Thought Field Therapy and PCT

[David_Goldstein1]

Has anyone heard of a new form of therapy called Thought Field Therapy(TFT)? This week-end I attended a three day workshop on it. I think it presents a challenge to PCT and all other Cognitive Behavioral Therapies. I would like to

briefly describe it. Then I would like to say why I think it presents a challenge to

PCT based Therapy as well as any of the other Cogntive Behavior Therapies.

In TFT, a person thinks of a problem situation. The therapist checks to see which

“energy meridians” are not OK. A sequence of treatment points are identified. The therapist treats the identified sequence of sites. This process continues until the upsetness level, as tested verbally and with muscle tests, goes from 10 to 0 or 1. If the upsetness level, called SUDS, does not go 0 or 1, a special check and

correction is made.

The way that Bill explains the source of negative emotions is the following. A person wants something. The person perceives something different from the desired state. An error signal is created in the person’s brain. This error signal drives behavior and prepares a person’s body to carry out the behavior. The negative emotional state is a person’s perception of the body which is the result of

the above process.

In TFT, the negative emotional state is thought to be caused by the energy

imbalances. If one corrects the energy imbalances, the upsetness level drops. It

is not necessary to talk about the problem situation with the person. No MOL.

During the course of correcting the energy imbalances, the SUDS level may stop

dropping. This is called a “Psychological Reversal”. I think of it as a

manifestation of a conflict. There are massive, mini, and specific psychological

reversals.

Now for why I think it represents a challenge to PCT based therapy, or any other

therapy which I know about. The treatment does not consist of talking to the

person. MOL is not necessary. The treatment consists of having the person

think of the problem, touch a point on his/her body, and at the same time, take

a full breath.

As the people in the workshop were doing the practicums, including myself, we

noticed that our thinking changed by itself as the SUDS level came down. There

were thinking changes that seemed to happen by itself. Not directed by the

therapist or the person working on the problem.

What do you think? Any questions? I will try to answer them as best I can.

···

From: David Goldstein

Subject: Thought Field Therapy and PCT

Date: 11/11/98

[Bruce_Gregory8]

[From Bruce Gregory (981103.0525 EDT)]

I was simply excited by learning something new and wanted to
share it. I was
also puzzled when thinking about how could it possibly work given the PCT
framework. It is as if Thought Field Therapy allowed one to work on the
physiological activity which the error signal produced. And, as a
result of
doing this, the error signal reduced or disappeared. It does not make PCT
sense.

It seems to me that anything that reduces conflict ought to reduce net error
signal. Higher level understandings are one way to reduce conflict. TFT
seems to be another. I don't see why this at odds with PCT in any way.

Bruce Gregory

···

From: David Goldstein

[David_Goldstein1]

Bruce Gregory: It seems to me that anything that reduces conflict ought to
reduce net error signal. Higher level understandings are one way to reduce
conflict. TFT seems to be another. I don't see why this at odds with PCT in
any way.

David: I think this is a very good point. The part of TFT which resolves
"Psychological Reversals" seems to be dealing with conflicts. The part that
I was focusing on does not involve conflict resolution in any obvious way.

···

From: David Goldstein
Subject: Re: Thought Field Therapy and PCT
Date: 11/13/98 [From Bruce Gregory (981103.0525 EDT)]

[Dick_Robertson]

[Fom Dick Robertson,981113.0727CST]
David Goldstein wrote:

···

From: David
GoldsteinSubject: Thought
Field Therapy and PCTDate: 11/11/98 Has
anyone heard of a new form of therapy called Thought Field Therapy(TFT)?
This week-end I attended a three day workshop on it. I think it presents
a challenge to PCT and all other Cognitive Behavioral Therapies. I would
like tobriefly describe it. Then I would like
to say why I think it presents a challenge toPCT based
Therapy as well as any of the other Cogntive Behavior Therapies…

“energy meridians” are not OK.
How is that measured?

A sequence of treatment points are identified.

How are they identified?

