The rational emotive behavior therapy (REBT) view of irrational beliefs (IBs) is explained, rationality and irrationality are defined in terms of this view, specific thinking processes that are often involved in emotional disturbance are discussed, and concrete ways of actively and forcefully disputing these irrational beliefs are presented.

The main theoretical and practical applications of Rational Emotive Behavior Therapy (REBT) and Cognitive Therapy (CT) are examined and found to be similar to each other in most respects, but REBT bases its concepts of improved treatment of neurotic disorders and of severe personality dysfunctioning largely on philosophical, existential, and humanistic bases, while CT tends to align them with empirical results of outcome studies. Both REBT and CT, however, use philosophic and empirical outcome studies to construct and validate their theories.

In the dialogue that follows, proponents representing rational-emotive therapy (RET) and cognitive therapy discuss ways in which they would conceptualize and treat various case examples. The similarities and differences in approaches are then examined. It was found that RET takes biological factors heavily into account, whereas cognitive therapy sees learning as primary in the development of emotional disorders; that RET focuses mainly on absolutistic thought, whereas cognitive therapy emphasizes faulty perceptions and inferences as much as absolutistic thought as targets for intervention; and that RET’s style is forceful and directive, whereas cognitive therapy’s style is gentle and more collaborative. In addition, the two approaches were found to differ in their goals for treatment: RET advocates an effort to minimize or eliminate the client’s “musts” and “shoulds”; cognitive therapy aims at moderating such absolutistic thought. Possible factors explaining the origin of these differences are explored.

Psychotherapy supposedly influences people’s values and actions and directly and indirectly affects their attitudes toward peace and war. This paper suggests that psychotherapy in general, and rational-emotive therapy (RET) in particular can directly help clients and their close associates, as well as indirectly help many members of the public, to acquire attitudes and behaviors to make them more peaceful toward themselves, toward their families and neighbors, and ultimately toward different ethnic, political, and foreign groups. RET has a specific theory and practice regarding how people inevitably have differences and disagreements and how, mainly by demanding that others absolutely must see how right they are and commanding that they have to agree with them, they frequently and needlessly construct self-defeating and society-sabotaging arguments and fights about their disagreements. A number of RET cognitive, emotive, and behavioral methods of achieving peaceful relationships are presented in this article.

The author largely agrees with Christine A. Padesky and Aaron T. Beck’s (2003) article, “Science and Philosophy: Comparison of Cognitive Therapy and Rational Emotive Behavior Therapy,” disagrees with several of its statements about REBT, and particularly objects to Padesky and Beck’s view that the fundamental difference between CT and REBT is that the former therapy is empirically based and the latter is philosophically based.