Full title: The Mind & The Brain, Neuroplasticity and the Power of Mental Force
I recently finished reading this, and would like to recommend it. It is full of quoted studies about the brain, and at several places it reminded me of a lot of the research already shared here on cognitive sciences and the Work, together. FWIW, all in all, I thought it was a very good book to add to our collection on cognitive science (if we can separate some of the authors' conclusions, which don't alter the message and have, IMO, no relevance even in the text).
Here is the description taken from Amazon:
The main thread is how therapists can understand and heal severe OCD patients. But there is a lot more to it. Basically, Schwartz chose OCD because it is a problem that, as opposed to other mental disorders, reflects a clear distinction between what goes on in the brain (physically), and the mind (or observer). The person with OCD can be aware that his or her compulsion is an intrusive thought or impulse that says "wash your hands for the 20th time". Yet, they cannot do much against it at the beginning of their therapy.
So he proposes a "Four-Step program": Relabel, Reattribute, Refocus, Revalue. First, he teaches the patients to really recognize it as an intrusive thought, a defective mechanism. Then he teaches them about where the issue is in their brains. Then, he encourages the patients to think about an alternative behavior, a healthier one instead ("I can go water the roses", or whatever). At the beginning, the patients can't perform the second action. But, with mental exercises and focus, their brain gets used to the second idea, until they actually learn to put it into action.
It reminds me of how, when we notice a program in ourselves (or more often, are given a mirror about it), we start being able to observe it, and know it's intrusive/our false personality, etc., but can't do anything at first. In the case of OCD, focusing on what it would be like to master that mechanical part of the self has shown to produce actual physical changes in the brain, AS IF the behavioral change had already occured. Then, it takes focus and attention, but the behavior CAN be changed. The patients learn to get less and less identified with the programmed reactions/thoughts, predator, etc., and little by little they manage to modify it or a least stop it from ruling their actions. Sounds familiar?
The authors talk about how quantum physics applies to the study of the brain adn the mind in this context, and why. My main criticism would be that they seem to be very pro-Mindfulness meditation and a bit too much in favor of Buddhism (although they get points for mainly talking about teachings that are fairly reasonable, in my opinion), but I kept thinking that EE and knowledge as taught in our group is way better for what they are trying to convey and accomplish.
They also describe a lot of experiments done to test neuroplasticity in adults, and the results are sometimes amazing. In other words, they demonstrate that it's never too late to rewire ourselves, if we want to, and put enough effort toward that goal. The key is paying attention.
They talk about the problems with behaviorism and other types of therapies, discuss the differences between the mind and the brain, and also mention briefly the New Age movement. Perhaps it wasn't their intention (they were quite vague at some points), but I think that from the studies they shared, one can infer that you "CAN create your own reality", except that it's not easy and certainly doesn't come without concentrated efforts on our part. That is true, if we look at how this network works. You get what you give to life, and everyone's efforts to become more sincere and conscious bring about changes in life that are certainly positive. Without putting effort into it, whoever wants the change to be for free, gets nothing and becomes "free lunch" instead.
Finally, they share studies on "will power", which I found were quite interesting. Basically, they showed in brain scans that "will" is there, and it acts as a decision maker. The automatic/programmed thought kicks in, and "will" lasts for a fraction of a second, during which a person can decide whether to act or not. And it can be trained to be more active each time, I think. In other words, learning to make our own decisions can't be done by suppressing part of ourselves, refusing to look into our mechanical Is, etc., but rather, if we learn to observe them, then we can make the choice not to act on them. I'm preaching to the choir here, but anyway, I thought the studies all throughout the book were cool!
I'll post some quotes soon, for those who are interested.
I recently finished reading this, and would like to recommend it. It is full of quoted studies about the brain, and at several places it reminded me of a lot of the research already shared here on cognitive sciences and the Work, together. FWIW, all in all, I thought it was a very good book to add to our collection on cognitive science (if we can separate some of the authors' conclusions, which don't alter the message and have, IMO, no relevance even in the text).
Here is the description taken from Amazon:
A groundbreaking work of science that confirms, for the first time, the independent existence of the mind–and demonstrates the possibilities for human control over the workings of the brain.
