Another reason therapists don't know

[Jo Bowyer]

Many years ago someone brought in a five year old boy (highly intelligent, no developmental issues) because he was getting into trouble in school and at home. I decided to put the mother on the table, whereupon the boy who had come in dressed as a knight, stopped shouting, put down his sword and picked up a book. The mother is still a patient of mine, I haven't seen the boy now in his late teens since.

[Barrett Dorko]

Patrick,

Perhaps uncertainty is at the root of our long conversation. I think that there are a couple of threads about that here and I've certainly expressed my feeling that it is constantly present and welcomed. Perhaps this is also at the root of my appreciation for complexity (like Novella's) and my attempts (quite often unsuccessful) to simplify that which defies simplification.

I sense that you feel similarly. Your questioning the seeming certainty of my premise is understandable. Perhaps there's a better one out there as yet unstated. I'm reminded of what Churchill said of democracy. You know that one, don't you?

[Evanthis Raftopoulos]

Hi Barrett, I'm responding to your last post to me in an effort to simplify things:

It is clear to me now that movement we are discussing here is pretty much

-Movement that is not planned

This movement neither has to be unconscious, nor caused by specific idea/mental representation. For these simple reasons it should not be labeled as ideomotion. Would you disagree?

[Barrett Dorko]

Evanthis says:

This movement neither has to be unconscious, nor caused by specific idea/mental representation. For these simple reasons it should not be labeled as ideomotion. Would you disagree?

But didn't Carpenter say it was an instinct; meaning we're born with it and that it's always there, whether or not it's fully expressed? If it's not the manifestation of a specific idea (to my way of thinking, to reduce mechanical deformation of the nervous tissue), where does it come from? What is it? What shall it be called?

I hate to turn the question back on you, but if I don't have something to call it, I'm truly lost. In my mind, ideomotion fits the bill.

[Mikal Solstad]

Just wanted to pop in and say that this thread has been fantastic, and will be re-read soon.

My English vocabulary just isn't good enough at present to really grasp everything in one reading.

[nari]

Don't worry, Mike - English is native to me and I still had problems with others' varied interpretations and what they were trying to say.

Nari

[PatrickL]

If it's not the manifestation of a specific idea (to my way of thinking, to reduce mechanical deformation of the nervous tissue),

I think the use if the word idea as a descriptor of a driver of non conscious motion might be what Evan objects to. Please correct me if I'm wrong, but it reads as though you're arguing that an "idea" only exists in consciousness, and therefore whatever is driving non conscious movement cannot be a manifestation of an "idea".

[Diane]

Maybe it's movement secondary to a neurotag.. which could ostensibly contain all sorts of things, and include being activated by a smell or a noise or a touch or a thought.

[PatrickL]

I sense that you feel similarly. Your questioning the seeming certainty of my premise is understandable. Perhaps there's a better one out there as yet unstated. I'm reminded of what Churchill said of democracy. You know that one, don't you?

What I've been questioning is the tendency for yourself, john and Diane to be equate the defensibility of your premise with the defensibility of your preferred methods over other handling approaches.

I've been arguing that non coercive handling methods are not the only defensible methods that are congruent with your defensible premise. I meet resistance to this argument every time I suggest it. Implicit in that resistance is a view that anyone who does anything other type of handling other than simple contact or DNM with their patients is either lacking in understanding of the relevant science and/or blinded by confirmation bias.

I think it is fair to charge many PTs with having an inadequate understanding of the relevant science. But c'mon, the relevant science points towards uncertain, non linear mechanisms, complexity and emergent phenomena. I think it is far too much of a linear assumption to argue that coercive handling = loss of locus of control = increased dependency = perpetuation/spreading of cultural meme of dependency = worsening of pain endemic

Surely what's more important is the narrative that accompanies handling, not the handling itself.

[Barrett Dorko]

Patrick says:

I meet resistance to this argument every time I suggest it. Implicit in that resistance is a view that anyone who does anything other type of handling other than simple contact or DNM with their patients is either lacking in understanding of the relevant science and/or blinded by confirmation bias.

I see what you're saying, but I have to disagree at this point. I've not seen anyone accused of lacking an understanding or told that their way of doing things is inappropriate. I'm still waiting on a premise from therapists moving their patients passively.

I've yet to see it.

Got a quote - a case to make?

[Evanthis Raftopoulos]

Barrett, Patrick, Diane, and others.

Carpenter's definition of ideomotion and context that originated from imply that a conscious idea/belief / mental representation causes unconscious movement. For example, in the video below a dowser strongly believes/ thinks/expects that the rods will move as he crosses the line of the drawn circle. The rods moving can be thought as a mental representation. It can be a table moving or whatever object movement behavior is represented in the person’s mind.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rMtuWymUzz4


Going back to my pervious post, two prerequisites for a movement to be labeled as ideomotion, are 1. a conscious idea/belief/expectation/mental representation exists in the mind of the individual expressing the movement behavior 2. the individual’s movement occurs at the unconscious level, which means that the capacity for awareness of this movement behavior is absent.

As I quoted before from here

“these tests demonstrate that honest, intelligent people can unconsciously engage in muscular activity that is consistent with their expectations"

So I stick to my argument that what we have been talking about here is not ideomotion, but 'unplanned movement'.

The therapeutic claims of this unplanned movement is a whole different argument and given the lack of evidence/falsifiability these claims remain speculations. Sorry Barrett, just my opinion/argument. I understand if you disagree with me.

[PatrickL]

I've not seen anyone accused of lacking an understanding or told that their way of doing things is inappropriate. I'm still waiting on a premise from therapists moving their patients passively.

i realize no one has accused anyone of a lack of understanding... that would be an explicit view. I suggested that implicit in the resistance to what i've written is the view that anyone who does anything other type of handling other than simple contact or DNM with their patients is either lacking in understanding of the relevant science and/or blinded by confirmation bias.

how else can the resistance be interpreted?

from post 329 in this thread

The premise is that the patient is stuck in protection and needs some help to get to resolution. The method is the provision of novel and non threatening input. I think that's the best we can state in support of any manual therapy (non coercive, passive or active).

Everything else is supposition, I think.

Although i think i like my simplification even better. "We are self corrective, but sometimes we suck at it"

[weni888]

i realize no one has accused anyone of a lack of understanding... that would be an explicit view. I suggested that implicit in the resistance to what i've written is the view that anyone who does anything other type of handling other than simple contact or DNM with their patients is either lacking in understanding of the relevant science and/or blinded by confirmation bias.

I could see that I am not the only one feeling that this forum promotes DNM and Simple Contact. This issue has been discussed for many times in particular for new members....

What happens??? why would some have this kind of misconception??

We all touch people in many forms. We all explain pain to pts in various ways. We all get the mixture of success and failure everyday no matter what approaches you employ. Why it seems that the premises supporting Simple contact or DMN seems more defensible?

Regards,

Weni

[zendogg]

I see what you're saying, but I have to disagree at this point. I've not seen anyone accused of lacking an understanding or told that their way of doing things is inappropriate. I'm still waiting on a premise from therapists moving their patients passively.

I've yet to see it.

Got a quote - a case to make?

Barrett,

Isn't the entire crossing the chasm thread about the "re-premising" of numerous modalities from a mesodermal mode to an ectodermal and neuroscience mode? Help a patient alter mechanical deformation and get off the square they are stuck on neurologically.

Nathan

[nari]

I'm still waiting on a premise from therapists moving their patients passively.

So am I.
It is an operator stance in my vocabulary and although it could be helpful in some circumstances, where is the premise that it is possibly (or not) more effective than other non-passive activity?

Nari