Analyzed to Death? 36%

By Sally Satel0%

6/28/2026, 9:01:33 AM

BS Summary: This article contains 28 faulty reasoning types, including Hasty Generalization, Appeal to Authority, and False Dilemma, with Negativity Bias as the most egregious example at 32.7% saturation with 405 hits. Analysis detected 1,873 faulty-reasoning hits from 1,237 analyzed words, generating a BS Score of 43.3% and a BS Rank of 36% (13,431 of 20,882 articles). This article is better (less manipulative) than 64.30% of the article peer group.

Depressed? 
Anxious? 
Maybe you should see someone. 
If so, good luck. 
According to the American Psychological Association, most mental health professionals are consistently and fully booked. 
Yet, for all that therapy, better mental health eludes Americans, says Jonathan Alpert, author of Therapy Nation—How America Got Hooked on Therapy and Why It's Left Us More Anxious and Divided. 
If anything, the author contends, mental health care is a likely cause of our collective psychological malaise. 
Alpert, a psychotherapist who practices in New York City and Washington, D.C., alleges that a sizable swath of the profession—not all therapists of course—have failed their patients. 
They medicalize normal human distress, turn painful life experiences into traumas, and effectively blackmail patients into prolonging their stay in therapy lest they unravel without it. 
And they validate, validate, validate, reinforcing "dysfunction, self-absorption, and the quiet decline of resilience across America." 
This stance has earned the author some detractors. 
Upon questioning aspects of therapy in a 2012 opinion piece ("In Therapy Forever? 
Enough Already"), his colleagues denounced him, ousted him from a professional networking group, and a commencement speaker at his departmental graduation ceremony repudiated him. 
Yet, as Alpert came to learn, lots of patients brought in a clipping of his essay to confront their own therapists. 
Presumably, vindication came from patients who were spinning their wheels in therapy, "stuck in repetitive cycles of venting and stagnation," as the author describes them. 
Or the ones who realized that their too-lenient therapist allowed them to wallow, week after week, in an orgy of blame (their parents, their boss, their spouse). 
Compounding these baseline problems is our current moment. 
Mounting political divisiveness, social disconnection, and ideological purity disrupt relationships in both intimate settings and the workplace, making them fodder for therapy. 
Fair enough, but, as the author asks, what happens when the therapist reflexively takes the patient's side in conflicts without exploring the complexities and the patient’s contributions to the friction? 
"Comfort is not growth," he insists. 
What's more, a new strain of perversion—woke therapy—took hold after the murder of George Floyd and the October 7 massacre in Israel. 
Widely taught in schools of counselor education, as the author describes in heart-sinking detail, it is a practice that views people not as individual actors but rather as representatives of particular marginalized groups. 
Therapists often regard themselves as activists and impart to patients the importance of social resistance. 
Woke therapy undermines virtually every tenet of psychotherapy: If a patient is white, the counselor's job is to help them see how they unwittingly perpetuate white supremacy. 
If black, the task is to sensitize the patient to how his race incited others to cause him distress, regardless of what brought him to therapy. 
Introspection is out. 
Externalization is in. 
Therapy Nation is well-paced and sprinkled with clinical vignettes from the author's own practice. 
Over the course of the book, however, the author's caveats can seem redundant. 
In addition, I wish he tried harder to prove his thesis. 
For example, could people be flocking to therapy in high numbers because so many are unhappy? 
Perhaps that dynamic better explains the paradox of more treatment-less mental health than the notion that therapy itself is making us sicker. 
Or maybe there are limits to therapy when patients' social circumstances are so trying, or because they do not even have a mental illness in the first place. 
These are not mutually exclusive forces, of course. 
The book's most striking shortcoming, however, is its ahistorical approach. 