Conventional science has long held the position that 'the mind' is merely an illusion, a side effect of electrochemical activity in the physical brain. Now in paperback, Dr Jeffrey Schwartz and Sharon Begley's groundbreaking work, The Mind and the Brain, argues exactly the opposite: that the mind has a life of its own.Dr Schwartz, a leading researcher in brain dysfunctions, and Wall Street Journal science columnist Sharon Begley demonstrate that the human mind is an independent entity that can shape and control the functioning of the physical brain. Their work has its basis in our emerging understanding of adult neuroplasticity–the brain's ability to be rewired not just in childhood, but throughout life, a trait only recently established by neuroscientists.
Through decades of work treating patients with obsessive–compulsive disorder (OCD), Schwartz made an extraordinary finding: while following the therapy he developed, his patients were effecting significant and lasting changes in their own neural pathways. It was a scientific first: by actively focusing their attention away from negative behaviors and toward more positive ones, Schwartz's patients were using their minds to reshape their brains–and discovering a thrilling new dimension to the concept of neuroplasticity.
The main thread is how therapists can understand and heal severe OCD patients. But there is a lot more to it. Basically, Schwartz chose OCD because it is a problem that, as opposed to other mental disorders, reflects a clear distinction between what goes on in the brain (physically), and the mind (or observer). The person with OCD can be aware that his or her compulsion is an intrusive thought or impulse that says "wash your hands for the 20th time". Yet, they cannot do much against it at the beginning of their therapy.
So he proposes a "Four-Step program": Relabel, Reattribute, Refocus, Revalue. First, he teaches the patients to really recognize it as an intrusive thought, a defective mechanism. Then he teaches them about where the issue is in their brains. Then, he encourages the patients to think about an alternative behavior, a healthier one instead ("I can go water the roses", or whatever). At the beginning, the patients can't perform the second action. But, with mental exercises and focus, their brain gets used to the second idea, until they actually learn to put it into action.
It reminds me of how, when we notice a program in ourselves (or more often, are given a mirror about it), we start being able to observe it, and know it's intrusive/our false personality, etc., but can't do anything at first. In the case of OCD, focusing on what it would be like to master that mechanical part of the self has shown to produce actual physical changes in the brain, AS IF the behavioral change had already occured. Then, it takes focus and attention, but the behavior CAN be changed. The patients learn to get less and less identified with the programmed reactions/thoughts, predator, etc., and little by little they manage to modify it or a least stop it from ruling their actions. Sounds familiar?
The authors talk about how quantum physics applies to the study of the brain adn the mind in this context, and why. My main criticism would be that they seem to be very pro-Mindfulness meditation and a bit too much in favor of Buddhism (although they get points for mainly talking about teachings that are fairly reasonable, in my opinion), but I kept thinking that EE and knowledge as taught in our group is way better for what they are trying to convey and accomplish.
They also describe a lot of experiments done to test neuroplasticity in adults, and the results are sometimes amazing. In other words, they demonstrate that it's never too late to rewire ourselves, if we want to, and put enough effort toward that goal. The key is paying attention.
They talk about the problems with behaviorism and other types of therapies, discuss the differences between the mind and the brain, and also mention briefly the New Age movement. Perhaps it wasn't their intention (they were quite vague at some points), but I think that from the studies they shared, one can infer that you "CAN create your own reality", except that it's not easy and certainly doesn't come without concentrated efforts on our part. That is true, if we look at how this network works. You get what you give to life, and everyone's efforts to become more sincere and conscious bring about changes in life that are certainly positive. Without putting effort into it, whoever wants the change to be for free, gets nothing and becomes "free lunch" instead.
Finally, they share studies on "will power", which I found were quite interesting. Basically, they showed in brain scans that "will" is there, and it acts as a decision maker. The automatic/programmed thought kicks in, and "will" lasts for a fraction of a second, during which a person can decide whether to act or not. And it can be trained to be more active each time, I think. In other words, learning to make our own decisions can't be done by suppressing part of ourselves, refusing to look into our mechanical Is, etc., but rather, if we learn to observe them, then we can make the choice not to act on them. I'm preaching to the choir here, but anyway, I thought the studies all throughout the book were cool!
I'll post some quotes soon, for those who are interested.