The therapist treats the identified sequence of sites.
This process continues until the upsetness level, as tested verbally and
with muscle tests, goes from 10 to 0 or 1. If the upsetness level,
called SUDS, does not go 0 or 1, a special check andcorrection
is made.Now for why I think
it represents a challenge to PCT based therapy, or any othertherapy
which I know about. The treatment does not consist of talking to
theperson. MOL
is not necessary. The treatment consists of having the personthink
of the problem, touch a point on his/her body, and at the same time, takea
full breath. As
the people in the workshop were doing the practicums, including myself,
wenoticed that our thinking changed by itself
as the SUDS level came down. Therewere thinking
changes that seemed to happen by itself. Not directed by thetherapist
or the person working on the problem. What do
you think? Any questions? I will try to answer them as best I can.

I think the proof of the pudding is in the eating, of
course, but I wonder what kind of energy we are talking about? As
a sometimes practitioner of Bioenergetics we sometimes talk about energy
too.

I use it metaphorically, you can see when a person is
acting more energetically and when he is more laid back or slowed down.
The concept of Life Energy has always intrigued me, but so far nobody
has adequately shown unambiguous evidence for its existence.

Has Thought field therapy ruled out placibo effect?

Best, Dick R.

[R_Marken]

[From Rick Marken (981113.0800)]

David Goldstein (981112) --

I was struck by how quickly people could work on and gain some
relief from a problem which had a long history. I was surprised
by the fact that a person did not have to discuss the problem but
just to think about it during the treatment process. There was no
going up a level.

Hasn't one gone "up a level" when one "thinks about the problem"
instead of just _having_ the problem?

And yet there was a reduction in the perceived upsetness
experienced as the process unfolded.

Probably becuase they went up a level -- or two;-)

For example, there was a man who gained relief from his long
term fear of heights within about 15 to 20 minutes.

Evangelists get even faster results. Thought Field Therapy has
a long way to go to compete with Evangelical Chistianity;-)

I think that Thought Field Therapy represents a challenge to MOL,
or just about every talk therapy which I know about.

Looks like a pretty efficient MOL to me -- nothing compared to
Elmer Gantry, but not bad.

For the sake of not diverting CSGnet attention from PCT work

I don't think you need to worry about it, David. Not much PCT work
gets done on CSGNet anymore and those of us who are doing PCT
work (offline) will get it done no matter what. Neither rain,
nor sleet, nor Reinforcment Theory nor Thought Field Therapy can
divert us from our appointed rounds;-)

Best

Rick

···

--
Richard S. Marken Phone or Fax: 310 474-0313
Life Learning Associates e-mail: rmarken@earthlink.net
http://home.earthlink.net/~rmarken

[Bill_Curry2]

[From Bill Curry (981113.2230EST)]

Hi Dave,

I'm interested in your precis of the TFT workshop, and would appreciate
any citations, web pointers, etc. to more info on TFT. Also Dave,
where could I find the paper you wrote with Dick Robertson on perception
of self-image? I am a researcher on human body weight control with an
interest in developing a self-control therapy based on PCT concepts.

I did have one thought on your TFT experience: If, according to WTP,
negative emotions are perceptions of the body's tensed but frustrated
readiness to respond, does it not make sense that reducing stress at the
energized physiological site through contact/awareness therapy would
provide new, relaxing neuro-muscular perceptions that could feed back up
the hierarchy to reduce high level phobic error. Perhaps the
reorganization would be experienced as "I have this phobic fear (error
signal) in my brain but now my body is relaxing and telling me that my
thought is inappropriate, or perhaps, irrational." An analogue to me is
the reduction in anxiety feelings that can be created by deep breathing
and relaxation of the shoulder/neck muscles. This sounds like it
comports pretty well with PCT to me--what am I missing?

Finally, I want to thank you for all your work and writing about HPCT
and MOL in a therapeutic setting.

Regards,

Bill

···

--
William J. Curry
Capticom, Inc.
capticom@olsusa.com
941.395.0088

[David_Goldstein1]

Rick: Hasn't one gone "up a level" when one "thinks about the problem"
instead of just _having_ the problem?

me: Rick, if I were going to ask you to "think about the reactions of some
people to you on the CSGnet" and that was it, would it be going up a level?
I am not asking you to talk about it, just to think about it.

If I were doing the MOL with you, I would ask you to talk about it. And
then I, and you, would tune into "background stuff."

When I do MOL work now, I think about the discussion of the topic as being
in the space between us. I ask people to be aware of stuff which is
happening on the periphery as they are talking about the topic. The
"background stuff" occupies the space around the topic being discussed. It
is almost tangible.

I agree with your skepticism and also agree that it reminds one of religious
types.

