exist.
Materialism is a world where action occurs in the direction of "matter ➡ mind." If this is correct, since the mind is always a result, psychotherapy, which attempts to change the mind directly through language, should have no effect. Materialism cannot explain the effectiveness of psychotherapy.
Idealism is a world where action occurs in the direction of "mind ➡ matter." If this is correct, since matter is always a result, pharmacotherapy, which changes neurotransmitters, should have no effect. Idealism cannot explain the effectiveness of pharmacotherapy.
In other words, it can be said that both materialism and idealism are wrong.
What is correct is likely a complementary dualism in which the mind and matter interact with each other.
Science is negative about the action in the "mind ➡ matter" direction, but strangely enough, there is the fact that psychotherapy works.
(823 characters)
About this essay
Author's intention
I finished reading the assigned book on 12/16. It contained many ideas for making things go viral. Among them was a technique of devising an entry point for the beginning of a discussion to introduce readers when the topic itself is unfamiliar and difficult. I thought this would be useful. This is because my previous essay, "Seeing a Red Apple," was philosophical and difficult to approach.
In my previous author's intention, I wrote the following.
In psychiatry, we perform pharmacotherapy under the premise that the mind is a function of the brain. On the other hand, there is also psychotherapy that has an effect comparable to medication, and recently, a treatment method called "Open Dialogue" that does not use medication has been attracting attention. We tend to think of pharmacotherapy and psychotherapy as opposing things, but both are used in clinical practice. Why do materialistic pharmacotherapy and idealistic psychotherapy coexist? The best philosophy has a basis that makes this possible. I wrote about that philosophy using "Seeing a Red Apple" as material.
In the feedback I received at the previous Fumisalo, there was a comment: "Couldn't you have just used the content of this author's intention as the essay itself?" Actually, before submitting that essay, I had thought the same thing myself and tried to rewrite it, but I interrupted the process because it seemed like it would be a difficult birth. I thought, "There are other people who think the same way. My own sense wasn't entirely wrong after all."
Therefore, since the assigned book this time had such content, I thought I would try writing using that technique. However, given the nature of the content, I am very uneasy about whether this will "successfully introduce the reader" or "if the content is easy to understand."
Process to completion
This work is the first draft.
I brainstormed ideas immediately after finishing the assigned book (30 minutes). I started writing the next day (70 minutes). I completed a draft on the 18th (30 minutes). I brushed it up and finished it on the 19th (60 minutes). I made minor adjustments on the deadline day, the 21st (20 minutes).
During this period, I referred to "How Emotions Are Made," "How the Brain Sees the World," "Introduction to Naturalism," and "If Emotions Are Made, What Happens to the World?" as reference books for the content of the essay as needed.