View/Open - UZSpace Home

negative symptoms and then move to the "future", while the last-mentioned will look
at the "present" situation, and then they will move to the "past." Self-introspection
automatically, in one way or another, will then come to the fore. This is something
that logotherapists will try to avoid.
.
In criticizing dereflection it is necessary to keep the different philosophical presup-
positions ofthe different personality psychologists in mind. While logotherapists
also take neurophysiological and/or genetic factors into account when applying dere­
flection in a therapeutic setting, behaviorists, with their strong emphasis that all beha­
vior is learned (Hjelle & Ziegler 1992:294), will point out that this is a technique that
focuses more on "covert" actions "inside a person" that on overt actions ofpeople as
determined by their life experiences.
For Skinner (comp 1953, 1974), behavior is best understood in terms ofresponses to
the environment. While behavioral-psychologists would welcome the choices, the
cognitive thought-processes and even the confrontational nature (at times) oflogothe­
rapists in dealing with their patients/clients, their treatment are basically based on 0­
perant conditioning (Hjelle & Ziegler 1992:300-330). This treatment inter alia in­
cludes classical conditioning, extinction, reinforcement, aversive stimuli (like
punishments), token economy, social skills mining, assertiveness (socially-skilled)
tmining, self-monitoring, and biofeedback (biological feedback), which rest on diffe­
rent philosophical-psychological presumptions (see HJelle & Ziegler 1992:314-319).
The proverbial Sitz im Leben ("original setting') ofthe patient/client is not seriously
enough taken into account in logotherapeutic circles - seen from a social cognitive
perspective. The social milieu and relevant cultural issues that are part and parcel of
modern societies are not genuinely opemting very strongly when dereflection is prac-
44