Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Pot-Pourri

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

  • How do you treat something that's invisible and immeasurable?
    You can't.

    You can, however, sell books and seminars by saying that you can.

    Comment


    • Ooooooooooooooh! Wash your mouth out Mr Solstad!

      Btw, you can sell more by franchising it.
      Jo Bowyer
      Chartered Physiotherapist Registered Osteopath.
      "Out beyond ideas of wrongdoing and rightdoing,there is a field. I'll meet you there." Rumi

      Comment


      • Originally posted by Mikal Solstad View Post
        You can't.

        You can, however, sell books and seminars by saying that you can.
        Hi Mikal, why are you so sure about that??

        Regards,

        Weni

        Comment


        • You can't treat pain itself, but you can of course treat the person in pain.

          The difference here is huge.

          Comment


          • Originally posted by Mikal Solstad View Post
            You can't treat pain itself, but you can of course treat the person in pain.

            The difference here is huge.
            Agreed - consider the wonderful metaphor offered by Steve in the "Pain is an Output" thread:

            The Chess Metaphor

            Imagine a chessboard stretching out to infinity in all directions. On this stage different pieces start to enter. Some are black and some are white, just as in the game of chess. They come close to the center of the board and they begin to align themselves into two separate teams on the different spaces of the board.

            Now imagine that each of the pieces represents a different emotion, cognition, memory, or sensation. Some of the pieces are positive, such as happiness, joy, pleasureful feelings, and loving memories. They hang out together as a team. And some of the pieces represent your pain, fears, and failings. Perhaps you are deeply depressed, or perhaps you have been diagnosed with an anxiety condition. See if it isn’t true that the negative thoughts and feelings associated with these conditions hang out together as a team, as well, but this team is quite different from the positive team.

            Now imagine that the various pieces start doing battle. It is a long, bloody war and pieces are being hewn and smashed to bits all around you. This battle has been going on for years. The black pieces are fighting with the white pieces edging in for the advantage while the white pieces desperately retaliate, trying with all their might not to be taken over by the enemy. They must fight because from the perspective of each “team,” the other is life-threatening.

            In the introduction, we began this book with a similar scene, but you yourself were in the battle. We suggested that this book was about learning how to leave the battle, not learning how to win the war: Unknown to [that] person, however, is the fact that, at any time, he or she can quit the battlefield and begin to live life now. The war may still go on, and the battlefield may still be visible.

            The terrain may look very much as it did while the fighting was happening. But the
            outcome of the war is no longer very important and the seemingly logical sequence of having to win the war before beginning to really live has been abandoned.

            When you first read this, it was probably just an abstract idea to you. Now you are further along, and you can begin to consider the possibility that it was only an illusion that took you into battle in the first place. You’ve been acting as if your favorite emotional and cognitive team must win this chess match. But that makes sense only if the white pieces are you and the black pieces are not. In that posture, you must fight because such polar opposites are direct threats to your survival.

            If “I’m a bad person” is 100 percent true, then “I’m a good person” is destroyed, and vice versa. Thus, leaving or abandoning the battle is not an option. It is a death sentence. The war must go on and you must win it, because you’ve jumped on the back of the White Queen and nominated her to be you.

            She (and thus you) cannot afford to stop fighting.

            But suppose none of these pieces is you? In this scenario, who are you? You can’t be the chess player: that is still someone trying to win the war and defend certain pieces over others. There is only one part of the metaphor that is in contact with all of the pieces. If you are not the pieces—if you can still be you and not have a huge investment in the outcome of the war—then who are you?

            What if you were the board on which this game was being played? Think about that. How does that fit for you? What if you aren’t defined by your pain, but rather you are the conscious container for it. What would this mean for you?

            To start seeing matters from the perspective of the board is to get in touch with the observing self.
            As therapists, we merely get to interact with the observer without seeing the chess board ourselves. We are only one of a multitude of other people in the observer's life who has influence over how to rearrange the furniture and/or change the lighting in the room, which (we hope) can serve the patient to see the board differently.

            Respectfully,
            Keith
            Blog: Keith's Korner
            Twitter: @18mmPT

            Comment


            • Originally posted by Mikal Solstad View Post
              You can't treat pain itself, but you can of course treat the person in pain. Nice reflection.


              The difference here is huge. Would you mind elaborating it a bit more, thanks
              Regards,

              Weni

              Comment


              • Hi, Weni,

                Cory said it very well in another thread (I'm paraphrasing):

                We can use fMRI while a pasient sees the color red and "see" the neural correlates of that experience, but what we see does not really capture the full experience of seeing the color red.

                The same applies to pain.

                A persons experience is something we cannot reach, given the complexity, non-linearity, and complete mystery of it.

