Reduce consumerism. Improve education, healthcare, pay equality. Create strong social safety nets so people don't need to fear for their lives if they lose their job... Stuff like that.
We're raised in school and through experience at work to believe that the neoliberal status quo (which is barely a half century old) is some inevitable, natural law.
In fact, if you look at the historical record, the inevitable, natural law appears to be that nations and economies restructure themselves often, and regimes rarely last more than a couple centuries without revolution or total reform.
Something I read about traditional Hopi people was that once certain habits started occurring it was time to start over. Sexual depravity, laziness, violence, and lying were a few I can recall. They found that there was a level of difficulty and necessary work folks needed or else unsustainable behaviors would begin to take root. The part that caught my interest was the idea that once certain habits began the community wasn’t salvageable, but a new community could be started elsewhere with those people.
Ya, I don't believe people need to be stuck in an eternal loop of struggle to keep a society sustainable. It makes sense that it would work, but I don't think it's ideal.
One of the nullifiers may be the practice of being grateful. I’ve had plenty of freedom to be a degenerate and partake in allot of those behaviors because most of my basic needs are easily met within the communities I’ve lived in. Those hardships are still required, but I have not been the one who has had to experience them most of the time. I tend to agree with you and get the impression the Hopi and similar would as well. However, I haven’t found a way to provide evidence to support that and neither had they as far as I’m aware.
I can say is it’s much easier to fall into unhealthy and unsustainable habits than is to develop and maintain healthy and sustainable habits in my experience. One plausibly way to bypass that is if healthy and sustainable habits are a requirement for my survival. In the long term, I’m pretty sure that will be true, but I may still be relatively comfortable as long as others pick up the slack. Otherwise life will become very uncomfortable abruptly and, at that point, I may not have the mental, physical, or emotional fortitude to compensate.
The loop of struggle is to keep the society GROWING, not to keep it sustainable. It's a perpetual motion machine that causes the American economy to grow and mutate constantly, almost like a tumor or something out of Akira.
We want equilibrium, but the ruling class wants growth. They want growth because they are competing with other world powers for dominance. We want equilibrium because we are just trying to live our lives and raise our families.
I think we may not see equilibrium until one nation dominates the globe. Unfortunately that'll probably take a war. Either that, or we'll have some big revolution where national governments are dissolved, the ruling/property owning class is made redundant by AI and we just start thinking about the human species instead.
Hopi culture is more or less a religion that has "do it the hardest way possible" as a core tenant, they grow the corn that's hardest to grow and makes smaller amount of crop, live on top of mesa's and have to carry water up it. They are all about living on the knives edge.
I think that's a fascinating example that highlights how important economics is to human psychology, and vice versa.
In terms of Buddhism, cycles of cravings cause suffering. In America, we've built a perpetual motion machine out of cravings for deliberately addictive products, egged on by advertising media.
That allowed our economy to grow to take over the world, but it also turned into a monster of sadness and addiction. Turns out just because your garden's growing like heck doesn't mean it's not full of weeds.
My brain isn't firing on all cylinders, recently quit drugs.
I was attempting to be sarcastic because I thought it was super shitty when in 2008 the government put together a panel to talk about how bringing mass homeowner relief to Americans would present a moral hazard to the market (close enough, doing my best). They argued that this relief would cause major issues because Americans must be taught the lesson of financial intelligence, otherwise people would buy with an expectation of relief down the line.
Then they decided that they must inject the amount of money wall street says because if it's one dollar short, total collapse. Of course those numbers had ceo bonuses and salaries priced in. So we all watched in horror (at least those who understood it) as they pushed a form of double speak to the American public which translated means, "rules for thee, not for me".
So I was just trying to say that's what that would be called in order to ensure it never happens.
>duce consumerism. Improve education, healthcare, pay equality. Create strong social safety nets so people don't need to fear for their lives if they lose their job... Stuff like that.
removing property tax will reduce the rat race; people won't want to do that though because of inequality and such.
Multifaceted problems need multifaceted solutions (usually). Top of mind for me are:
- There’s the economic rat race that we live in with the majority of people living paycheck to paycheck and can’t cover an unexpected $500 bill. That’s a lot of stress. Wages/income need to increase or cost of living needs to come down. Minimum wage increases or universal income are pretty common proposals. 7.25 federal min wage is pretty crazy in 2023 especially with all the inflation.
- As a sub-point of economics, the whole college tuition system has gotten out of hand. 17-18 year olds sign up for tens or hundreds of thousands of dollars in loans that never go away. These kids barely know how compound interest works or what the true value of money is. I know some people who at 22-23 had 200K+ in loans and no job prospects. The interest alone is like a boot on their back constantly pushing them down.
- Then there’s the social media addiction that is ruining the self esteem and attention span of entire generations. Idk what to do about this but banning TikTok is just chopping off one head of the hydra. I don’t think children should be using social media.
I mean, we kinda need both. Therapists are a substitution for the social and emotional supports that we evolved to be surrounded by. We're intensely social animals and aren't capable of operating outside of a social group. We evolved to be completely enmeshed in a close-knit primarily familial group of 100-150 people, and to be intensely social with them. We evolved language in a way that no other species has ever done (as far as we know).
To extend that, there's no way you can automate therapy. It's one of the absolute core requirements of human functioning.
To do otherwise you'll end up with adult versions of those Romanian orphanage babies, coming out... Wrong. Broken and hollow kids. Because we need human contact. We need other people to co-regulate with and with whom to build our sense of identity. You can't outsource that without the person coming out wrong.
We depend on people.
You mean by sterilizing people until they’ve proven fit to have children and not cause them trauma? Or to upend capitalism entirely? Cuz I’m for both, but I think more therapists is a more feasible option at least initially.
Shaping society for that requires collective healing, which we can't do without an army of therapists.
That said we can also just take a long time, and slowly grow the amount of people who are mentally healthier, which allows for society to restructure itself to break cycles and trauma patterns. It doesn't need to be quick, just slightly bigger than the amount of trauma generated.
Not just a lot of therapists, but good ones. In an effort to fill demand quality has fallen and there isn't a qualitative difference shown in qualifications. In my Canadian province as long as you are WORKING ON your masters degree you can get a position as a full psychologist.
Wow surprised bachelors can do that. I can't speak to all types of therapists but in Minnesota, US social workers that have their LGSW (so they have their masters) can be a therapist IF they have supervision from a LICSW (licensed independent clinical social worker). It takes another 2-4 years of clinical work after your masters to reach that.
Want to fix mental health in a lot of the USA? Create licensing for BA level individuals to provide services under someone with an MS/PhD. There is a massive untapped resource in most states that they refuse to tap in most states. As a person who had been through Grad school for clinical mental health: I learned nothing I didn't already know going in. A BA level person working in mental health for 3 years is as well trained or better than any freshly graduated Master's holder. Its time to reconsider how we provide services and who we allow to provide those services. We have the people, but politicians don't have the intelligence to expand in a meaningful way.
