.

NLP Academy Forums

   
 
Mirror neurons
Posted: 12 March 2011 05:30 PM   [ Ignore ]
Member
Rank
Total Posts:  2
Joined  05-03-2011

Hi folks,

Just watched this short but fascinating video on mirror neurons. It explains a lot and is quite incredible I love the idea of Gandhi neurons:
http://www.ted.com/talks/vs_ramachandran_the_neurons_that_shaped_civilization.html

See you tomorrow,
Sarah

Profile
Want to join in with this discussion? Please Login or Register.
 
Posted: 14 March 2011 05:36 PM   [ Ignore ]   [ # 1 ]
Administrator
Avatar
RankRankRank
Total Posts:  88
Joined  30-03-2010

Thanks for putting this up, very interesting!

Particuarly the Phenoma of feeling in the phantom limb.

[ Edited: 15 March 2011 05:55 PM by Jack Carroll ]
Profile
Want to join in with this discussion? Please Login or Register.
 
Posted: 14 April 2011 02:40 AM   [ Ignore ]   [ # 2 ]
Member
Avatar
Rank
Total Posts:  8
Joined  16-12-2009

This stuff is awesome!  It really helps me appreciate the importance of us developing our theoretical underpinning around NLP.  Really useful when being challenged about our research base and also critically important for helping us to appreciate our deep interconnectedness as human beings i.e. unconscious rapport.

Does this also explain why we can become ‘emotional’ when watching a sad film or exhilarated when watching a great football match?  I wonder why some of us are more affected than others though?  Is it related to that feedback circuit that Ramachandran speaks of or is there other stuff at play here?

Profile
Want to join in with this discussion? Please Login or Register.
 
Posted: 06 August 2011 09:47 PM   [ Ignore ]   [ # 3 ]
Member
Rank
Total Posts:  2
Joined  08-07-2011
janicejoannou - 14 April 2011 02:40 AM

This stuff is awesome!  It really helps me appreciate the importance of us developing our theoretical underpinning around NLP.  Really useful when being challenged about our research base and also critically important for helping us to appreciate our deep interconnectedness as human beings i.e. unconscious rapport.

Does this also explain why we can become ‘emotional’ when watching a sad film or exhilarated when watching a great football match?  I wonder why some of us are more affected than others though?  Is it related to that feedback circuit that Ramachandran speaks of or is there other stuff at play here?

As I’ve come to understand it, it’s a part of the explanation as to why we become affected. “Everything” in NLP is probably at work here, meta-programs, generalizations, what you omit and what you distort etc. Some part of the feedback ought to land at an unconscious level and the rest become conscious.

I don’t remember who said it, but one of the great names of NLP, claimed that psychology is not science, because of all the subjectivity involved. I think that’s also an interesting way of looking at it. With that perspective NLP could consciously move away from science. If you don’t claim that “affecting with words” is science, then there will be no need to justify it with science, right?

Profile
Want to join in with this discussion? Please Login or Register.
 
Posted: 28 August 2011 07:27 AM   [ Ignore ]   [ # 4 ]
Member
Rank
Total Posts:  2
Joined  28-08-2011

“I don’t remember who said it, but one of the great names of NLP, claimed that psychology is not science, because of all the subjectivity involved. I think that’s also an interesting way of looking at it. With that perspective NLP could consciously move away from science. If you don’t claim that “affecting with words” is science, then there will be no need to justify it with science, right?”

1) Psychology is a science, just because Bandler or Grinder (who weren’t psycholgists) said it wasn’t doesn’t make them right. There is lots of objectivity involved in Psychological experiments.

2) I’d hardly class NLP as scientific as it is presently, so moving away from science will not make it any more credible. I find it hard to understand why you could just say “we’re not trying to be scientific” and then not have to justify your “results” with science. If it is a credible and well designed therapy you can back it up with research evidence. NLP has LITTLE TO NO research evidence, which is why you are so often challenged!

3) Mirror neurons have nothing to do with NLP, as the “Neuro-” part of neurolinguistic programming has no relevance to real neuroscientific paradigms whatsoever. When NLP begins making claims of effectiveness that aren’t testimonial and are statistically significant, email me because i’ll be more than happy to read the research.

Profile
Want to join in with this discussion? Please Login or Register.
 
   
 
 
RSS 2.0     Atom Feed