                We are, as Keith has said, "only one of a multitude of other people in the observer's life who has influence over how to rearrange the furniture and/or change the lighting in the room, which (we hope) can serve the patient to see the board differently".

                Maybe we are like all these little dots. Maybe you have a big influence on the person in pain (like the doctor who says that you've got the spine of an 80-year old), or maybe not.

                It is out of our reach.
                Attached Files
                Last edited by Mikal Solstad; 17-07-2015, 09:30 AM. Reason: Spelling

                Comment


                • Originally posted by Mikal Solstad View Post
                  It is out of our reach.
                  Hmmm, no. Of course a personal experience is out of any reach but fMRI are able to decipher a common neural experience.
                  Science is able to show an average experience because as humans we share a common behaviour.

                  Science is able to find red without any tone.
                  You multiply observations to get multiple data then discard differences but keep the common ones.
                  I'm quite sure that brain is normal.
                  https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Normal_distribution
                  https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Multiv...l_distribution
                  Last edited by bernard; 17-07-2015, 10:20 AM.
                  Simplicity is the ultimate sophistication. L VINCI
                  We are to admit no more causes of natural things than such as are both true and sufficient to explain their appearances. I NEWTON

                  Everything should be made as simple as possible, but not a bit simpler.
                  If you can't explain it simply, you don't understand it well enough. Albert Einstein
                  bernard

                  Comment


                  • Originally posted by bernard View Post
                    Hmmm, no. Of course a personal experience is out of any reach but fMRI are able to decipher a common neural experience.
                    Science is able to show an average experience because as humans we share a common behaviour.

                    Science is able to find red without any tone.
                    You multiply observations to get multiple data then discard differences but keep the common ones.
                    I'm quite sure that brain is normal.
                    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Normal_distribution
                    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Multiv...l_distribution
                    The neural activity of an experience is not the experience itself.

                    As you said, "a personal experience is out of any reach".

                    What is a "neural experience"?

                    Comment


                    • Originally posted by Mikal Solstad View Post
                      What is a "neural experience"?
                      A neurotag = neurosignature = active neural network.

                      Originally posted by Mikal Solstad View Post
                      The neural activity of an experience is not the experience itself.
                      No but it is like its fingerprint : unique but, at some point, reproducible.
                      Simplicity is the ultimate sophistication. L VINCI
                      We are to admit no more causes of natural things than such as are both true and sufficient to explain their appearances. I NEWTON

                      Everything should be made as simple as possible, but not a bit simpler.
                      If you can't explain it simply, you don't understand it well enough. Albert Einstein
                      bernard

                      Comment


                      • Originally posted by AdamB
                        As I understand it, red/color exists in a relation between the organism and the world.
                        This relation depends of its use itself.
                        A bee needs to see where is food/nectar. Flower wants to attract bees.
                        BTW, my eyes are not of the same kind those of a bee. :angel:
                        A color exists because there is light and reflection.
                        Simplicity is the ultimate sophistication. L VINCI
                        We are to admit no more causes of natural things than such as are both true and sufficient to explain their appearances. I NEWTON

                        Everything should be made as simple as possible, but not a bit simpler.
                        If you can't explain it simply, you don't understand it well enough. Albert Einstein
                        bernard

                        Comment


                        • A guy from Norway, Denmark and France each arguing in their second language which in itself does not convey what we really mean.

                          The language barrier is certainly a factor here.

                          Comment


                          • It still makes for good reading. :thumbs_up
                            Jo Bowyer
                            Chartered Physiotherapist Registered Osteopath.
                            "Out beyond ideas of wrongdoing and rightdoing,there is a field. I'll meet you there." Rumi

                            Comment


                            • Originally posted by Mikal Solstad View Post

                              The language barrier is certainly a factor here.
                              Still learning those damned English subtleties... :embarasse
                              Simplicity is the ultimate sophistication. L VINCI
                              We are to admit no more causes of natural things than such as are both true and sufficient to explain their appearances. I NEWTON

                              Everything should be made as simple as possible, but not a bit simpler.
                              If you can't explain it simply, you don't understand it well enough. Albert Einstein
                              bernard

                              Comment


                              • You, your joys and your sorrows, your memories and your ambitions, your sense of personal identity and free will, are in fact no more than the behavior of a vast assembly of nerve cells and their associated molecules...
                                Yep.

                                And I will add mine : Life is a collection of ordered molecules.
                                Simplicity is the ultimate sophistication. L VINCI
                                We are to admit no more causes of natural things than such as are both true and sufficient to explain their appearances. I NEWTON

                                Everything should be made as simple as possible, but not a bit simpler.
                                If you can't explain it simply, you don't understand it well enough. Albert Einstein
                                bernard

                                Comment

                                Working...
                                X