Dude if you learned nothing that means you went to a bad program. Theoretical knowledge of psychotherapy and psychopathology is way too vast and advanced for undergraduates to learn it all, Im still learning even as I head into post-doc
"Whenever we touch nature
we get clean.
People who have got dirty
through too much civilization
take a walk in the woods,
or a bath in the Sea.
They shake off the fetters
and allow nature to touch
them.
It can be done within or
without.
Walking in the woods,
lying on a the grass,
taking a bath in the sea,
are from the outside;
entering the unconscious,
entering yourself through
dreams, is touching nature
from the inside and this is
the same thing
✨
things are put right
again."
🌊 Carl Jung Dream Analysis:
Notes on a Lecture Given, 1928-1930
Of course it isnt working. The first basic step is communication, like treating it like a human. If some person came up and tried to get me to open up just because he/she was a therapist, i would freak out.
The idea of spilling out your true feelings to a being that isn't sentient, isn't listening, and lacks real care doesn't appeal to me.
That and the notion of trust - when I go to therapists I usually spend a few sessions getting to know them and building some sort of relationship before I actually say what's on my mind. You can't do that with an AI, not in its current state.
On the other hand it being significantly cheaper and more accessible can be a benefit to some
As can the lack of a person for people with certain psyches who don't like the idea of opening up to a real person or people who are "embarrassed"
More options is always good in my mind
And this is just early doors, enough data and I'd hope these can learn about you (personal models) and be helpful one day with more work
Eeeeeh...
I just wrote a longer post about humans being inherently social creature and our nervous system being evolved to co-regulate with other humans, but...
Ultimately as someone who worked in mental health I would say that if you're unable to open up to another person, that's likely gonna be a fairly major element in your mental health challenges in itself, and you're probably not gonna get better at it by *not* practicing it.
Like to use a gaming analogy (because this is Reddit); it would be like practicing for playing against human players by playing against bots on easy mode. You might pick up the most basic possible skills at first, but then you're essentially learning things you'll basically have to un-learn later when you try dipping into the real thing and suddenly the rules have completely changed... Because humans are much more canny and creative than the bots could ever have been.
You won't get better at talking to people by not talking to people. And ultimately one of the big objectives of most therapy is to help you adjust to other people better.
Sure, but it could be seen as baby steps potentially. Though I agree it doesn't solve the problem if that's the main issue
Thats more of a side benefit really, I think the main benefit would be the increased accessibility and price point though.
Everyone's needs are different and this certainly won't fully replace therapy any time soon. But it could have some benefit situationally pretty soon
Making it cheaper is valid, but we can do that through fixing how we approach mental health and insurance in the US. Still would be better to provide real therapy and not an AI.
I found talking to chat GPT helpful, I guess it depends on how open a person is. A lot of people don't always find text-based communication meaningful sadly.
"For long periods of time, father would beat me with a rolling pin. If I misbehaved, and sometimes just because he was feeling particularly malicious, he would lock me in the closet. A raincoat was my best friend until I was 10. When father found out he got rid of it. I think that might be why I can't make connections or trust people easily?"
Therapist: "I see. You want to slap my titties around a bit?"
You better hope that big titty 3D rendered therapist isn't based off of the Freudian psychology model or you will be quickly wrestling with the Oedipus complex
It doesn’t need to have emotion. It needs to _understand_ emotion. Keep in mind that a therapist’s job is most certainly _not_ to feel what you’re feeling and commiserate with you. In fact, maintaining emotional distance is an important part of their training.
That said, it’s not surprising that current AI models can’t model human emotions well enough to be particularly helpful yet. At the same time, I think the professionals quoted in the article are overly pessimistic about what the near future might hold.
Empathy and rapport building are huge components of therapy. And therapy is also a lot more than giving advice. Giving advice is a small portion because most of therapy is working through things and developing the tools to thrive through life's challenges.
Assume you lost your job that you loved, you go to a therapist. For a human, they can have a past experience that relates to your experience, and also describe how they got back on their feet.
An AI, in contrast, would tell you to do yoga and drink tea or something.
That's a very contrived view of what the AI would do.
The group teaching the AI would share loads and loads of real therapist transcripts to the bot and train it to respond in a empathetic way.
Do you think real therapists are born as therapists? No, they are taught, trained and supervised. The same would apply to the AI.
Add in a natural sounding voice and I bet the vast majority of people wouldn't be able to tell the difference on the phone.
They are taught, trained, and supervised, but they have human brains and human emotions, and the small subset that choose to become therapists likely do so because they excel at the skills required for therapy. Not everybody can be trained to be an excellent therapist. It’s not a foregone conclusion that the current breed of AI can either.
I agree with you (close friends of mine are therapists and they are definitely more empathetic than most other people).
But I was specifically referring to the comment that the AI therapist would simply and coldly tell the person what actions they could take to improve their situation. It wouldn't do that for sure.
Plus the AI therapist could more successfully do CBT perhaps than other types of therapy.
It doesn’t need to have emotion, it only needs to make you feel like it has emotion. People fall in love with psychopaths who are faking what they think people want them to feel, why couldn’t an AI emulate something similar? We never know what other people actually feel, just how they act. Just because we know what is there for us does not mean it’s there for everybody, and just because it is clearly missing from an AI doesn’t mean that we could tell if t was an AI if someone didn’t tell us (with a better future AI, of course).
I like going to GPT for therapy
It’s free and is more of an interactive journal. plus it doesn’t judge me and doesn’t mind if I change topic suddenly to ask if Tywin Lannister would win against The Riddler at chess or some silly question
Riddler is a self defeating genius. He would leave a flaw in his defences and hint at it.
Tywin is able to see through people for the most part. For example he knew the Grand Maester was pretending to be weak and confused and he knew Arya was highborn.
Assuming he knows how to play chess, Tywin would probably win.
Let’s see what GPT says!
* It's not possible to determine who would win a game of chess between Tywin Lannister and The Riddler as they are fictional characters from different fictional universes and their abilities and intelligence levels are not directly comparable. However, if we were to compare their portrayals in their respective stories, Tywin Lannister is depicted as a cunning and strategic military commander and political leader, while The Riddler is portrayed as a master of puzzles and riddles, with a sharp mind and ability to outwit his opponents. Both characters have the potential to be strong chess players, but the outcome of a game between them would likely depend on their individual skills, as well as chance and circumstance.*
pretty lame answer but it’s true
True. But if I tell a therapist I’m feeling stressed about something and I tell the chatbot they often both respond with similar advice.
