This book is a self help book that helps the reader by going through various scenarios and cognitive therapy. It gives you the right way of doing things and the wrong way (it's very black and white). Check it out sometime.

Dr. Ellis has done it again! (I must not be spiteful or digressfrom the contents of this book or I will be breaking the guidelines ofAmazon.com). So I will just state the truth instead. Ellis has claimed RET for himself and Dr. Beck. Well, it was created by Dr. Low in 1937. Jack Trimpey invented RR as an alternative to alcohol with "The Small Book". Using cognitive- behavioral principles. Ellis wrote the intro. Then he coveted RR with this book. If you are an athiest, agnostic, and NOT a falling down drunk, give Jack's book, Rational Recovery, a try. I don't think it was a very kind thing for this man to do. I did read this book. And it does seem incredibly simple-minded in the extreme. While Jack acknowledges a mid-brian "thirst for the alcoholic which can be talked back to, Ellis is sticking totally to the A-B-C method for alcholism. The examples he gives are really funny. The client states that he had no thought about drinking. Then the RET therapist interrogates the client! "You must have had some thoughts". Finally, the client backs down and says "Yes! Yes! Alright! I did say something to myself I guess." Therapist: "Like wanting to drink?" "yes, yes, I must have said something to myself when I saw the liquor store! " This is called "therapeutic aggression" where the therapist aggressively forces the client to fit into the therapist's paradighm of the universe. The entire book is loaded with cases like this!

Jack's book is much better for people who are not going down the drain. The wording of this book is very bad. As if Ellis wrote it on the subway to one of his singing lectures. If you are a falling down drunk, go to A.A. A Rational-Emotive Therapist told me that she has had "good luck" with her clients going to Alchoholics Anonymous! And she just thinks the world of Albert Ellis. Yes, I was seeing her for help!

While applying REBT to addiction and recovery may seem cumbersome at first, it DOES work and there are many many people that have recovered by applying the ideas and techniques presented in this book.

Ellis's REBT is a basis for SMART Recovery, and this book basically shows the REBT aspects of SMART.

Another reviewer has pointed to the Small Book of Rational Recovery as an alternative to this book, however, the primary author of that book no longer agrees with it's contents. The Small Book IS however, still on the recommended reading list at SMART.

Overall, this book provides excellent examples of applying REBT to alcohol and addiction issues.

As someone who feels that the only self-help book that anyone ever needs is David Burns' "Feeling Good," I was charmed to learn that Albert Ellis was the vanguard thinker of this cognitive approach to all. And here I find it applied to abusive drinking! What a treat, and at a crucial time.

Basically, the book shows you how you can teach yourself to analyze thoughts about drinking and to re-channel your actions. I find its logic unquestionable. VERY, very accepting of people, it makes me feel markedly more tranquil just reading it.

This book is not only helpful, but it's funny, also. Ellis is a rather salty person, sprinkling his writing with expletives here and there, which makes this logical, very useful book a giggle right when I needed one. I have heard some say that he's too rough in his language, but I find it a refreshing change, and a necessary one in the face of the real crudeness of alcohol abuse and the life it entails.

In response to the other reviewer who suggests that somehow his brother's suicide was precipitated by Ellis (!), I simply have to recap his constant allusion to the idea that no one can "make" you do anything. You choose to do everything that you do. Obviously, some people are too disturbed to think through it (this man evidently was)-- but for those who can -- it's awesome.

I found this title in a mainstream bookstore, among tomes of 12-step books...a ratio I propose to change if I am at all able to do so!

I am going to buy another title on the next "click!"

Abused women, do NOT read this book BEFORE therapy or before you are well on your way to recovery. This book will RETRAUMATISE you. Dr. Ellis, whilst a well-respected psychologist, misuses his authority by speaking the truth WITHOUT love. He does make some very valid points, but the book is permeated with the idea that others have the perfect right to run roughshod over anyone who can't "stop" them. Yes, we all own our emotions. Yes, we each create our own responses to how others treat us. HOWEVER, we, each and every one of us, ALSO are responsible for HOW OUR BEHAVIOR effects others. This is especially true for abusive people who brutally control others through threats, intimidation, double-bind situations and the misuse of trust inherent in intmate relationships. IT IS NOT YOUR FAULT, even if a notable psychologist says it is.

This book by Dr. Ellis sounds like a weak rationalization for justifying the idolization of Darwin's Survival of the Fittest Theory for the Ignorant. It's too bad that it seems to be skewed toward domestic relations where the stronger partner has license to ignore the sensitivity or the humanity of the weaker partner. Unfortunately, this pattern is not limited only to intimate relations but appears upon every street corner as well as every street, if not on every playground. There seems to be little evidence of reactionary refusals included in attempts to set limits on such behavior. In most cases, the "stronger, more intelligent" person refuses to stoop to the level of the ignorant person who uses such tactics to try to control, ideally, to prevent wallowing in the stench of the ignorant persons who use this method pretending it represents control, power, and strength. In most cases, it's not worth the bother since such "acting out" by weak-minded persons don't deserve to have their poorly constructed "arguments" met with legitimate response, and are usually too ignorant to understand the benefit of alternative methods. This "typical bully behavior" that doesn't even rise to the level of legitimate S&M, much less pass for communication, deserves the only kind of response possible in such situations - complete dismissal because of its failed credibility. The public nusiance that it is, however aggravating, is best left to stew in its own disgraced juice, spiced by its own concoction of frustration. Why would it deserve more recognition than acknowledging its failings rooted more in its own ridiculous outbursts than by any legitimate concern that commands attention or authority? How can it be thought of as anything but ignorant? It sounds like a wonderful opportunity to appreciate the differences between black and white in areas where gray doesn't "wear well."