Readers would never know that the therapy culture has been under scrutiny for over half a century at least. 
There is no mention of, for example, Philip Rieff's pioneering book, The Triumph of the Therapeutic: Uses of Faith after Freud (1966), in which the sociologist argues that Freudian psychoanalysis has replaced communal religion as the primary cultural authority, creating a "therapeutic culture" where the self—its desires and expression—takes primacy. 
Likewise, historian Christopher Lasch, in his 1979 The Culture of Narcissism: American Life in an Age of Diminishing Expectations, lamented that modern therapy encourages interminable self-scrutiny rather than active engagement with society. 
In the late 1980s and '90s, Allan Bloom, Wendy Kaminer, and Charles Sykes identified the corrupting influence of moral relativism and victimhood on individual growth, self-reliance, and personal responsibility. 
Somehow the author presents a chapter on "the cult of trauma" without mentioning the two most influential "cult" leaders: psychiatrist Bessel van der Kolk and physician Gabor Maté. 
His discussion of medicalizing normal variants of emotional distress omits psychiatrist Allen Frances (Saving Normal, 2013). 
Finally, Coddling of the American Mind (Greg Lukianoff and Jonathan Haidt, 2018) and Bad Therapy (Abigail Shrier, 2024) have all put forth versions of Alpert's claims but are never acknowledged. 
Finally, my feathers were seriously ruffled by his glib discussion of filmmaker Woody Allen (Without Feathers, 1975). 
"Allen has become the ultimate poster child for psychoanalysis gone wrong—proof that the longer one stays in therapy, particularly psychoanalysis, the more self-absorbed and neurotic they are likely to become," the author writes. 
Reality check: Allen, "neurotic" as he may or may not be, is a complicated, controversial man who has made great films that have become cultural touchstones. 
For some patients, it is true, analysis may be too preoccupied with the past, too interior, and not action-oriented enough. 
But for others, the intellectual exploration afforded by analysis has been a great source of psychic freedom and a facilitator of growth and change. 
I should point out, too, that there are effective psychodynamically oriented treatments that fall somewhere between open-ended psychoanalysis and the time-limited, prescriptive version of care, called cognitive behavioral therapy, CBT, that the author clearly favors. 
Extremely well-studied, CBT is a goal-defined therapy that helps patients identify and reframe negative thought patterns, such as false assumptions and misattributions. 
In a classic CBT-type intervention, the therapist might walk an avoidant or phobic patient through gradual exposure to anxiety-provoking situations, eventually neutralizing the fear. 
Therapy Nation fits squarely in the self-help genre. 
It is full of practical advice, such as how to vet a therapist. 
A sample: "Be cautious of therapists who overuse terms like safe space, explore your feelings, or support you on your journey without mentioning actionable steps toward progress." 
The author also points to ways that patients undermine themselves: Among these are the tendency to expect too much improvement, too fast, to withhold information, or become too invested in a self-diagnosis they made on TikTok. 
He advises patients, after being in therapy for many months or years, to ask themselves the following: "Do you feel increasingly self-reliant?" 
"Are you noticing tangible changes outside of the therapy office?" 
"Are you working toward your objectives?" 
Therapy Nation makes a persuasive case that there is a lot of bad therapy out there—indulgent, regressive, and unaccountable—and that patients should be more demanding when they don't see progress. 
But whether therapy is dividing us or "accelerating societal decline," as the author claims, I am not sure. 
Still, fair to say, there are too many patients putting their trust in undeserving therapists. 
This book could be an antidote to their complacency. 
Therapy Nation—How America Got Hooked on Therapy and Why It's Left Us More Anxious and Divided 
by Jonathan Alpert 
Hanover Square Press, 320 pp., $32 
Sally Satel is a psychiatrist, senior fellow at the American Enterprise Institute, and coauthor, with Christina Hoff Sommers of One Nation Under Therapy—How the Helping Culture is Eroding Self-Reliance (St. 