Dick: Has Thought field therapy ruled out placebo effect?

me: There is one study which is on the Thought Field Therapy Web Page which
purports to do this. You can decide for yourself.

I did one study on a patient of mine. I did a QEEG before and after TFT
treatment (done by an associate in the same session). Before treatment,
when she thought of a specific traumatic incident, her brain waves showed
excessive beta, she hyperventilated and she struggled to "stay grounded" and
not dissociate. When she cleared her mind, her brain waves were normal.
After treatment, her brain waves were normal under both conditions (clear
mind, thinking of the trauma). The treatment allows her to remember the
trauma and not be as upset as subjectively reported and as shown by the
brain waves. As I said, this all took place within one session.

···

From: David M. Goldstein
Subject: Re: Thought Field Therapy and PCT [From Rick Marken
(981113.0800)]; [Fom Dick Robertson,981113.0727CST]
Date: 11/13/98

[David_Goldstein1]

Thanks Bill for you kind words.

Here is one link: http://www.tftrx.com/
It is the address of the creator of Thought Field Therapy who is Roger J.
Callahan, Ph.D.

Martin Taylor has included the paper on the self-image in a journal. He has
posted to the CSGnet under the heading "editorial." If you can't find the
post, let me know. I will send you his email address.

I am very interested in what you are doing with human weight control. Have
you tried to put your ideas in the form of a Vensim model? In any case, how
about telling us about it?

Bill said: I did have one thought on your TFT experience: If, according to
WTP,negative emotions are perceptions of the body's tensed but frustrated
readiness to respond, does it not make sense that reducing stress at the
energized physiological site through contact/awareness therapy would provide
new, relaxing neuro-muscular perceptions that could feed back up the
hierarchy to reduce high level phobic error. Perhaps the eorganization
would be experienced as "I have this phobic fear (errorsignal) in my brain
but now my body is relaxing and telling me that my thought is inappropriate,
or perhaps irrational." An analogue to me is the reduction in anxiety
feelings that can be created by deep breathing and relaxation of the
shoulder/neck muscles. This sounds like it comports pretty well with PCT to
me--what am I missing?

me: Maybe nothing. My understanding of the hierrarchy is that the higher
levels set the goals for the lower levels, not vice versa. However, you are
proposing: TFT changes lower levels. The emotion perceived changes. A
thought which goes with this new emotion occurs. This thought conflicts with
the old one. Reorganization takes place and the new thought is retained. Am
I understanding your viewpoint correctly.

Maybe Rick, or Bill could comment on this scenario. I don't think it is
classic HPCT but I may be wrong.

···

From: David Goldstein
Subject: Re: Thought Field Therapy and PCT [From Bill Curry
(981113.2230EST)]
Date: 11/14/98

[Bruce_Gregory8]

[From Bruce Gregory (981114.0750 EDT)]

David M. Goldstein

Subject: Re: Thought Field Therapy and PCT [From Rick Marken
(981113.0800)]; [From Dick Robertson,981113.0727CST]
Date: 11/13/98

I did one study on a patient of mine. I did a QEEG before and after TFT

treatment (done by an associate in the same session). Before treatment,
when she thought of a specific traumatic incident, her brain waves showed
excessive beta, she hyperventilated and she struggled to "stay
grounded" and
not dissociate. When she cleared her mind, her brain waves were normal.
After treatment, her brain waves were normal under both conditions (clear
mind, thinking of the trauma). The treatment allows her to remember the
trauma and not be as upset as subjectively reported and as shown by the
brain waves. As I said, this all took place within one session.

I have done similar "processes". My interpretation of what occurred was that
I stopped resisting the traumatic experience that I had avoid thinking about
in the past. The more I "looked at it" the less emotional responses the
scene had for me. (I am reminded of Buddhist meditations on death and
decay.) It seems to me that this particular emotional response is produced
by a desired to avoid confronting the image. ("The Great Way is not
difficult, for those who have no preferences.") As the scene was confronted,
the emotional charge diminished. As my old guru Werner Erhard would say,
"Whatever you can let be, lets you be." It would be interesting to see after
a few weeks if the beta waves returned, albeit diminished. In my experience
it took several sessions to remove the affective response permanently from
the imagined scene.

Bruce Gregory

[R_Marken]

[From Rick Marken (981114.0920)]

Me:

Hasn't one gone "up a level" when one "thinks about the problem"
instead of just _having_ the problem?

