Efficacy Of Assistive Natural Therapy Compared To Other Psychological Therapies For Depression
I got acquainted with different psychotherapy methods. I got depressed because of the realization that the current understanding on human nature was not at all reflected in psychological treatment advocated by psychotherapists’ circles across the country. I came to know that the magnitude of the problems that are encountered by both psychology practitioners, mental health seekers at psychological sociological biological cultural levels on account of the therapy models and the therapy settings. Taking cue from human evolution I have made use of the following assumptions on human nature healing. Human is biologically endowed with nature setting. Human survival and acquiring knowledge are a non conscious process. Human cannot be completely satisfied by the indoor or isolated situation but by the virtue of the natural ambience in the meaningful interaction. Human evolutionary necessity is an organic process which progresses in a cyclical manner.
New age psychotherapies seem to ignore human evolutionary characteristics that they are propagating a methodology that is nothing but a sophisticated extension of the behaviour and cognitive model of teaching or methods. It is very clear that we cannot be satisfactorily live if we try to liberate ourselves from the natural environment, our sense organs which are a meditative process which can’t be taken recourse to by all. Obliviously no one cannot advocate such a process in the indoor therapy room. It would be possible to get ourselves involved activities at a natural environment and have absolute involvement there In the indoor therapy setting, we are conscious that we are undergoing the therapy. All our sense organs are active. We are more conscious on our issues and self centred then but when we are absolutely involved in the life generated environment we forget everything at least for a short while, we are not conscious about it.
A few issues in other psychotherapiesHuman nature and uniquenessWe have an evolutionary past. We were then hunter gatherers. Many years our ancestors involved different kind of physical activities. These activities moulded our ancestors, they lived and passed on their genes to us. Actually our physique and our genes were shaped by the necessity of the physical world where they lived. They did not any exercise but the various physical activities that made ensure their existence. Our ancestors that hunter gatherers did spend a lot of time travelling by bare foot at a gentle jog. Their calories that burnt per pound of body weight is about the same as ours. Hunter-gatherer’s didn’t run about much but they lived on a relatively low calorie diet. The men typically walked about 11 km a day for hunting food. Women involvement for hunting were less. They walked 6km a day. Both men and women did energy sapping tasks like chopping wood and digging up tubers to eat. They tended to be lean. Hunter gatherers did a different activities. They alternate low intensity but fairly constant movement with shorts bursts of high intensity activity. Hunting climbing trees chopping wood. They also alternate periods of activity intensively with days where they did relatively little.
Hunter gatherers approach is really convincing for our most pampered bodies. We have to follow same pattern of alternating method workout one day with an easy one the next day produces higher levels of fitness with lower rates of injury. The natural cross involment that was a good aspect of life as a hunter gatherers. Hunter gatherers life style is beneficial. It seems that activities such as walking and short intensity activity that would be ensured interval training short intermittent burst of low to moderate to high intensity exercise are beneficial but infuse with rest and recovery should ensured. We are social beings so activities should do in a social setting in outdoor or open places where we get sunlight which gives our skin vitamin D. My natural cross journey I was curious but sceptical on natural cross programme planned. I liked the idea of improving psychological wellbeing and getting medically fit in a short period of time. I decided to start with two individuals. Three times a week for four weeks. We went into the hill station, having climbed one half kilometres. During this activity we interspersed with a shot time break. Sometimes we had to lay down on the meadow. We sometimes tried to be relaxed. During our stay there, I initiated talking to them and we became more openness with each other. Then it was time for the feedback. There was a good news. It was that we all wanted to be there again and our happiness had improved by a remarkable level. we were elated and wondered why this had happened.
The next day after the natural cross journey, I got a call from participants. They shared their changes in their mood and they are motivated to live happily in this life, even accepting their shortcomings. But the bad news was that although they were able to be happy. They had on their previous visit and felt good about it but their working ambiance is not comfortable so they want to do the same natural cross journey again but it is not practically possible. So it works better for some people who are bored depressed than for others Cross natural journey that can be worked in to busy life with relative easy. The real appeal of natural cross walking is that it can easily slip in to our weekend. By doing this, we cope with the psychological pressures. It is either we tune in to our bodies and focus on what we are doing or what we dissociate and we think of other things and forget to ruminate on our issues. Sometime we did intensively running and walking. This helped us keep up the pace and rhythm. As we became tired, it can help to reframe our feeling. We are genetically predetermined to do short bursts of intense. It means that increasing amount of activity in the natural settings that we build in to our everyday life. It would be have a dramatic effect on our mood, wellbeing and health.
Explaining the theory of ANT
Human beings and their development could not be looked at detaching them for their natural social and materialistic environment because it was with the natural settings that human constantly interacted. But the environment is not a constant one. It keeps changes so the natural environment and social interaction that we will also have to look in to the particular organic settlement and social events the individual has successfully participated in over a certain period of time. An isolated trajectory will not help us improve our well being. We have to consider our biological inheritance, as other species are, they are born into an environment that is forged by the activities of previous generations. Biological inheritance carried in the genes is added the social inheritance carried in the meanings of artefacts’ and practices in the individual’s environment. Human well being is immeasurably enriched and extended through the individuals active interaction with the nature as this is encountered in activity and interaction with others Natural setting.
Obviously, the natural settings have an important. An individual who lives is an environment that is devoid of rich life environment cannot help it. A biological behaviour does not develop in impoverished and unnatural environment. In an unnatural environment individuals will not be flourished. From an evolutionary point of view, human beings have evolved from ancestral apes through thousands of years. If we examine the anatomy of various animals we will know that after every stage of evolution it has attained more and more complexity as is manifested by the difference between amoeba and the man. Human brain also may have passed through similar evolutionary stages. There was a man who wanted to see a forest. Where can I see a forest he asked a monk. Do you see a lot trees there said the monk pointing towards the forest. This is a forest. So the man set out his journey to the forest; he reached the forest, entered it and continued his search. At the end of his tired search he came out of the forest and met the saint once again. Did you see the forest asked the monk. No I didn’t see the forest; I saw only trees.
⚠️ Remember: This essay was written and uploaded by an average student. It does not reflect the quality of papers completed by our expert essay writers. To get a custom and plagiarism-free essay click here.