Martin's, 2005). 
Article reasoning-pattern comparisonThis article: 5.8%Sally Satel: 2.7%freebeacon.com: 7.1%Confirmation Bias5.8%This article: 0.0%Sally Satel: 0.0%freebeacon.com: 0.7%Anchoring Bias0.0%This article: 2.9%Sally Satel: 2.2%freebeacon.com: 2.9%Availability Heuristic2.9%This article: 0.0%Sally Satel: 0.9%freebeacon.com: 1.3%Representativeness Heuristic0.0%This article: 0.0%Sally Satel: 0.3%freebeacon.com: 1.0%Hindsight Bias0.0%This article: 3.3%Sally Satel: 1.3%freebeacon.com: 0.9%Overconfidence Bias3.3%This article: 0.9%Sally Satel: 2.2%freebeacon.com: 12.8%Framing Effect0.9%This article: 0.0%Sally Satel: 1.1%freebeacon.com: 0.3%Loss Aversion0.0%This article: 0.0%Sally Satel: 0.0%freebeacon.com: 0.4%Status Quo Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%Sally Satel: 0.0%freebeacon.com: 0.2%Sunk Cost Effect0.0%This article: 4.8%Sally Satel: 0.7%freebeacon.com: 0.8%Optimism Bias4.8%This article: 3.5%Sally Satel: 1.3%freebeacon.com: 1.4%Pessimism Bias3.5%This article: 32.7%Sally Satel: 8.9%freebeacon.com: 15.6%Negativity Bias32.7%This article: 0.0%Sally Satel: 0.6%freebeacon.com: 1.2%Self-Serving Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%Sally Satel: 0.3%freebeacon.com: 1.5%Fundamental Attribution Error0.0%This article: 0.0%Sally Satel: 0.0%freebeacon.com: 0.3%Actor-Observer Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%Sally Satel: 0.2%freebeacon.com: 2.3%In-Group Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%Sally Satel: 0.7%freebeacon.com: 1.6%Out-Group Homogeneity Bias0.0%This article: 1.1%Sally Satel: 0.5%freebeacon.com: 2.2%Halo Effect1.1%This article: 0.0%Sally Satel: 0.0%freebeacon.com: 1.2%Horn Effect0.0%This article: 0.0%Sally Satel: 0.0%freebeacon.com: 0.0%Dunning-Kruger Effect0.0%This article: 0.6%Sally Satel: 0.5%freebeacon.com: 1.1%Recency Bias0.6%This article: 0.0%Sally Satel: 0.0%freebeacon.com: 0.6%Primacy Effect0.0%This article: 1.5%Sally Satel: 0.2%freebeacon.com: 0.1%Blind-Spot Bias1.5%This article: 4.0%Sally Satel: 1.4%freebeacon.com: 5.9%Ad Hominem4.0%This article: 6.7%Sally Satel: 3.7%freebeacon.com: 1.2%Straw Man6.7%This article: 13.9%Sally Satel: 5.2%freebeacon.com: 3.8%Appeal to Authority13.9%This article: 8.1%Sally Satel: 2.7%freebeacon.com: 2.0%False Dilemma8.1%This article: 2.1%Sally Satel: 3.7%freebeacon.com: 0.8%Slippery Slope2.1%This article: 0.0%Sally Satel: 0.0%freebeacon.com: 0.2%Circular Reasoning0.0%This article: 16.2%Sally Satel: 9.0%freebeacon.com: 8.9%Hasty Generalization16.2%This article: 0.0%Sally Satel: 0.0%freebeacon.com: 0.9%Red Herring0.0%This article: 0.0%Sally Satel: 0.3%freebeacon.com: 0.5%Bandwagon0.0%This article: 5.6%Sally Satel: 3.8%freebeacon.com: 5.8%Appeal to Emotion5.6%This article: 0.0%Sally Satel: 0.2%freebeacon.com: 1.2%Begging the Question0.0%This article: 7.6%Sally Satel: 2.5%freebeacon.com: 3.1%Post Hoc (False Cause)7.6%This article: 2.1%Sally Satel: 0.3%freebeacon.com: 1.0%Tu Quoque2.1%This article: 0.9%Sally Satel: 0.4%freebeacon.com: 1.1%Burden of Proof0.9%This article: 0.0%Sally Satel: 0.3%freebeacon.com: 0.2%Appeal to Nature0.0%This article: 1.3%Sally Satel: 0.2%freebeacon.com: 0.4%Composition/Division1.3%This article: 3.7%Sally Satel: 2.5%freebeacon.com: 2.0%Anecdotal3.7%This article: 0.0%Sally Satel: 0.0%freebeacon.com: 0.2%No True Scotsman0.0%This article: 0.0%Sally Satel: 0.5%freebeacon.com: 1.6%Ambiguity (Equivocation)0.0%This article: 0.0%Sally Satel: 0.0%freebeacon.com: 0.0%Gambler’s Fallacy0.0%This article: 4.6%Sally Satel: 0.9%freebeacon.com: 0.0%Middle Ground4.6%This article: 0.0%Sally Satel: 0.0%freebeacon.com: 0.1%Personal Incredulity0.0%This article: 0.0%Sally Satel: 0.0%freebeacon.com: 0.2%Special Pleading0.0%This article: 0.0%Sally Satel: 0.0%freebeacon.com: 2.2%Genetic Fallacy0.0%This article: 1.1%Sally Satel: 1.4%freebeacon.com: 2.8%Unattributed Quote1.1%This article: 4.9%Sally Satel: 1.9%freebeacon.com: 2.7%Quote-first Misdirection4.9%This article: 4.8%Sally Satel: 3.3%freebeacon.com: 17.7%Biased Writer Voice4.8%This article: 3.1%Sally Satel: 1.0%freebeacon.com: 1.6%Indoctrination3.1%This article: 0.0%Sally Satel: 0.6%freebeacon.com: 0.7%Politically Left Leaning Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%Sally Satel: 1.5%freebeacon.com: 10.4%Politically Right Leaning Bias0.0%This article: 3.6%Sally Satel: 5.3%freebeacon.com: 0.5%Attempt to Sell a Product or S…3.6%