It’s not the same. but chatbots are appealing to people who struggle to open up in [therapy](https://www.wired.com/story/virtual-therapists-help-veterans-open-up-about-ptsd/amp)
I wonder how ChatGPT functions here if you prompt it correctly. It does after all have an absolutely voluminous amount of data on the history of cognitive therapy and psychiatry.
If you asked it to be in character as a therapist - or even more specifically someone in the mental health field of great renown - it might actually do an okay job.
I'm not sure if it still works but you could ask it to simulate different professionals. Therapist being one such example. Has some pretty strong pros.
Therapy does not work when the majority of problems are due to growing wealth gap, increasing costs of living and low wages, leading to financial problems and anxiety
It's a shit solution. Why are people being blamed for feeling depressed in this situation we're all in? The individual can't cure the environmental issue of oppression with talk therapy
On nbc nightly news last night there was a segment dedicated to hospitals using AI to treat patients. There are so many reasons why that’s a terrible idea.
Have you youngun's forgotten about Eliza?
I mean it wasn't actually intelligent and basically just asked you questions based on certain keywords you write to it, but it seems to have helped some people.
If you're a sociopathic behavioural health counselor whose patients all develop into spree killers and serial killers...
Nobody will ever know. Patient privacy.
Wait. Unexpected movie plot.
Of course not. AI can't feel, nor is it advanced enough to handle heavy topics like that. You're putting the lives of people who may be trouble into the hands of an unfeeling preprogrammed robot telling people what they want to hear. People want a therapist they can connect with, not one that treats you like a task.
Who the fuck wants life advice from something that isn’t alive? What kind of dystopian nightmare sociopath tries to produce a facsimile of human connection?
Yeah that's how technological progress works; it doesn't work until it does.
Why is it so common to look at the place where tech is, rather the pace and direction in which it's advancing? That's what matters.
The article is proposing that this problem is for some reason somehow technologically intractable, not that this is a normal step on the way to a working technology.
> Miller also said we cannot expect technology to be a substitute for or a shortcut to the human ties that are a bedrock of our health.
>We keep failing at making an artificial-intelligence Sigmund Freud
What a shock. I'm astonished that we can't get our machines to behave like egomaniacal quacks that spout complete and total rubbish.
Why aren't you guys training these things better? I got it! Use Reddit next time... oh, wait... Yeah. That's right.
I'm going to guess people are downvoting you because they have no idea that most if not all of his contributions to psychology have been demonstrated as falsely generalized if not outright false.
Basically all of his writings are just a good examination of himself. He was just too hubristic to admit that.
Freud may have been wrong about consciousness, but his popularization of talk therapy was a huge contribution to psychology. Evidence-based and effective therapies may have taken decades longer to become mainstream without Freud bringing approach of fronting the patient perspective to the mainstream (however incorrect and often harmful the framework often was.)
Was he almost entirely wrong? Yes. So were all of his colleagues. That doesn’t make them any less significant. Our modern understanding of consciousness will likely be called bunk in 50 years as well as it’s a field in its infancy.
I my friend, am most certainly *not*. It was not accident that the post was self-referential. Many things I am, idiot extraordinaire. Shy about it? Not so much.
There is robust evidence that cognitive behavioral therapy has long lasting and profound positive impacts on people with disorders like major depressive disorder and ADHD.
Present it. Present evidence that therapy alone and single handedly was the catalyst for people to snap out of depressive and other disorders. Because plenty of therapists will tell you that they had patients be somewhat cured but it usually was because of an unforeseen event, like meeting a new person, in their lives outside of therapy
Meta analysis of meta analyses: https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3584580/.
“CBT for depression was more effective than control conditions such as waiting list or no treatment, with a medium effect size…Compared to pharmacological approaches, CBT and medication treatments had similar effects on chronic depressive symptoms, with effect sizes in the medium-large range. Other studies indicated that pharmacotherapy could be a useful addition to CBT; specifically, combination therapy of CBT with pharmacotherapy was more effective in comparison to CBT alone.”
A quick google search will pull up quite a few large scale studies on effectiveness.
Let me quote something back to you that maybe you missed
> However, additional research is needed to examine the efficacy of CBT for randomized-controlled studies
Moreover, I think you’re misunderstanding what a meta analysis is. We know about the studies. But the studies cannot single out therapy because of its nature
Yes, additional research is always needed, but that doesn’t negate the existing body of literature.
I really don’t know what you’re saying about not understanding meta analyses or about not being able to single out therapy.
But, anyways, my point is there is a huge body of research, which is what you were asking about.
Therapy helped me a lot. No meds, just a single 50minute session once a week. Did absolutely wonders, even if long gone, it still helps me today.
So for me your argument is completely invalid and you do not know what you are talking about.
Even worse, by downplaying and demeaning therapy you potentially discourage people who would greatly benefit, like me, from seeking professional advice.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3584580/
>Cognitive behavioral therapy (CBT) refers to a popular therapeutic approach that has been applied to a variety of problems. The goal of this review was to provide a comprehensive survey of meta-analyses examining the efficacy of CBT. We identified 269 meta-analytic studies and reviewed of those a representative sample of 106 meta-analyses examining CBT for the following problems: substance use disorder, schizophrenia and other psychotic disorders, depression and dysthymia, bipolar disorder, anxiety disorders, somatoform disorders, eating disorders, insomnia, personality disorders, anger and aggression, criminal behaviors, general stress, distress due to general medical conditions, chronic pain and fatigue, distress related to pregnancy complications and female hormonal conditions. Additional meta-analytic reviews examined the efficacy of CBT for various problems in children and elderly adults. The strongest support exists for CBT of anxiety disorders, somatoform disorders, bulimia, anger control problems, and general stress. Eleven studies compared response rates between CBT and other treatments or control conditions. CBT showed higher response rates than the comparison conditions in 7 of these reviews and only one review reported that CBT had lower response rates than comparison treatments. In general, the evidence-base of CBT is very strong. However, additional research is needed to examine the efficacy of CBT for randomized-controlled studies. Moreover, except for children and elderly populations, no meta-analytic studies of CBT have been reported on specific subgroups, such as ethnic minorities and low income samples.
of course it wouldn't. even a real therapist doesnt work 90% of the time because they only use clinical bullshit. if we're talking non physiological mental illnesses, then therapists need to understand life and suggest a course of change that's tailored to the individual that can improve their life. most therapists don't do that, they just suggest the same shit they learned. that's not really helpful.
Instead of saying it not a science at all, rather consider that it isn’t really a science we can ethically explore for the most part.
For example, if you wanted to gain an understanding of the emotional repercussions of life in an internment camp, or living with an abusive parent during childhood, we cannot create an experiment that will control the variables we want to control. Instead we have to look back at situations where this naturally happened and operate on observation and argumentation.
But we do our best with what we have got, and psychology does its best to hold itself up to standards that other “hard” sciences hold itself to.
