[haswell]

> I can take the effort articulate these emotions into thoughts, and those thoughts may perhaps be negative / harmful

But those thoughts are ultimately interpretations of the emotion, and those interpretations are built on a foundation of past experience and external factors. The feeling of anxiety and the feeling of excitement are remarkably similar, and "I'm anxious about this upcoming event" and "I'm excited about this upcoming event" are two potential interpretations of the same feeling.

> But in many, many cases it's clear the emotions preceded the thoughts.

The question is: what preceded the emotions that preceded those thoughts? I think that in many cases, it's hard to trace this all the way back. There are times when thoughts (e.g. incessant rumination) directly lead to the negative emotions, which then lead to thoughts, but now there's a feedback loop and it's hard to tell where it started.

There's a certain kind of co-emergence that seems to happen, and the interpretive layer has a lot to do with how it plays out. And as interpretations change, so do the resulting chains of thoughts/emotions.

[everdrive]

I think that's a fair interpretation, however I'd strongly argue two points:

- Sometimes, emotions precede (and at least set the stage) for thoughts.

- The reality is not so clear cut as the CBTs state. ie, they say that "Thoughts [always] dictate emotions."

That said, CBT is still very effective, and will yield improvements for most people. It's just that their core tenant seems to be an oversimplification.

[haswell]

I think that's fair as well with the "sometimes", and I fully agree re: the oversimplification. I think CBT is ultimately labeling the most recognizable stages of certain mental phenomena and providing a framework for interacting with and guiding that phenomena. But as a discipline I think CBT knows very little (relatively speaking) about the machinery involved, and at best we have a low resolution understanding that is surely incomplete.

But yeah, my belief in CBT is mostly for its utility.

As a side note, I've found some of Lisa Feldman Barrett's work on emotions to be pretty interesting. It dives into newer research behind how emotions are intrinsically connected to other bodily processes, and explores some of ways that the emergence of emotional states doesn't match our intuitions.

[broscillator]

sorry if this sounds out of left field but what you're talking about is exactly what buddhism is about, you're kind of describing dependent origination: https://tricycle.org/beginners/buddhism/dependent-originatio...

[haswell]

Not far afield at all. That’s another rabbit hole I’ve gone down pretty deeply, and I’ve found it an incredibly useful set of ideas for thinking (or not thinking) about the world. It cuts through a lot of the stuff we tend to get stuck in our heads about.

On this tangent, I’ve found mindfulness meditation to be one of the most useful tools when navigating the harder feelings. In that mode of observation, you start to notice these things just unfolding in the space of consciousness.

It made a lot of the ideas I’d been introduced to in therapy actually become real experientially, e.g. the idea that I am not my thoughts sounds nice, but while meditating, I begin to experience this as thoughts come and go like waves, and eventually just stop. But I’m still aware. It was the first time I could really feel the difference between “me” and “a thought my brain is thinking right now”. Getting that separation makes dealing with the harder thoughts significantly easier.