1237 words analyzed.

Speakers

3speakers9.5%attributed speech1,119writer words
Voice mapSelect a segment to jump to its words
Writer's voice • 3 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 1 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 1 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 5 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 4 words • 0.0% coverageAmerican Psychological Association • 15 words • 0.0% coverageJonathan Alpert • 31 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 17 words • 0.0% coverageJonathan Alpert • 27 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 26 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 16 words • 100.0% coverageWriter's voice • 8 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 13 words • 100.0% coverageWriter's voice • 24 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 21 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 25 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 27 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 8 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 22 words • 0.0% coverageJonathan Alpert • 30 words • 0.0% coverageJonathan Alpert • 6 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 22 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 33 words • 100.0% coverageWriter's voice • 15 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 27 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 26 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 3 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 3 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 14 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 13 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 11 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 16 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 22 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 28 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 8 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 10 words • 100.0% coverageWriter's voice • 19 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 50 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 32 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 29 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 28 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 16 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 30 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 17 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 33 words • 100.0% coverageWriter's voice • 26 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 20 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 24 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 35 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 22 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 24 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 8 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 13 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 27 words • 100.0% coverageWriter's voice • 36 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 22 words • 100.0% coverageWriter's voice • 10 words • 100.0% coverageWriter's voice • 6 words • 100.0% coverageWriter's voice • 30 words • 100.0% coverageWriter's voice • 18 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 15 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 9 words • 100.0% coverageWriter's voice • 16 words • 0.0% coverageJonathan Alpert • 3 words • 0.0% coverageHanover Square Press • 6 words • 100.0% coverageWriter's voice • 30 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 2 words • 0.0% coverage
Selected voice

Jonathan Alpert

97%flagged-word coverage
97 attributed words82% of attributed speech83% writer coverage
0%5.0%10.0%Quote-first Misdirection-5.4 ptsWriter: 5.4%Jonathan Alpert: 0.0%0.0%Biased Writer Voice-5.3 ptsWriter: 5.3%Jonathan Alpert: 0.0%0.0%Attempt to Sell a Product -3.5 ptsWriter: 3.5%Jonathan Alpert: 0.0%0.0%Indoctrination-3.4 ptsWriter: 3.4%Jonathan Alpert: 0.0%0.0%Unattributed Quote-1.2 ptsWriter: 1.2%Jonathan Alpert: 0.0%0.0%

Attribution is sentence-level. Pattern percentages are calculated only from words assigned to that voice.

Loading…
Loading…
Loading…
Loading…

Analysis

Hover over highlighted words in the article to view the associated bias or fallacy analysis.