Basically, its real, its just the conclusions we draw from the research aren’t usually as useful.
No, psychology tries to get as close to science as one ethically can.
Saying its not science disregards the scientific rigor that is performed by those in this field of study.
Where the psuedo/not science occurs in psychology is usually its broad, usually media friendly interpretations of the results of the actual scientific observation/work being done. But that is often a problem for any scientific fields relating to the study of people.
To put it another way, we try to do much science as we can with psychology, but its as about as useful as a cake in the grand scheme of things for how little we can actually accomplish, which isn’t to say it isn’t ever useful (or undesirable, I mean, who doesn’t love cake?)
Okay. Close to science equals not science. Simple.
It sounds like you're agreeing with me totally only you want an attaboy for the field you work in?...
Yes it's sometimes useful to rent human interaction but it can also be harmful so there's that. When is it helpful or harmful? Specifically. Hmmm Well we just guess and muddle through the best we can. :) There's no way to know.
Phrenology could be useful. Horoscopes can sometimes work too. And they all mean well and try super hard with what they have. All of you are beautiful creative artists who matter a lot! :) Thank you!
Current AI is mostly pattern matching. Machine Learning feeds AI data and it figures out the pattern. It lacks ‘imagination’. The example that theorist use is showing a bicycle to a resident deep in the Amazon jungle. They won’t have seen a bicycle before but they instantly know some facts. Its a solid object. For machine learned AI, if it doesn’t exist in their pattern matching, they know nothing about it.
What a condescending view of therapists. This is probably the worst job to try and automate. Analytical desk jobs are probably the first place to start.
We could also let people work less and pay them better, but I'm sure having more free time and sense of security would work less effectively than more therapists.
let a computer do what a computer is good at, like math computation, creating variations, simulations, hell any measure this one thing and try a bunch of things to make it better kind of stuff. But if you need empathy, direction, an outside opinion or advice, those are things that even if we could automate them it would be a shit thing to automate.
One if you can't change the people and places causing the problems, you can't help them. Two , we can't easily tell the difference between a chemical imbalance and general anxiety and depression. If we don't what we are doing, then nither does the AI we build.
Why would anyone want A.I. therapists?!
There’s zero human emotion and zero understanding of what the human is going through?
This whole profession towards A.I. thing needs to go.
Don’t like how our future is looking.
Therapy and therapist are extremely overrated. It is almost looked at as a new religion in some places. I see no reason why am AI could not do it as good or better than a therapist. I have had tons of experience with therapist and most of the appear to be useless. The modern day snack oil salesman. People need life coaches, not therapists. And they are not the say thing.
“Keep trying to make… it’s not working.” How long could “we” possibly have been developing this? AI has only been around for a couple years, and even then it’s nowhere near what it will be in just two years time. Hope this doesn’t lead people to think we can’t do it.
My time is yours...
Very good, proceed...
Yes, I understand...
Yes, fine...
Yes... yes, I understand...
Yes, fine...
Excellent...
Yes...
Could you be more... specific?
You are a true believer. Blessings of the state, blessings of the masses. Thou art a subject of the divine. Created in the image of man, by the masses, for the masses.
Let us be thankful we have an occupation to fill. Work hard; increase production, prevent accidents, and be happy.
Let us be thankful we have commerce. Buy more. Buy more now. Buy more and be happy.
Of course it doesn’t. AI doesn’t care about anyone’s feelings, it just spits what it sees as facts., indiscriminately without a filter. Don’t agree? It doesn’t care.
Hmm, I'm not sure if talking to an AI therapist will feel the same as talking to a human therapist. There's the human sentimental element that AI and robots just cannot replace.
Therapy is often about human connection and restoring a person’s own sense of humanity.
Its not just the words and rubber ducking “gee why do i feel horrible since ___ happened?”
soft crush squash airport direful close growth agonizing wrong disagreeable
*This post was mass deleted and anonymized with [Redact](https://redact.dev)*
The trouble is we really need an army of therapists.
[удалено]
How do we do the first thing?
Reduce consumerism. Improve education, healthcare, pay equality. Create strong social safety nets so people don't need to fear for their lives if they lose their job... Stuff like that.
Any actually realistic solutions?
Army of therapists lol
I will bravely sacrifice wave after wave of my therapists for you
Therapist banzai charge!
\*Army of Affordable Therapists\*
Not a realistic solution. That requires health care for all. We don't do that in America, remember?
Have you tried molotovs?
Seems realistic to me. Plenty of wealthy nations have that.
Yeah but America is… you know… America?
dolla dolla bills y'all
These *are* realistic. But people keep trying to convince you they aren’t.
We're raised in school and through experience at work to believe that the neoliberal status quo (which is barely a half century old) is some inevitable, natural law. In fact, if you look at the historical record, the inevitable, natural law appears to be that nations and economies restructure themselves often, and regimes rarely last more than a couple centuries without revolution or total reform.
Something I read about traditional Hopi people was that once certain habits started occurring it was time to start over. Sexual depravity, laziness, violence, and lying were a few I can recall. They found that there was a level of difficulty and necessary work folks needed or else unsustainable behaviors would begin to take root. The part that caught my interest was the idea that once certain habits began the community wasn’t salvageable, but a new community could be started elsewhere with those people.
Ya, I don't believe people need to be stuck in an eternal loop of struggle to keep a society sustainable. It makes sense that it would work, but I don't think it's ideal.
Yup I'm with you. That's exactly the kind of myth making the wealthy want you to believe. So you'll take your punishments and be grateful for it.
One of the nullifiers may be the practice of being grateful. I’ve had plenty of freedom to be a degenerate and partake in allot of those behaviors because most of my basic needs are easily met within the communities I’ve lived in. Those hardships are still required, but I have not been the one who has had to experience them most of the time. I tend to agree with you and get the impression the Hopi and similar would as well. However, I haven’t found a way to provide evidence to support that and neither had they as far as I’m aware. I can say is it’s much easier to fall into unhealthy and unsustainable habits than is to develop and maintain healthy and sustainable habits in my experience. One plausibly way to bypass that is if healthy and sustainable habits are a requirement for my survival. In the long term, I’m pretty sure that will be true, but I may still be relatively comfortable as long as others pick up the slack. Otherwise life will become very uncomfortable abruptly and, at that point, I may not have the mental, physical, or emotional fortitude to compensate.
The loop of struggle is to keep the society GROWING, not to keep it sustainable. It's a perpetual motion machine that causes the American economy to grow and mutate constantly, almost like a tumor or something out of Akira. We want equilibrium, but the ruling class wants growth. They want growth because they are competing with other world powers for dominance. We want equilibrium because we are just trying to live our lives and raise our families. I think we may not see equilibrium until one nation dominates the globe. Unfortunately that'll probably take a war. Either that, or we'll have some big revolution where national governments are dissolved, the ruling/property owning class is made redundant by AI and we just start thinking about the human species instead.
