|
|
Go to page [Previous] 1~2 | ||||||||||
shrink Inner circle 2609 Posts |
Quote:
On 2002-11-05 14:28, Alain Bellon wrote: What you are expressing is just another belief in other words an overwhelming feeling that something is so. Of course I can only speak from my own experiences faciltating break through sessions. These last around 6 hours and i Believe deep rooted beliefs can be changed along with the emotional component. It is possible to find the linch pin or decision made about oneself that holds together a whole range of beliefs that may be having a profound but limiting impact on ones life. When dismantled all the other beliefs can drop away. Ive seen it happen it doesn't take 7 days only 6 hours. Sometimes a deep profound belief can just dissolve in a few mins. But the real consequences and value may not be realised for a year or so when they look back and see the different road in life they are taking. Decisions and beleifs have a structure it is possible to dismantle and re-structure. There also people out there with whom I believe will never change with no amount of NLP or any other discipline. I also beleive that it is possible to have such an emotionally significant experience that can change your core beleifs almost instantly. Ive seen it with people who are at an all time low have never been religeous all of a sudden they "find" god. a major shift in their beleif system. They go from total athiets to fanatics over night. |
|||||||||
A l a i n B e ll o n Veteran user 302 Posts |
Quote:
What you are expressing is just another belief in other words an overwhelming feeling that something is so. Hehe Does that imply that we can express ourselves outside the domain of belief? Hey I meant no offense in my comments. No need for a personal attack. On serious note, there is some evidence that suggests that apparent breakthroughs that require deep belief shifts relapse after some time unless there is enough favorable exposure to the new belief system. The evidence suggests that the paradigm shift just creates a turning point but not a change in beliefs in itself. Again, the neurological argument is hard to overlook. Contending that a belief system can just crumble and fall is a very strong statement. One that would require an explanation as to how an individual can survive such event. Neuronal structures cannot rearrange themselves dramatically in short periods of time. Much less after 8 years of age. If that were the case we would see instant pianists crop up. There is a difference between a person acknowledging a certain belief or concept intellectually and accepting it as part of their belief systems when it would be clearly contradictory. Saglasser is very right on his appreciation of believing styles. We all need to believe on different levels. Those stubborn advocates will remain that way independently of the actual content of their beliefs. In many cases when we see an apparent sudden change it is merely a change in posture, not a deep change in belief structure. There is a gray zone between believing or not believing in something. Many people live in that gray area, considering the possibility of something. They may then adopt a skeptical pose, which can suddenly shift given some evidence. But they have not made an instant belief change, they just changed their external behavior and moved slightly inside the gray zone. I have been surrounded by psychologists and psychiatrists in my family all my life. Their divergent points of view has been a very valuable tool in my search for understanding the human mind. And while I cannot escape talking about the concepts in my head, those same that make up my belief system, I make every attempt to keep a fresh attitude in the face of evidence. NLP, just as conductism (conditioning psychology) are very good at some tasks such as fear removal and, the very relevant, perpective change. Still they have a track record of short-comings when it comes to deep and profound changes. Recognizing the advantages and disadvantages of different psychological approaches is of paramount importance. No single theory is a panacea. |
|||||||||
shrink Inner circle 2609 Posts |
Quote:
On 2002-11-05 17:16, Alain Bellon wrote: I can't see a personal attack Allan? The only implication from my last post is that you are expressing a belief. Anything else is projection on your behalf. You are entitled to your beliefs which I respect. If you are looking for some kind of argument then you won't find one from me. Like I said you can come up with as much "evidence" to back up your beleif as you like. In my experience change happens at lightning speed. I see evidence of it all around me with or without NLP all the time. Most people will know of someone who decided to change their lifestyle or belief system at a moments notice because of some significant event in their lives. Going from athiest to preacher over night is a major change in core beleif system fromnot beleiving in the supernatural to believing. And no offence is taken if your core beliefs work well for you then great! |
|||||||||
A l a i n B e ll o n Veteran user 302 Posts |
Quote:
On 2002-11-05 18:24, shrink wrote: Ok let me keep projecting. All in all I take no real offense. I take it all in light spirit. I have seen the "lightning speed" changes you refer to. But they appear to be turning points, not changes in the neuronal structure. Since you have plenty of experience in this, what do you think would evidenciate a profound belief change as opposed to just a turning point (cognitive recognition)? A real and profound paradigm shift requires a a change in the physical representation of the information content. And we know those neuronal changes are not instantaneous. I am sincerely commenting, and not interested in whether my beliefs work for me or if yours work for you. My dissertation is completely honest. |
|||||||||
shrink Inner circle 2609 Posts |
Yes thats right you are commenting.... and expressing yourself through your beliefs which are unconscious filters. We all do. (I am not having a go at you I happen to "believe" that this a truism).
