Decision Making
In his earlier writings, Ellis (1962) does not explicitly talk about a framework for making decisions, but he does argue rather convincingly for a life-style based on a long-range, social hedonism. All of us should guiltlessly seek out and enjoy harmless physical sensations (such as sex and gustatory pleasures); but, because we will probably not die tomorrow, some degree of moderation in our eating, drinking, and merrymaking may be a safer course of action.
In addition to stressing the concept of future consequences of our actions, Ellis emphasizes the equality between self-interest and social interest; that is, what is good for us is also good for our culture: "There is a very good answer to the question why one should love one's neighbor, or at least why one should take care not to harm him: namely, that only in so doing is one likely to build the kind of society in which one would best live oneself" (1962, p. 323). This doctrine is, of course, akin to the classic economic theory of "enlightened self-interest." By paying his workers five dollars per day, Henry Ford ensured they would have enough money to buy his automobiles.
But though Ellis does present a philosophy on which all decisions to act ought to be grounded, his credo is relatively abstract, so the dictates of what specifically constitutes rational behavior are open to wide interpretation. Furthermore, in his classic text Ellis (1962) does not provide the counselor with a technology or even a procedural description for helping clients resolve a decision.
In a more recent book, The Civilized Couple's Guide to Extra-Marital Adventure, which was designed for lay reading (no pun intended), Ellis (1973) addresses these issues indirectly. We are told, for example, that "civilized adultery" may be a very rational activity. In fact the opening chapter is entitled "Extramarital adventure: Almost everybody is doing it." In a subsequent chapter ("To be or not to be an extramarital adventurer: That is the question") Ellis examines a number of factors to consider before making such a decision. These include gauging and analyzing your motives, dealing with feelings of shame and guilt (You shouldn't have any; they're irrational!), and using a "hedonistic calculus" in which facts are considered along with the advantages and disadvantages of each alternative. Finally, should one decide to embark on a course of extramarital adventure, one must make another decisionshould one be honest with one's spouse? After marshaling the opinions of numerous experts, Ellis generally recommends "no" (for reasons that, incidentally, may or may not be entirely rational).
Thus Ellis does recommend engaging in a number of preparatory steps prior to making a decision. The gathering of relevant information and the consideration of advantages and disadvantages are components that tie Ellis's views to those of most other decision theorists. But though some of the components may be present, the process is rather incomplete and unsystematic. No formal sequence of counselor activities is provided.
Ellis does apparently allow for the possibility of more than one "rational" choice. However, it is rather difficult to read his book on extramarital sex and come away with the notion that monogamy could ever be anything but a stifling compromise.
Finally, there is the matter of intrusive counselor values--a factor that cannot be dismissed as irrational drivel (see chapter 6). Ellis's system demands that the therapist directly attack the client's irrational beliefs, a procedure most counselors--behaviorally inclined or otherwise-would support from a cost- perspective. Although the irrationality of certain client self-statements may be obvious to everyone, just what constitutes a rational substitute may not be at all clear. Ellis is not above advice giving or arguing for a particular alternative such as secrecy from one's spouse in the matter of extramarital sex. But Ellis's utilities may differ widely from those of his clients and other rational emotive counselors
Essentially, then, Ellis has provided the counselor with a very useful framework for removing clients from discomforting emotional states. Although his conceptualizations have stimulated much behavioral counseling theory, research, and practice, his work only indirectly and imperfectly addresses the topic of decision-making counseling.