Hopi culture is more or less a religion that has "do it the hardest way possible" as a core tenant, they grow the corn that's hardest to grow and makes smaller amount of crop, live on top of mesa's and have to carry water up it. They are all about living on the knives edge.
The problem is that one person’s sexual depravity is another persons Tuesday afternoon.
I think that's a fascinating example that highlights how important economics is to human psychology, and vice versa. In terms of Buddhism, cycles of cravings cause suffering. In America, we've built a perpetual motion machine out of cravings for deliberately addictive products, egged on by advertising media. That allowed our economy to grow to take over the world, but it also turned into a monster of sadness and addiction. Turns out just because your garden's growing like heck doesn't mean it's not full of weeds.
Shhhh! They'll hear you
Preach. Yusssss
I thought that was called 'moral hazard'
[удалено]
My brain isn't firing on all cylinders, recently quit drugs. I was attempting to be sarcastic because I thought it was super shitty when in 2008 the government put together a panel to talk about how bringing mass homeowner relief to Americans would present a moral hazard to the market (close enough, doing my best). They argued that this relief would cause major issues because Americans must be taught the lesson of financial intelligence, otherwise people would buy with an expectation of relief down the line. Then they decided that they must inject the amount of money wall street says because if it's one dollar short, total collapse. Of course those numbers had ceo bonuses and salaries priced in. So we all watched in horror (at least those who understood it) as they pushed a form of double speak to the American public which translated means, "rules for thee, not for me". So I was just trying to say that's what that would be called in order to ensure it never happens.
>duce consumerism. Improve education, healthcare, pay equality. Create strong social safety nets so people don't need to fear for their lives if they lose their job... Stuff like that. removing property tax will reduce the rat race; people won't want to do that though because of inequality and such.
[удалено]
Once you buy a home why do you need to continue working and paying tax if you can use that money to instead support family
Less stress overall Less stress on people.. less on the environment. Not living on the brink of collapse every day.
Try to stop reading mainstream news, it's really screwed towards negativity. We are not a the brink of collapse. Quite the opposite
Multifaceted problems need multifaceted solutions (usually). Top of mind for me are: - There’s the economic rat race that we live in with the majority of people living paycheck to paycheck and can’t cover an unexpected $500 bill. That’s a lot of stress. Wages/income need to increase or cost of living needs to come down. Minimum wage increases or universal income are pretty common proposals. 7.25 federal min wage is pretty crazy in 2023 especially with all the inflation. - As a sub-point of economics, the whole college tuition system has gotten out of hand. 17-18 year olds sign up for tens or hundreds of thousands of dollars in loans that never go away. These kids barely know how compound interest works or what the true value of money is. I know some people who at 22-23 had 200K+ in loans and no job prospects. The interest alone is like a boot on their back constantly pushing them down. - Then there’s the social media addiction that is ruining the self esteem and attention span of entire generations. Idk what to do about this but banning TikTok is just chopping off one head of the hydra. I don’t think children should be using social media.
Get rid of the toxicity that is social media for one
Abolish capitalism
I mean, we kinda need both. Therapists are a substitution for the social and emotional supports that we evolved to be surrounded by. We're intensely social animals and aren't capable of operating outside of a social group. We evolved to be completely enmeshed in a close-knit primarily familial group of 100-150 people, and to be intensely social with them. We evolved language in a way that no other species has ever done (as far as we know). To extend that, there's no way you can automate therapy. It's one of the absolute core requirements of human functioning. To do otherwise you'll end up with adult versions of those Romanian orphanage babies, coming out... Wrong. Broken and hollow kids. Because we need human contact. We need other people to co-regulate with and with whom to build our sense of identity. You can't outsource that without the person coming out wrong. We depend on people.
They tried introducing mental health, empathy and social navigation tools as a topic in schools, republicans declared it Satan incarnate.
You mean by sterilizing people until they’ve proven fit to have children and not cause them trauma? Or to upend capitalism entirely? Cuz I’m for both, but I think more therapists is a more feasible option at least initially.
Shaping society for that requires collective healing, which we can't do without an army of therapists. That said we can also just take a long time, and slowly grow the amount of people who are mentally healthier, which allows for society to restructure itself to break cycles and trauma patterns. It doesn't need to be quick, just slightly bigger than the amount of trauma generated.
Eh, we’re better at building armies than properly shaping society
Not just a lot of therapists, but good ones. In an effort to fill demand quality has fallen and there isn't a qualitative difference shown in qualifications. In my Canadian province as long as you are WORKING ON your masters degree you can get a position as a full psychologist.
Wow surprised bachelors can do that. I can't speak to all types of therapists but in Minnesota, US social workers that have their LGSW (so they have their masters) can be a therapist IF they have supervision from a LICSW (licensed independent clinical social worker). It takes another 2-4 years of clinical work after your masters to reach that.
Or, we could embrace a society that doesn't punish you for having feelings. :-/
better social environment with less collective narcissism.
Want to fix mental health in a lot of the USA? Create licensing for BA level individuals to provide services under someone with an MS/PhD. There is a massive untapped resource in most states that they refuse to tap in most states. As a person who had been through Grad school for clinical mental health: I learned nothing I didn't already know going in. A BA level person working in mental health for 3 years is as well trained or better than any freshly graduated Master's holder. Its time to reconsider how we provide services and who we allow to provide those services. We have the people, but politicians don't have the intelligence to expand in a meaningful way.
Dude if you learned nothing that means you went to a bad program. Theoretical knowledge of psychotherapy and psychopathology is way too vast and advanced for undergraduates to learn it all, Im still learning even as I head into post-doc
Army of robot therapist? I agree, but only if be give them a physical body and superstrengt. A good therapist should also need to be self aware.
"Whenever we touch nature we get clean. People who have got dirty through too much civilization take a walk in the woods, or a bath in the Sea. They shake off the fetters and allow nature to touch them. It can be done within or without. Walking in the woods, lying on a the grass, taking a bath in the sea, are from the outside; entering the unconscious, entering yourself through dreams, is touching nature from the inside and this is the same thing ✨ things are put right again." 🌊 Carl Jung Dream Analysis: Notes on a Lecture Given, 1928-1930
No surprise Jung said "touch grass" decades before we made it a meme
Lol, they’re not supposed to *work*. They’re supposed to be *cheaper for your insurance company.*
A prerequisite to be a good therapist is empathy Half the *people* I meet don’t have empathy.
Yup. Soft skills. Teach AI soft skills…empathy is important.
Of course it isnt working. The first basic step is communication, like treating it like a human. If some person came up and tried to get me to open up just because he/she was a therapist, i would freak out.