David M. Goldstein (981113) --

Rick, if I were going to ask you to "think about the reactions
of some people to you on the CSGnet" and that was it, would
it be going up a level?

Yes. That would definitely be going up a level, even if those
reactions were not a problem for me (and they usually aren't).

I am not asking you to talk about it, just to think about it.

That's no problem. We can go up a level all on our own. I do it
all the time. So do you. Everyone does.

I agree with your skepticism and also agree that it reminds one
of religious types.

I'm not skeptical about TFT or religion; they work. So do
conventional and unconventional psychotherapies. So does
talking to your friends, going to a movie or listening to a
Mozart Piano Concerto. Everything works -- sometimes. I was
just suggesting that one reason TFT -- like all other therapies --
may work works (when it does) is by helping a person go "up a
level" and see their problem from another conscious point of view.

Bill Curry (981113.2230EST) --

does it not make sense that reducing stress at the energized
physiological site through contact/awareness therapy would
provide new, relaxing neuro-muscular perceptions that could
feed back up the hierarchy to reduce high level phobic error.

I don't think so. This assumes that perceptions cause error; in
fact, according to PCT, error causes actions that _control_
perceptions. When I get nice neuro-muscular perceptions (via
massage, say, so I am controlling these perceptions via the actions
of another person) I find that it moves my consciousness away from
the stressed parts of my control hierarchy; away from the perceptions
that I don't have under control, for whatever reason (conflict,
skill limits, whatever). For a while I just stop worrying about
those perceptions; I think the reorganization process, which Bill
has suggested is guided by consciousness to the high error systems
in the control hierarchy, just stops for a while. The problems don't
go away but the reorganization process that is aimed at trying to
solve those problems seems to stop for a while. A few hours after
the massage I'm again worrying about how I'm going to pay all my
bills and still be able to retire in a few years.

Best

Rick

···

--
Richard S. Marken Phone or Fax: 310 474-0313
Life Learning Associates e-mail: rmarken@earthlink.net
http://home.earthlink.net/~rmarken/

[Bruce_Gregory8]

[From Bruce Gregory (81114.1415)]

Rick Marken (981114.0920)

I don't think so. This assumes that perceptions cause error; in
fact, according to PCT, error causes actions that _control_
perceptions.

Errors arise as a result of differences between what we perceive and what we
want to perceive. Assigning them a causal role suggests a linearity that I'm
sure you did not intend.

When I get nice neuro-muscular perceptions (via
massage, say, so I am controlling these perceptions via the actions
of another person) I find that it moves my consciousness away from
the stressed parts of my control hierarchy; away from the perceptions
that I don't have under control, for whatever reason (conflict,
skill limits, whatever). For a while I just stop worrying about
those perceptions; I think the reorganization process, which Bill
has suggested is guided by consciousness to the high error systems
in the control hierarchy, just stops for a while. The problems don't
go away but the reorganization process that is aimed at trying to
solve those problems seems to stop for a while. A few hours after
the massage I'm again worrying about how I'm going to pay all my
bills and still be able to retire in a few years.

This description sounds plausible, but has nothing to do, as far as I can
tell, with any mechanism described in PCT. Why does controlling one
perception lead reorganization to stop in another? What does it mean to stop
worrying about a perception? How can you worry about a perception? Why is it
possible to distract yourself via a massage? Are you implying that any
treatment is simply a temporary distraction?

Bruce Gregory

[Bill_Curry2]

Bill Curry [981114.2335EST]

David Goldstein [981114.0614] wrote:

I am very interested in what you are doing with human weight control.

Have

you tried to put your ideas in the form of a Vensim model? In any case,

how

about telling us about it?

First of all Dave, let me advise you and the list that I am not a
degreed professional in psychology or, for that matter, any of the
fields that regularly dine at the PCT table. I'm just an apprentice
hod-carrier at this point, still happily plowing through the WTP
library. I've had a wide ranging career including industrial
management, production engineering, environmental policy development and
lobbying, large scale rural land management, and business consulting.
My only academic exposure to systems thinking was at Penn where I
audited Russell Ackoff's OR lectures in the early '70's, and a little
later I was involved in a graduate school exchange program with the U.
of Fla. working with Howard Odom's modeling group in describing the
energetics of natural ecosystems. I hope this mea culpa will provide
cover for me to ask the occasional duh! question, and also to float an
off-the-wall idea now and then.

