Spontaneous Personality Synthesis in Group Therapy

Combined therapy is defined as concurrent dyadic and group therapy with the same therapist. This paper focuses on a neglected aspect of combined therapy: broaching and exploring this question with one's individual, patient. The author shows how raising this question: (1) alters the therapeutic field whether or not the patient joins; (2) can sharpen the therapist's understanding of the indications and contraindications for group membership; (3) offers untapped therapeutic approaches and opportunities to clarify issues in the individual treatment; and (4) stirs up countertransference issues related to issues of profitability, the transference of the patient in individual treatment, and the transference of the group-as-a-whole. Several case examples are provided.     

Worldmates and internal relatedness

In recent work, Jonathan Schaffer (Mind 119: 341–376, 2010) has attempted to argue that counterpart theorists are committed to holding that any two actual objects are bound together in a modally substantial sense. By clarifying the core elements of counterpart theory, I explain why Schaffer’s argument fails.     

Noneism,Ontology, and Fundamentality

In the recent literature on all things metaontological, discussion of a notorious Meinongian doctrine—the thesis that some objects have no kind of being at all—has been conspicuous by its absence. And this is despite the fact that this thesis is the central element of the noneist metaphysics of Richard Routley (1980) and Graham Priest (2005). In this paper, we therefore examine the metaontological foundations of noneism, with a view to seeing exactly how the noneist's approach to ontological inquiry differs from the orthodox Quinean one. We proceed by arguing that the core anti‐Quinean element in noneism has routinely been misidentified: rather than concerning Quine's thesis that to be is to be the value of a variable, the real difference is that the noneist rejects what we identify as Quine's “translate‐and‐deflate” methodology. In rejecting this aspect of Quinean orthodoxy, the noneist is in good company: many of those who think that questions of fundamentality should be the proper focus of ontological inquiry can be read as rejecting it too. Accordingly, we then examine the differences between the noneist's conception of ontology and that offered by the fundamentalist. We argue that these two anti‐Quinean approaches differ in terms of their respective conceptions of the theoretical role associated with the notion of being. And the contrast that emerges between them is, in the end, an explanatory one.     

Examining the Effects of Social Bonds and Shame on Drug Recovery within an On-Line Support Community

Past research has demonstrated the utility of on-line support groups for individuals to form relationships and make connections. Additionally, some on-line communities have expanded to provide various types of support, particularly for deviant behavior. These virtual communities may be particularly indispensable to individuals who, out of fear of condemnation, are reluctant to seek traditional forms of social support. For purposes of this study, we examined how members of a substance abuse recovery on-line support group expressed feelings pertaining to their own substance abuse, as well as their processes of attempted or successful recovery. Using an inductive approach for our preliminary analysis, we first assessed which theories were most prevalent throughout the writers’ journals. We then used these theories, both Hirschi’s theory of social control and Braithwaite’s theory of reintegrative shaming, as frameworks to explore the differences between those who were in recovery and those who were still using.