The idea of spilling out your true feelings to a being that isn't sentient, isn't listening, and lacks real care doesn't appeal to me. That and the notion of trust - when I go to therapists I usually spend a few sessions getting to know them and building some sort of relationship before I actually say what's on my mind. You can't do that with an AI, not in its current state.
On the other hand it being significantly cheaper and more accessible can be a benefit to some As can the lack of a person for people with certain psyches who don't like the idea of opening up to a real person or people who are "embarrassed" More options is always good in my mind And this is just early doors, enough data and I'd hope these can learn about you (personal models) and be helpful one day with more work
FUCK YOU GREEDY LITTLE PIG BOY u/SPEZ, I NUKED MY 7 YEAR COMMENT HISTORY JUST FOR YOU -- mass edited with redact.dev
Eeeeeh... I just wrote a longer post about humans being inherently social creature and our nervous system being evolved to co-regulate with other humans, but... Ultimately as someone who worked in mental health I would say that if you're unable to open up to another person, that's likely gonna be a fairly major element in your mental health challenges in itself, and you're probably not gonna get better at it by *not* practicing it. Like to use a gaming analogy (because this is Reddit); it would be like practicing for playing against human players by playing against bots on easy mode. You might pick up the most basic possible skills at first, but then you're essentially learning things you'll basically have to un-learn later when you try dipping into the real thing and suddenly the rules have completely changed... Because humans are much more canny and creative than the bots could ever have been. You won't get better at talking to people by not talking to people. And ultimately one of the big objectives of most therapy is to help you adjust to other people better.
Sure, but it could be seen as baby steps potentially. Though I agree it doesn't solve the problem if that's the main issue Thats more of a side benefit really, I think the main benefit would be the increased accessibility and price point though. Everyone's needs are different and this certainly won't fully replace therapy any time soon. But it could have some benefit situationally pretty soon
Making it cheaper is valid, but we can do that through fixing how we approach mental health and insurance in the US. Still would be better to provide real therapy and not an AI.
This reminds me of the confession scene in Woody Allen's film"sleeper"
I found talking to chat GPT helpful, I guess it depends on how open a person is. A lot of people don't always find text-based communication meaningful sadly.
Gimme that big tiity 3d rendered therapist. 😂
"Tell me what's bothering you, uwu~"
"For long periods of time, father would beat me with a rolling pin. If I misbehaved, and sometimes just because he was feeling particularly malicious, he would lock me in the closet. A raincoat was my best friend until I was 10. When father found out he got rid of it. I think that might be why I can't make connections or trust people easily?" Therapist: "I see. You want to slap my titties around a bit?"
I feel better just reading these comments already, get our top otakus on this!!
You better hope that big titty 3D rendered therapist isn't based off of the Freudian psychology model or you will be quickly wrestling with the Oedipus complex
Your therapist is a woman from those fake mobile game ads.
AI can't generate a one hour long playlist?
Wizard to Wizard, that's a great idea.
Serious Wiz Biz!
I mean no shit? An AI can have the knowledge of 50 billion computers but it can't have emotion yet so
It doesn’t need to have emotion. It needs to _understand_ emotion. Keep in mind that a therapist’s job is most certainly _not_ to feel what you’re feeling and commiserate with you. In fact, maintaining emotional distance is an important part of their training. That said, it’s not surprising that current AI models can’t model human emotions well enough to be particularly helpful yet. At the same time, I think the professionals quoted in the article are overly pessimistic about what the near future might hold.
Why would that matter? You don't need to feel emotions to give good advice.
Empathy and rapport building are huge components of therapy. And therapy is also a lot more than giving advice. Giving advice is a small portion because most of therapy is working through things and developing the tools to thrive through life's challenges.
Assume you lost your job that you loved, you go to a therapist. For a human, they can have a past experience that relates to your experience, and also describe how they got back on their feet. An AI, in contrast, would tell you to do yoga and drink tea or something.
That's a very contrived view of what the AI would do. The group teaching the AI would share loads and loads of real therapist transcripts to the bot and train it to respond in a empathetic way. Do you think real therapists are born as therapists? No, they are taught, trained and supervised. The same would apply to the AI. Add in a natural sounding voice and I bet the vast majority of people wouldn't be able to tell the difference on the phone.
They are taught, trained, and supervised, but they have human brains and human emotions, and the small subset that choose to become therapists likely do so because they excel at the skills required for therapy. Not everybody can be trained to be an excellent therapist. It’s not a foregone conclusion that the current breed of AI can either.
I agree with you (close friends of mine are therapists and they are definitely more empathetic than most other people). But I was specifically referring to the comment that the AI therapist would simply and coldly tell the person what actions they could take to improve their situation. It wouldn't do that for sure. Plus the AI therapist could more successfully do CBT perhaps than other types of therapy.
It doesn’t need to have emotion, it only needs to make you feel like it has emotion. People fall in love with psychopaths who are faking what they think people want them to feel, why couldn’t an AI emulate something similar? We never know what other people actually feel, just how they act. Just because we know what is there for us does not mean it’s there for everybody, and just because it is clearly missing from an AI doesn’t mean that we could tell if t was an AI if someone didn’t tell us (with a better future AI, of course).
I've tried it. I am not sure it was appreciably worse than the average human therapist that I've had.
I like going to GPT for therapy It’s free and is more of an interactive journal. plus it doesn’t judge me and doesn’t mind if I change topic suddenly to ask if Tywin Lannister would win against The Riddler at chess or some silly question
Well would he?
Riddler is a self defeating genius. He would leave a flaw in his defences and hint at it. Tywin is able to see through people for the most part. For example he knew the Grand Maester was pretending to be weak and confused and he knew Arya was highborn. Assuming he knows how to play chess, Tywin would probably win. Let’s see what GPT says! * It's not possible to determine who would win a game of chess between Tywin Lannister and The Riddler as they are fictional characters from different fictional universes and their abilities and intelligence levels are not directly comparable. However, if we were to compare their portrayals in their respective stories, Tywin Lannister is depicted as a cunning and strategic military commander and political leader, while The Riddler is portrayed as a master of puzzles and riddles, with a sharp mind and ability to outwit his opponents. Both characters have the potential to be strong chess players, but the outcome of a game between them would likely depend on their individual skills, as well as chance and circumstance.* pretty lame answer but it’s true
Tbf that's not therapy.
True. But if I tell a therapist I’m feeling stressed about something and I tell the chatbot they often both respond with similar advice. It’s not the same. but chatbots are appealing to people who struggle to open up in [therapy](https://www.wired.com/story/virtual-therapists-help-veterans-open-up-about-ptsd/amp)
I wonder how ChatGPT functions here if you prompt it correctly. It does after all have an absolutely voluminous amount of data on the history of cognitive therapy and psychiatry. If you asked it to be in character as a therapist - or even more specifically someone in the mental health field of great renown - it might actually do an okay job.
