Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

We're looking for a movement

Collapse
This is a sticky topic.
X
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • MinkiKimSI
    replied
    Haha maybe, maybe not. Sometimes I get the sense they think I'm talking nonsensical fluff. Or they think I'm a hippie associating me with the New Age types Structural Integrators are known for.

    Leave a comment:


  • Barrett Dorko
    replied
    Minki,

    I appreciate the phenomenal effort you're showing. I have the sense that it displays something about you.

    Your clients must sense this. Maybe not, but you can look in the mirror.

    Leave a comment:


  • MinkiKimSI
    replied
    I'm bumping this thread. I found quotable nuggets from Barrett and Diane that are worth a read and a reread.

    Bump!

    Leave a comment:


  • Barrett Dorko
    replied
    Dimitii,

    Yes. Active makes sense, and we're learning that active may be split into conscious and unconscious. This doesn't help completely, but a bit.

    As it turns out, what doesn't surprise us was probably planned unconsciously prior to its expression. I'm pretty sure that's a conclusion of Libet's research.

    There's more, but I have to get back to work. Great topic.

    Leave a comment:


  • dim66
    replied
    Originally posted by Barrett Dorko View Post
    As soon as I saw the word "conscious" I was stumped.

    I can't tell you what that word means exactly, but clearly it doesn't belong in a description of ideomotor activity.
    From the point of view of logic, you're right.
    Most likely inaccurate translation.
    French - Russian - English.
    Probably meant "active"

    Leave a comment:


  • Ken Jakalski
    replied
    Hi Barrett!

    Many of your posts have had a direct bearing on my teaching career, and they continue to influence my coaching career.

    It seems to me that our colleagues who use strengthening for painful problems, and they are legion, have made a similar mistake. Having had a little luck with this on a large scale (and I do mean luck) they have simply applied the same principles to increasingly smaller muscle groups, intricately choreographing precise routines of contraction that we are increasingly familiar with but have shown no real tendency to solve the majority of painful problems out there. Why would they?
    This is what I'm seeing more and more among my colleagues:

    Perhaps we can put it this way: Therapists assume that painful problems existent in the absence of pathology have a common origin – biomechanics. In this they are mistaken. The common origin is neurobiologic
    Owen Anderson once noted the following:

    "Exercise scientists have searched for an optima among elite runners, thinking that the very best runners would have naturally developed biomechanical patterns which promote the highest-possible running velocities and simultaneously block injuries. Instead of finding predictable kinetics among the elites, however, the scientists have discovered wide variation in biomechanical variables.

    Take maximum knee flexion during the swing phase of the gait cycle, for example. Some elites flex their knees a lot during swing, reaching angles as great at 140 degrees, but others only flex to 109 degrees (the angle of the knee during running is defined as the angle between the actual position of the shin and an imaginary line drawn to indicate the position that the shin would occupy if the leg were perfectly straight; knee angle is zero when the leg is perfectly straight). This kind of variation is found when almost all other biomechanical variables are studied.

    In other words, scientific research suggests that running biomechanics are highly personal and probably depend on such individual characteristics as skeletal structure, flexibility, joint stiffness, muscle length, overall muscular strength, and neural coordination of gait. There is not an optimal biomechanical pattern which can be applied to you – which can be used to change your individual biomechanics and thus alter your performances and risk of injury in a predictable way."

    Leave a comment:


  • Barrett Dorko
    replied
    As soon as I saw the word "conscious" I was stumped.

    I can't tell you what that word means exactly, but clearly it doesn't belong in a description of ideomotor activity.

    Leave a comment:


  • dim66
    replied
    excerption
    "...myofascial unwinding (ideomotor movement!?)- a conscious strategic diversion of the central nervous system, which directs the therapeutic treatment of the forces in the body, while retaining control over the patient's physician ..."

    Leave a comment:


  • Barrett Dorko
    replied
    Thanks for asking Karen.

    Done

    Leave a comment:


  • Guest's Avatar
    Guest replied
    Barrett this is a classic thread with nearly every element of ideas you have continued to develop and discuss in the following 5 years I have been a member. Thanks Ken for bumping the thread again.

    Barret I vote for this thread to be stickied in your forum. It really is to good to get re-buried.

    I just am so grateful that when I arrived at some simple 5 years ago I was not afraid of the small stuff. When my school was teaching lion taming and gator wrangling I was off in Cleveland looking for Whos in Whoville.

    Karen

    Leave a comment:


  • Ken Jakalski
    replied
    Personally, I’d be less fearful of the large animal, if only because I can track it, grasp it, relate to it with a level of consciousness that might not be like mine exactly but is a whole lot closer than an ant’s. Its attack isn’t invisible to me, and that, for me, is the most important factor.
    This makes me think of the ending of The Grey.
    Attached Files

    Leave a comment:


  • Guest's Avatar
    Guest replied
    Hello all,

    I just re-found this thread I had saved as a pdf and thought it deserved some air and daylight.

    Karen

    Leave a comment:


  • Jon Newman
    replied
    The attached is freely available via the internet and I think this is a great thread for it to be associated with. There is some really good stuff in there. Read Understanding the Internet: Model, Metaphor and Analogy by T.G. McFadden.
    Attached Files
    Last edited by Jon Newman; 01-07-2009, 06:57 PM.

    Leave a comment:


  • Diane
    replied
    I thought this would fit in here, as it has to do with ants: Mo at Neurophilosophy has a blogpost on ants, comparing them to neurons. They swarm according to growingly predictable rules, form a collective "brain" which makes decisions, and come up with unexpected emergent behaviors. He refers in his post to this article by Carl Zimmer, From Ants to People: An instinct to Swarm. Really, really interesting article.

    I very much like the whole gist Mo takes, that neurons are a swarm, that as a swarm they do things that no single neuron could do on its own. Furthermore, neurons come from a preexisting swarm called ectoderm. Not only does ectoderm take charge of growing, monitoring and looking after everything else in the body, all the things it will need to make its life easier, like muscles and internal stilts, it behaves differently, uses more oxygen etc, and looks different - long skinny cells that never quite touch instead of round clumpy ones that molecularly adhere.

    Leave a comment:


  • nari
    replied
    Very interesting.

    Perhaps too, the resistance is there because it gets PTs off the hook, as it were, because we don't do anything to the patient and so ideomotion might be seen as not meeting the PTs' own expectations of physical intervention. Ego has to come into the equation somewhere...

    Nari

    Leave a comment:

Working...
X