About two years ago, I became interested in the problems of weight
management in humans, with a particular focus on self-control methods.
My interest was sparked by my personal success with a three part regimen
that I developed to enhance the moment to moment awareness of the eating
process. Much of this evolved out of my interest in meditation and
Ashtanga yoga. In an effort to understand the underlying psychology of
why this system worked, I've read a raft of material on various
self-treatment approaches, most of which relied upon behavioral
modification thinking. In my meanderings, I stumbled onto the CSG
site, and found the elegant framework of HPCT and MOL which appears to
answer many of my questions. I'm not at liberty at this time to
publically disclose my work because of intellectual property
considerations, but I will follow up with you personally via email.

My understanding of the hierrarchy is that the higher levels set the

goals for the lower levels, not vice versa. However, you are

proposing: TFT changes lower levels. The emotion perceived changes. A

thought which goes with this new emotion occurs. This

thought conflicts with the old one. Reorganization takes place and the

new thought is retained. Am I understanding your

viewpoint correctly?

Not quite. Reorganization might be cognitively experienced as "one
thought replacing another" or "I just no longer feel that way about it",
but the HPCT explanation I am proposing for this reorganization is that
the TFT induced relaxation dramatically attenuates the intensity of
neuro-muscular signals from the tensioned areas; without feedback of its
supporting physiological error signals [error=0], the phobic mental
state no longer has perceptual validation, and it simply evaporates as
the relevant control system reverts to normal operation.

Regards,

Bill

···

--
William J. Curry 941.395.0088
Capticom, Inc. capticom@olsusa.com

[David_Goldstein1]

Rick: . I was just suggesting that one reason TFT -- like all other
therapies --may work works (when it does) is by helping a person go "up a
level" and see their problem from another conscious point of view.

Me: Rick, did you notice in the research study which I cited that before TFT
treatment, the person thought about the trauma and she became scared as
evidenced by verbal report, observation, and EEG activity?

Many people do not think about traumatic experiences because they become
upset when they do. If just thinking about a traumatic experience was
"going up a level", and this is what helped her become less scared, then why
did she not show this before TFT treatment?

If just thinking about a problem situation were going up a level, then the
MOL takes a person beyond where just thinking about takes the person.

For example, when I asked you to think about "some of the negative
reactions which you have experienced on the CSGnet" was that doing the full
MOL? or was it just the start of the process?

If just "thinking about a problem" were all that was necessary, then most
therapy sessions would end after the patient tells the therapist what was
troubling them.

···

From: David Goldstein
Subject: Re: Thought Field Therapy and PCT [From Rick Marken (981114.0920)]
Date: 11/15/98

[R_Marken]

[From Rick Marken (981115.1030)]

Me:

This assumes that perceptions cause error; in
fact, according to PCT, error causes actions that _control_
perceptions.

Bruce Gregory (81114.1415)]

Errors arise as a result of differences between what we perceive
and what we want to perceive.

Errors _are_ the difference between what we perceive and what
we want to perceive. They arise (and disappear) as a result of
disturbances to the controlled variable, changes in our reference
for the state of that variable (changes in what we want),
variations in our own actions and variati0ns in the error signal
itself.

Assigning them a causal role suggests a linearity that I'm
sure you did not intend.

True. I made my comments in response to this from Bill Curry
(981113.2230EST) --

does it not make sense that reducing stress at the energized
physiological site through contact/awareness therapy would
provide new, relaxing neuro-muscular perceptions that could
feed back up the hierarchy to reduce high level phobic error.

It sounded like Bill was suggesting that providing "new, relaxing
neuro-muscular perceptions" could cause reduced error. This would
only be true if the error were in the system controlling neuro-
muscular perception and new perceptions were being "provided" by
someone pushing (disturbing) this controlled variable in a way that
brings it to its reference state. This is like scratching an itch
for another person; by scratching you are providing a new _state_
of the controlled perceptual variable (itchiness), one that is
closer to the reference state. I agree that this is a way for an
outsider (the scratcher) to provide a new perception that reduces
stress (error). But I don't think this is what TFT is about.

David Goldstein (981115) --

If just thinking about a traumatic experience was "going up a
level", and this is what helped her become less scared, then why
did she not show this before TFT treatment?

