The BT Show

According to Darwin’s theory of natural selection, we as humans strive to survive, progress for success, solve (problems) to evolve, move to groove, etc. Much like the turtle and his shell, the porcupine and her spines, and the possum who plays dead, certain defense mechanisms—both inherent and acquired—serve to protect us, ultimately, to promote survival. Much attention has been devoted to exploring evolution in human beings and it can be suggested that given the increased insight regarding our own adaptive “progress,” one might easily get carried away, expecting all protective measures to be infallible, reliably and dependably keeping us from harm and ensuring that we thrive.

However, one must consider the case of Barry the Bee. I think it is safe to say that Muhammad Ali’s famed taunt, boasting that his ability to “float like a butterfly and sting like a bee,” permitted him to defeat his opponent is actually quite misleading. Unlike the world champion boxer, there will be no gold medal for Barry the Bee…no Rumble in the Jungle…no Thrilla in Manilla…no major motion picture about his life (actually, that last one is not true), because in Barry’s case, with his sting, he gives his life.

And what about Pepe le Pew? While the ability to deter and disgust most any predator with just a little wiggle of his hindquarters is enough to inflate his ego (according to Darwin, the skunk appears “conscious of his power”), even he cannot deny the fact that he cannot find a date. With all due respect, the cat he is always chasing in the cartoons is not being coy…she just doesn’t like him because he stinks.
Loose contemplation regarding the physical and social consequences both Barry and Pepe likely endure as a result of their respective defense mechanisms provides insight regarding the behavioral activation (BA) model. All references to cartoon characters aside, Jacobson et al. thoroughly review the origin and history, as well as the underlying principles of the BA model. While widely recognized as a major component of cognitive therapy, BA seemed to be overlooked when it came time to interpret and explain the efficacy of CT. Specifically, much of the success associated with CT was attributed to the cognitive aspect. Jacobson et al. challenge these assumptions and provide empirical data that supports the contrary: BA, applied independently, represents a potentially promising intervention strategy for individuals with depression.

Evidence supporting this behavioral approach can be extracted from real life, every day life—not just the cartoons. As we have discussed, one may experience negative cognitions in response to a negative experience (ie. a perceived threat to one’s social self). Such negative reinforcement (real or perceived) is likely to influence future thoughts and behaviors, as well as the way they are interpreted. Thus, the withdrawal from social situations, low self-esteem, and other symptoms that we associate with depression may initially have been defense mechanisms…and such behaviors may result in social isolation, decreased sense of social support, poor social skills, etc. While avoidant behavior may be useful in some instances, it can also contribute to a vicious cycle…

Some concluding questions/thoughts:

What comes first, the Dream chicken or the egg?

If you are a hammer, is everything/everyone a nail?

Are we really what we eat…and if so, does that make me bowl of quinoa and a bottle of Bud Light?

Wouldn't each of the behavior therapy technologies make great sitcoms? Or at least sitcom episodes? For example, imagine if Zack used a DBT approach when he went to pick up Kelly for a date and she asked him if she looked "fat" in her neon blue spandex dress.