Interview with Michael Muthukrishna - episode #02 of Flexible Conversations

Are you interested in learning more about Acceptance and Commitment Therapy? Then join my newsletter and get my free seven part ACT Mini-Course! Simply visit stevenchayes.com and click on "Yes! Please send it to me!"
Discover a whole new way to practice therapy with PsychFlex. Visit psychflex.com and get immediate access.
Follow me on Facebook: / stevenchayesphd
Follow me on Twitter: / stevenchayes
Follow me on Instagram: / drstevenchayes
Follow me on LinkedIn: / steven-c-hayes

[@fionaoneill9174]

I don't think that a good outcome of RFT intervention would be to change the numbers of people "on the spectrum" or otherwise reduce human variability. It's also not true that people without language don't have a sense of self. They may not have the sense of self you've previously described in your work, but imo this is as dangerous rhetoric as an idea of heritability as inheritance and plays into the eugenic history you criticise. Maybe behavioural science is at its best when it creates increasing degrees of freedom to choose from a reasonably distributed appetitive array rather than engineering particular trajectories of change towards a predetermined outcome. I think interventionists of all stripes have done a lot of well intentioned harm in assuming there's an ideal type of self/language used etc that people need to be nudged towards. Maybe we need to let go of the need to engineer controlled outcomes, given increasing complexity?