I wouldn't recommend this as a first book to read about verbal abuse. For me, it was a real catalyst for change, but probably would NOT have been if I hadn't a) been in therapy for a while and b)first read a lot of other books, especially books by Cheri Huber, a buddhist teacher with very similar ideas. 100% responsibility for your experience, 100% of the time.

I agree, it is hard to swallow the idea that an abuser has the 'right' to abuse, but really it is true, but not in a specific way, like the way that we have a right to free speech. It is broader than that, and I think is intended more to shift your attention away from what the abuser is doing and instead focus on YOURSELF. I can't explain it, but it has to do with the abuser sowing his own seeds.

I think this is a very powerful book, but also very easy to misinterpret. Save this one for more advanced recovery work.

Albert Ellis provides his argument that religion is itself a form of mental illness; due to the fact that it promotes ideas such as not putting yourself ahead of everyone else, letting others emotionally support you, and thinking that there is such a thing as Truth.
Ellis absolutely rejects all absolute claims, tells people exactly how to avoid having people tell them what to do, and can't stand intolerant people. His intellectual arrogance is matched only by the internal weaknesses of his arguments. I am a psychologist who specializes in the study of religion, and the scientific evidence overwhelmingly supports the idea that religion serves as a source of emotional strength and personal worth, not as a source of pathology or irrationality.
Ellis, an otherwise admirable psychologist, is entrapped by his own prejudice.

Dr. Ellis presents a traditional psychoanalytic view of religion, but takes it one step beyond. Beginning with the writings of Sigmund Freud (e.g., "Totem and Taboo" and "Moses and Monotheism"), the field, traditionally, has viewed persons with strong religious beliefs as suffering from a neurotic preoccupation with fantasy objects (i.e., God). However, Dr. Ellis has extended these arguments by calling religious beliefs the equivalent of psychotic -- at least "irrational" (the worst perjorative in his vocabulary). This thinking has been largely undermined by more recent research evidence that indicates just the opposite: that persons with strong religious convictions exhibit lower levels of psychopathology, have more sustained relationships, and are more resilient in face of stress than persons of lesser religious faith (or with no religious beliefs at all).

The error of Dr. Ellis and others is the confusing of a simple correlation (i.e., that a person with strong religious beliefs has a mental disorder) with a cause-effect relationship. Systematic observation has not supported these contentions. Unfortunately, some theoreticians continue to hold to these tenents. There appears to be a strongly prejudicial set of beliefs driving the reactions of some observers, which is revealed in Dr. Ellis' writing. This can be seen in the title: "The Case Against Religion" and by statements like "Parental promotion of religion is guaranteed to have deleterious effects on children" (as noted by another reviewer). Such preposterous statements would be rejected out of hand, were it not for the esteemed positions of the authors. Such "scientific bigotry" is much like the eugenics of a century ago which strove to eliminate "undesirable characteristics" from the human population by selective breeding. In the science of eugenics, these unacceptable qualities might have been "swarthy complexion", low intelligence, or a sloping brow. In the case of the analytic tradition, religion has been treated as equally undesirable. For further reading on the subject, see "Freud and the Problem" of God by Hans Kung.

So many plans for breaking addictions involve a 12-step program, the apparent purpose of which is to replace one addiction (alcohol, drugs, TV, buying too many books, etc.) with an even more deadly addiction, the addiction to religion. More people have been murdered in the past 2,000 years in the name of religion than for any other reason. Read this well-written monograph, listen to "Imagine" by John Lennon, and if you're very lucky, religious addiction will be replaced by something less harmful. Why doesn't someone write a book and call it "How to Break Your Addiction to Religion, Spirituality and Personal Growth in Ten Easy Lessons."

The original Trimpey cult item, now disavowed. But it's just as valuable as it ever was. Very amusing take on AA ... having almost nothing to do with the facts ... Jack don't like facts ... Jack does love his opinions. Don't bother to purchase. Just step over to the nearest bar ... and don't drink. Try it again and again. Just say no. Just don't drink. Now wasn't that easy?

Like the person from Anchorage implies, The Small Book has been superseded by Trimpey's book, "Rational Recovery..." Trimpey has disavowed The Small Book, because he added new concepts and abandoned others (e.g., the Rational Recovery system no longer has support groups). In fact, Trimpey states on his website that he wishes he could pull The Small Book from publication, but he is powerless to do so. Buy the Rational Recovery book instead.

This book has done more to save my son, who has been a drug addict for the last 10 years, than all three of the rehab clinics and AA meetings combined. For the first time in years, he is actually thinking positive and feeling good about himself. He also encouraged me to read it too. It is a great book for anyone, whether you are an addict or not.

This writer wasted time and paper writing such hogwash. The book is nothing more than a bunch of negative comments about a psychology he has never practice or research. He offers no valid reason other than personal bigotry as to why transpersonal psychology doesn't work. His whole book read as a fear of the new and unknown. Don't waste your time buying this book.

Albert Ellis, One of the most prolific writers of psychological self-help books (do an Author search on his name to see the breadth of his output) and the inventor of Rational Emotive Therapy, is a man who has zero patience or tolerance for the fuzzy, the vague, notions of the supernatural or dogmatism in any form. In this book he surveyed the writings of many people associated with, or known for promoting, Transpersonal Psychology (as of the late 80's). Over and over he finds them promoting "mysticism, occultism, supernaturalism, and religiosity," and say all of them, including the well-known Ken Wilber, "foster absolutistic and dogmatic thinking."