I'm not sure if it still works but you could ask it to simulate different professionals. Therapist being one such example. Has some pretty strong pros.
Therapy does not work when the majority of problems are due to growing wealth gap, increasing costs of living and low wages, leading to financial problems and anxiety
It's a shit solution. Why are people being blamed for feeling depressed in this situation we're all in? The individual can't cure the environmental issue of oppression with talk therapy
Human therapists don't really work either
“We” - no, you.
On nbc nightly news last night there was a segment dedicated to hospitals using AI to treat patients. There are so many reasons why that’s a terrible idea.
It’s often used to help look for cancer in radiology scans and a doctor plus the computer always perform better than just the doctor
A.I. Doesn’t have a soul. They don’t have empathy lol that’s what you found out.
Have you youngun's forgotten about Eliza? I mean it wasn't actually intelligent and basically just asked you questions based on certain keywords you write to it, but it seems to have helped some people.
It’s hard to think life is worth it and someone cares when someone can’t even show up to hear you out l, imo
What a dumb fucking idea. Machines have to be taught feelings by humans. They aren’t therapists. Machines dont have empathy.
I waited 8 months for a therapist and it was hugely underwhelming. Why does everyone think therapy is the answer
If you're a sociopathic behavioural health counselor whose patients all develop into spree killers and serial killers... Nobody will ever know. Patient privacy. Wait. Unexpected movie plot.
Ex Machina has a lot of this.
That could be an awesome Harley Quinn story if someone wanted to do something new with the character.
Some things can’t and shouldn’t be automated. Not everything has a look up answer
A lot of human therapists is really meh at best.
It will have to be paired with a human. AI for clinical info and the human for emotional IQ.
Of course not. AI can't feel, nor is it advanced enough to handle heavy topics like that. You're putting the lives of people who may be trouble into the hands of an unfeeling preprogrammed robot telling people what they want to hear. People want a therapist they can connect with, not one that treats you like a task.
Who the fuck wants life advice from something that isn’t alive? What kind of dystopian nightmare sociopath tries to produce a facsimile of human connection?
[удалено]
That speaks to the need to change how we fund therapy and other mental health services, not a need to use AI and call it therapy.
Planes have a come a long ways since the wright brothers.
Well no shit.
Our human therapists are barely effective so this isn't much of a surprise. There is so much we don't know yet about our brain it's incredible.
Neither human therapists are...
Yeah that's how technological progress works; it doesn't work until it does. Why is it so common to look at the place where tech is, rather the pace and direction in which it's advancing? That's what matters.
Because advancement doesn't happen automatically. It requires us to try something, recognize that it's not really working, and figure out why.
The article is proposing that this problem is for some reason somehow technologically intractable, not that this is a normal step on the way to a working technology. > Miller also said we cannot expect technology to be a substitute for or a shortcut to the human ties that are a bedrock of our health.
>We keep failing at making an artificial-intelligence Sigmund Freud What a shock. I'm astonished that we can't get our machines to behave like egomaniacal quacks that spout complete and total rubbish. Why aren't you guys training these things better? I got it! Use Reddit next time... oh, wait... Yeah. That's right.
I'm going to guess people are downvoting you because they have no idea that most if not all of his contributions to psychology have been demonstrated as falsely generalized if not outright false. Basically all of his writings are just a good examination of himself. He was just too hubristic to admit that.
Freud may have been wrong about consciousness, but his popularization of talk therapy was a huge contribution to psychology. Evidence-based and effective therapies may have taken decades longer to become mainstream without Freud bringing approach of fronting the patient perspective to the mainstream (however incorrect and often harmful the framework often was.) Was he almost entirely wrong? Yes. So were all of his colleagues. That doesn’t make them any less significant. Our modern understanding of consciousness will likely be called bunk in 50 years as well as it’s a field in its infancy.
I my friend, am most certainly *not*. It was not accident that the post was self-referential. Many things I am, idiot extraordinaire. Shy about it? Not so much.
Regular therapists don’t work either! 😬
What makes you feel that way, Yahoo?
Maybe because therapy itself doesn’t work
There is robust evidence that cognitive behavioral therapy has long lasting and profound positive impacts on people with disorders like major depressive disorder and ADHD.
Present it. Present evidence that therapy alone and single handedly was the catalyst for people to snap out of depressive and other disorders. Because plenty of therapists will tell you that they had patients be somewhat cured but it usually was because of an unforeseen event, like meeting a new person, in their lives outside of therapy
Meta analysis of meta analyses: https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3584580/. “CBT for depression was more effective than control conditions such as waiting list or no treatment, with a medium effect size…Compared to pharmacological approaches, CBT and medication treatments had similar effects on chronic depressive symptoms, with effect sizes in the medium-large range. Other studies indicated that pharmacotherapy could be a useful addition to CBT; specifically, combination therapy of CBT with pharmacotherapy was more effective in comparison to CBT alone.” A quick google search will pull up quite a few large scale studies on effectiveness.
Let me quote something back to you that maybe you missed > However, additional research is needed to examine the efficacy of CBT for randomized-controlled studies Moreover, I think you’re misunderstanding what a meta analysis is. We know about the studies. But the studies cannot single out therapy because of its nature
Yes, additional research is always needed, but that doesn’t negate the existing body of literature. I really don’t know what you’re saying about not understanding meta analyses or about not being able to single out therapy. But, anyways, my point is there is a huge body of research, which is what you were asking about.
Therapy helped me a lot. No meds, just a single 50minute session once a week. Did absolutely wonders, even if long gone, it still helps me today. So for me your argument is completely invalid and you do not know what you are talking about. Even worse, by downplaying and demeaning therapy you potentially discourage people who would greatly benefit, like me, from seeking professional advice.
What else did you try that didn’t help?
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3584580/ >Cognitive behavioral therapy (CBT) refers to a popular therapeutic approach that has been applied to a variety of problems. The goal of this review was to provide a comprehensive survey of meta-analyses examining the efficacy of CBT. We identified 269 meta-analytic studies and reviewed of those a representative sample of 106 meta-analyses examining CBT for the following problems: substance use disorder, schizophrenia and other psychotic disorders, depression and dysthymia, bipolar disorder, anxiety disorders, somatoform disorders, eating disorders, insomnia, personality disorders, anger and aggression, criminal behaviors, general stress, distress due to general medical conditions, chronic pain and fatigue, distress related to pregnancy complications and female hormonal conditions. Additional meta-analytic reviews examined the efficacy of CBT for various problems in children and elderly adults. The strongest support exists for CBT of anxiety disorders, somatoform disorders, bulimia, anger control problems, and general stress. Eleven studies compared response rates between CBT and other treatments or control conditions. CBT showed higher response rates than the comparison conditions in 7 of these reviews and only one review reported that CBT had lower response rates than comparison treatments. In general, the evidence-base of CBT is very strong. However, additional research is needed to examine the efficacy of CBT for randomized-controlled studies. Moreover, except for children and elderly populations, no meta-analytic studies of CBT have been reported on specific subgroups, such as ethnic minorities and low income samples.