I don't know. It depends on what "thinking about it" means. If she
was just reliving the trauma then she didn't go up a level. If
she was thinking about the trauma _as a problem_, then she went up
a level.

If just thinking about a problem situation were going up a level,
then the MOL takes a person beyond where just thinking about
takes the person.

It's not just thinking about the problem; it's thinking about the
problem from a new _perspetive_. That's the up a level. I'm afraid
of heights. I am _up a level_ from that problem when I think _about_
being afraid of heights. I am _at the level_ of the problem when
I am experiencing all kinds of stress imagining myself rescuing
Faye Wray from the top of the Empire State.

Best

Rick

···

--

Richard S. Marken Phone or Fax: 310 474-0313
Life Learning Associates e-mail: rmarken@earthlink.net
http://home.earthlink.net/~rmarken/

[Bruce_Gregory8]

[From Bruce Gregory (981115.1345 EDT)]

Rick Marken (981115.1030)

It's not just thinking about the problem; it's thinking about the
problem from a new _perspetive_. That's the up a level. I'm afraid
of heights. I am _up a level_ from that problem when I think _about_
being afraid of heights. I am _at the level_ of the problem when
I am experiencing all kinds of stress imagining myself rescuing
Faye Wray from the top of the Empire State.

We clearly have different understandings of what "up a level" means. I have
always assumed it means from the level at which reference levels are
established--the reference levels that produce the conflict at the lower
level. If this were true it would mean that one now had access to the
mechanisms that produces the conflict. ("Oh, now I see that I produced this
conflict by....") I could see how this might be therapeutic. I see nothing
therapeutic about recognizing that agoraphobia is a "problem." Most
neurotics know they have problems and even have "explanations" for them.
Must we one of those many points about PCT I fail to grasp.

Bruce Gregory

[R_Marken]

[From Rick Marken (981115.1720)]

Bruce Gregory (981115.1345 EDT) --

We clearly have different understandings of what "up a level"
means. I have always assumed it means from the level at which
reference levels are established--the reference levels that
produce the conflict at the lower level.

I think our understandings are pretty close. When I say "up
a level" I'm just referring to an actual consciousness experience;
it's something I know about because I can experience it (and so can
you or anyone else, I presume).

Your understanding of "up a level" includes stuff about reference
levels and conflict, which are part of the theory of why going
"up a level" (having the experience of becoming conscious of
something from a new point of view) might be helpful in therapy.
But that's more than I am talking about when I talk about going
"up a level". For me, "up a level" just refers to a phenomenon --
the subjective experience of becoming conscious of something from
a new point of view -- and that's all.

Best

Rick

···

---
Richard S. Marken Phone or Fax: 310 474-0313
Life Learning Associates e-mail: rmarken@earthlink.net
http://home.earthlink.net/~rmarken/

[David_Goldstein1]

Rick: It depends on what "thinking about it" means. If she
was just reliving the trauma then she didn't go up a level. If
she was thinking about the trauma _as a problem_, then she went up
a level.

Me: This is a good distinction. When I said to her to think about the
traumatic incident, I was asking her to relive it.

So, this rules out "going up a level" as an explanation for the reduced fear
reactions. Yes? And if so, then therapeutic change can take place without
going up a level? And this challenges the necessity of going up a level as a
condition of therapeutic change? That was my original point, an apparent
counterexample to the idea that going up a level is necessary condition for
therapeutic change.

···

From: David Goldstein
Subject: Re: Thought Field Therapy and PCT [From Rick Marken (981115.1030)]
Subject: 11/15/98

[R_Marken]

[From Rick Marken (981115.2110)]

Me:

It depends on what "thinking about it" means. If she was just
reliving the trauma then she didn't go up a level. If she was
thinking about the trauma _as a problem_, then she went up
a level.

David Goldstein (981115) --

This is a good distinction. When I said to her to think about the
traumatic incident, I was asking her to relive it.

So, this rules out "going up a level" as an explanation for
the reduced fear reactions. Yes?

Possibly. But not necessarily. Going up a level is something
your patient would be doing. It's hard to see it from the outside.
The best you can do is try to infer it based on what she says.
But I'm happy to stimulate that this patient didn't up a level.

And if so, then therapeutic change can take place without
going up a level?

Yes, indeed.