My experiences have lead me to beleive that NLP works and that rapid change is possible so I gather evidence (experiences) to support those beliefs. I already have gave you "evidence". someone who has shown no interest or beleif in religion becomes preacher-like over night. To me that is a profound and rapid shift in belief. From not believing in the super natural to believing. Others going through the same experiences do not change religeous beliefs while others do. I would've thought turning points as you call them are brought about by a change in belief. They have a pill out now on the market to "cure" shyness. Im sure they have pages of neurological and biochemical research to justify it's existence. When in actual fact a couple of sessions of basic hypnotherapy will in the vast majority of cases suffice. I don't need academic evidence their behaviour changes or it does not. That is what the client wants in a therapy context thats the only evidence they need a change in perception "experience". I once got a call from someone who attended a workshop I held on beliefs a few years after she attended. she was in the second year of doing a management Degree. She said she would never have thought that she would've made it to university and attributed her success to the work we done on that workshop. And a part of that workshop did include the "anxiety" goal setting you mentioned earlier. I have dozens of examples of rapid change work which perhaps you call turning points. a whole variety of Phobias, dramatic improvements in sports performance, overcoming depression,ending years of being on prescription drugs,etc I once had a client who had spent an absolute fortune on driving lessons and was still no where near ready to sit her test. One of the main components to her situation was that she believed that she was no good at anything. All I did with her was some belief change using submodalities and some simple trance work. Apparently her driving instructor was puzzled by the improvement in her driving. She past her test three weeks later. My guess is by playing around with a few of those general beliefs she had about herself will have also benefited her in other areas of her life. I once worked with a professional Golfer . He hadn't won anything in almost two years since he turned pro. We worked for five sessions over five days. He put 30 yards on his drive and won a tournament in California six weeks later. It was covered in a local news paper. Beliefs were a major part of the work. I could go on and on..but i think it would get pretty boring pretty quickly. So getting back to the original thread I think could be possible to change someones belief and is probable that you could at least re-inforce beleifs by a good demonstration of mentalism. But thats just an opinion. :wavey: |
|||||||||
brainman Special user 970 Posts |
...belief strongly in what you want to belief..and reality might change from this moment on - yours and the reality of others.
No great hypothesis...just clear belief. P |
|||||||||
Luke Kerr Regular user 119 Posts |
Quote:
On 2002-11-05 20:40, shrink wrote: I think that what alain express is more knowledge than beliefs. I'll explain myself: He said:"We know that greater changes in beliefs come with changes at level of neuronal connection." And then: "Neuronal connection doesn't happen at light speed". After this he said that so,when you see a sudden reaction probably it is other than a change of belief,and it became a change of belief omnly if you continue to apply in changing person's belief after the great shock. I see in it more a sort of knowledge (could this be demonstrated in non statistical way?) than an affirmation of a belief. |
|||||||||
A l a i n B e ll o n Veteran user 302 Posts |
Shrink I agree with your experiences. I think I understand what you are saying now, and I think you are correct.
Reorganizing some of the ideas presented: Belief may be considered those accepted notions or concepts at a conscious level, e.g. John believes that we can talk to the dead. Belief may also be those implications of a consciously accepted notion or concept, e.g. John believes that we can talk to the dead, therefore, there is a soul, and this soul survives physical death and this soul can interact with the physical world through a human channel but at the same time be non-physical (non-detectable by physical interaction tests). A turning point is the decision to accept a new belief (concept) that will (instantly or not) change the concepts and notions that are implied by the adoption of the new belief. Seems like individual concepts are changeable at the conscious level and recognizable cognitively. The less implications that have to be changed the easier the adoption of the new concept. If John comes as a non-believer of talking to the dead, but accepts the existence of a soul, he may change his mind if presented with evidence of contact with the dead. On the other hand if John comes as a non-believer of the soul and is presented with the same evidence, he will have a harder time changing due to the fact that talking to the dead carries many more implications (as listed above). If john is favorably exposed to the "talk to the dead" experience repeatedly, he may change the implications one by one so that talking to the dead can be an acceptable notion in his view of the world. Now, is it possible that a person by simply recognizing intellectually the "truth" of some concept change his/her mind along with all the implications? In other words would it be possible that if John intellectually recognizes that talking to the dead is a true ocurrance he will just instantly negate all the implications of of his previously believed concept? I have seen cases of people with skeptic outlooks in life change overnight to become deeply religious. And I have pondered over those cases. I have studied those cases. Why? Because some were very close friends, and because I was once a complete believer myself. A couple of cases involved a bipolar disorder. And even in those, the shift was not as dramatic. They were always believers and contemplated the possibility of the supernatural. They just presented themselves as skeptical. While this is just my personal experience I have seen similar cases outside my personal circle of acquaintances. From the point of view of cognitive dissonance: John starts as a skeptic of the soul. John is presented with evidence of talking to the dead. Does John believe in talking to the dead? John's mind will evaluate: On one hand I have evidence that I am experiencing, on the other hand I have all these notions that I believe in that forbid talking to the dead from happening. Furthermore, John may see himself as a skeptic. Therefore accepting the notion of talking to the dead, despite of the evidence, would be congnitively dissonant with believed notions and with the perceived image John has of himself. More likely than not, John will negate the experience in spite of the evidence he is presented with (just as we see all the time with skeptics). For John to accept the notion we would need to change the other things that produce the cognitive dissonance. All the implications of the new belief and even the image John has of himself. And those come with tons of implications as well. It may be expected that if this is to happen, it will happen gradually. Could it then be that those instant changes were not such large changes in belief as we think from the outside? Perhaps the person is more in a gray area to start with and not so much black or white (even if he/she projects a black or white image)? Maybe a person can intellectually accept a concept and thus start the process of changing all the implications so that such notion fits with their view of the world? Interesting questions. |
|||||||||
The Magic Cafe Forum Index » » Penny for your thoughts » » Performance Impact... (0 Likes) | ||||||||||
Go to page [Previous] 1~2 |
[ Top of Page ] |
All content & postings Copyright © 2001-2024 Steve Brooks. All Rights Reserved. This page was created in 0.06 seconds requiring 5 database queries. |
The views and comments expressed on The Magic Café are not necessarily those of The Magic Café, Steve Brooks, or Steve Brooks Magic. > Privacy Statement < |