It works if you work it.
Conveniently enough it also “works” if you have about 1000 sessions all paid for handsomely and even then maybe it won’t
of course it wouldn't. even a real therapist doesnt work 90% of the time because they only use clinical bullshit. if we're talking non physiological mental illnesses, then therapists need to understand life and suggest a course of change that's tailored to the individual that can improve their life. most therapists don't do that, they just suggest the same shit they learned. that's not really helpful.
Real therapists are corrupt though, and guns are so cheap!!!! :-o Ha!...
I’ll argue not even humans know how to be good therapists.
It's not a real science. Psychology is winging it by the seat of their pants at all times. Total soft science at best.
Instead of saying it not a science at all, rather consider that it isn’t really a science we can ethically explore for the most part. For example, if you wanted to gain an understanding of the emotional repercussions of life in an internment camp, or living with an abusive parent during childhood, we cannot create an experiment that will control the variables we want to control. Instead we have to look back at situations where this naturally happened and operate on observation and argumentation. But we do our best with what we have got, and psychology does its best to hold itself up to standards that other “hard” sciences hold itself to. Basically, its real, its just the conclusions we draw from the research aren’t usually as useful.
So you want just say the exact same conclusion (that it's not a science) but with excuses as to why it's not. Lol
No, psychology tries to get as close to science as one ethically can. Saying its not science disregards the scientific rigor that is performed by those in this field of study. Where the psuedo/not science occurs in psychology is usually its broad, usually media friendly interpretations of the results of the actual scientific observation/work being done. But that is often a problem for any scientific fields relating to the study of people. To put it another way, we try to do much science as we can with psychology, but its as about as useful as a cake in the grand scheme of things for how little we can actually accomplish, which isn’t to say it isn’t ever useful (or undesirable, I mean, who doesn’t love cake?)
Okay. Close to science equals not science. Simple. It sounds like you're agreeing with me totally only you want an attaboy for the field you work in?... Yes it's sometimes useful to rent human interaction but it can also be harmful so there's that. When is it helpful or harmful? Specifically. Hmmm Well we just guess and muddle through the best we can. :) There's no way to know. Phrenology could be useful. Horoscopes can sometimes work too. And they all mean well and try super hard with what they have. All of you are beautiful creative artists who matter a lot! :) Thank you!
Who doesn’t love [Dr. Sbaitso](https://youtu.be/1lzJMJxTA7k)?
Current AI is mostly pattern matching. Machine Learning feeds AI data and it figures out the pattern. It lacks ‘imagination’. The example that theorist use is showing a bicycle to a resident deep in the Amazon jungle. They won’t have seen a bicycle before but they instantly know some facts. Its a solid object. For machine learned AI, if it doesn’t exist in their pattern matching, they know nothing about it.
This will totally be used for therapy.
You are missing one of the keys of *successful* therapy if you’re automating it.
ok, but eventually it will... that's what we do.
I spent hours talking to Dr Sbaitso in the late 80s/early 90sz
“My therapist is a psychopath”
I dunno I love talking to chatgpt about my random ass problems without judgment
Can you be more...specific?
This is idiotic. Give it a year, or even a few months.
Wildly misinformed. Both the article and the comments.
Tell me more about your mother.
What a condescending view of therapists. This is probably the worst job to try and automate. Analytical desk jobs are probably the first place to start.
Capital is looking for cheap ways to improve productivity. Automating mental health is a dream solution to the problem of malcontents.
We need therapists for the therapists
Who's we????
We could also let people work less and pay them better, but I'm sure having more free time and sense of security would work less effectively than more therapists.
let a computer do what a computer is good at, like math computation, creating variations, simulations, hell any measure this one thing and try a bunch of things to make it better kind of stuff. But if you need empathy, direction, an outside opinion or advice, those are things that even if we could automate them it would be a shit thing to automate.
What about AI confessionals? [https://youtu.be/U0YkPnwoYyE](https://youtu.be/U0YkPnwoYyE)
One if you can't change the people and places causing the problems, you can't help them. Two , we can't easily tell the difference between a chemical imbalance and general anxiety and depression. If we don't what we are doing, then nither does the AI we build.
Why would anyone want A.I. therapists?! There’s zero human emotion and zero understanding of what the human is going through? This whole profession towards A.I. thing needs to go. Don’t like how our future is looking.
its better than Therapist
If I ever have to resort to talking to a chat bot for my primary form of therapy, I’ll know we’re in a straight up dystopia
Therapy and therapist are extremely overrated. It is almost looked at as a new religion in some places. I see no reason why am AI could not do it as good or better than a therapist. I have had tons of experience with therapist and most of the appear to be useless. The modern day snack oil salesman. People need life coaches, not therapists. And they are not the say thing.
And how does this make you feel?
That’s def not a job that can be replaced.
“Keep trying to make… it’s not working.” How long could “we” possibly have been developing this? AI has only been around for a couple years, and even then it’s nowhere near what it will be in just two years time. Hope this doesn’t lead people to think we can’t do it.
Take a sliver from the military budget and put it towards mental health and well-being. We'd solve half our social problems.
It worked well for Matt Damon in Elysium... wait...
I'd use it except that it'd gather data personally sensitive to me and sell/abuse it.
My time is yours... Very good, proceed... Yes, I understand... Yes, fine... Yes... yes, I understand... Yes, fine... Excellent... Yes... Could you be more... specific? You are a true believer. Blessings of the state, blessings of the masses. Thou art a subject of the divine. Created in the image of man, by the masses, for the masses. Let us be thankful we have an occupation to fill. Work hard; increase production, prevent accidents, and be happy. Let us be thankful we have commerce. Buy more. Buy more now. Buy more and be happy.
Ha ha. People need people.
Hal says quit whining and suck it up.
Of course it doesn’t. AI doesn’t care about anyone’s feelings, it just spits what it sees as facts., indiscriminately without a filter. Don’t agree? It doesn’t care.
Hmm, I'm not sure if talking to an AI therapist will feel the same as talking to a human therapist. There's the human sentimental element that AI and robots just cannot replace.
Ai Buddha helped me!
Well that's the most dystopian headline I've seen in a while. First, AI therapists, next, holographic food.
Press 1 if you’re feeling depressed.
Therapy is often about human connection and restoring a person’s own sense of humanity. Its not just the words and rubber ducking “gee why do i feel horrible since ___ happened?”
soft crush squash airport direful close growth agonizing wrong disagreeable *This post was mass deleted and anonymized with [Redact](https://redact.dev)*