And this challenges the necessity of going up a level as a
condition of therapeutic change? That was my original point,
an apparent counterexample to the idea that going up a level
is necessary condition for therapeutic change.

I don't think PCT says that going up a level is _necessary_
for theraputic change. It just suggests that this is one
possibility. And the method of levels is a nice, coherent
approach to helping someone else solve their problems -- a
method that is consistent with the theoretical assumptions
of PCT. But from what I've seen of therapy _anything_ will do;
what seems to be crucial is that the patient _believe_ in the
therapy: ergo the success of religion, primal scream therapy,
Freudean therapy, orgone box therapy, scientology, the Reagan
administration -- you name it;-)

Best

Rick

···

---
Richard S. Marken Phone or Fax: 310 474-0313
Life Learning Associates e-mail: rmarken@earthlink.net
http://home.earthlink.net/~rmarken/

[Bill_Powers1]

[From Bill Powers (9811170304 MST)]

From: David Goldstein
Subject: Re: Thought Field Therapy and PCT [From Rick Marken (981115.1030)]
Subject: 11/15/98

Rick: It depends on what "thinking about it" means. If she
was just reliving the trauma then she didn't go up a level. If
she was thinking about the trauma _as a problem_, then she went up
a level.

Me: This is a good distinction. When I said to her to think about the
traumatic incident, I was asking her to relive it.

So, this rules out "going up a level" as an explanation for the reduced fear
reactions. Yes? And if so, then therapeutic change can take place without
going up a level? And this challenges the necessity of going up a level as a
condition of therapeutic change? That was my original point, an apparent
counterexample to the idea that going up a level is necessary condition for
therapeutic change.

Rick was trying to point out that if you just relive the incident by
remembering it, there is no necessary level change. The fact that a person
has been re-enacting or remembering the trauma of an incident for years
shows that merely remembering it is not enough to effect therapeutic
change. You must also, apparently, be observing this experience from
another level, rather then just suffering it again. I would interpret the
results as showing that the person DID observe from a higher level where
reorganization can do some good -- even if you didn't tell the person to do
so.

I see nothing in "Thought Field" therapy that might explain any therapeutic
effects. There's no evidence that "thought fields" or "meridians" exist, or
that there are any kinds of energies involved in behavior but ordinary
physical and chemical energies, or that tapping on the body in various
places with two fingers, or one or three, has any effect but to compress
the skin and create tapping sensations -- and perhaps to call attention to
various parts of the body. If therapeutic changes take place as a result of
talking about or doing these things, I think our best bet is that this
method somehow persuades a person to cease doing whatever has been creating
the problem. Doing that, I presume, requires going up one or more levels.

If there is anything of practical importance in TFT, it is the
demonstration that many human problems can be dismissed in a few minutes
just by the person who has them attending to them in the right way. We have
already found such results using the MOL: conflicts, once seen from the
right viewpoint, simply melt away without any dramatic or prolonged struggles.

However, in the MOL we don't try to explain what is happening by appealing
to an elaborate system of imaginary and otherwise undetectable "energies"
or "fields", and we don't introduce meaningless manipulations that bring in
an element of magic. While theoretical assumptions are involved in
explaining how the MOL works, none are involved in its practice. The only
element that is not part of a physical model of the brain is awareness
itself and its mobility. But that is a well-established phenomenon and does
not depend on assumptions.

The TFT Web page is a wonderful example of snake-oil salemanship. Anyone
who is persuaded by this material to seek help from a TFT practitioner is
well-primed with bold suggestions that a cure is possible, easy, and sall
bu certain, with the results to be expected fully described and promised.
Remember the cry of the gullible: "They wouldn't be allowed to say such
things if they weren't true, would they?"

Any condition that is basically psychosomatic (and what else are phobias
and such?) is very likely to yield to this "treatment," because the patient
who created this problem for himself or herself is also the person who will
cure it in the end, once internal permission is given to stop having it. If
the manipulations of the TFT persuade the person to desist from maintaining
the conditions that are causing the problem, it will go away. The more
firmly the person is convinced that TFT will have this effect, the more
likely it will be to have this effect, not because of "suggestibility" but
because the person enters the treatment ready (at last) to give up the
problem. Of course the practitioners claim that belief is not necessary -
"It works with animals!" -- and they wouldn't be allowed to say that if it
weren't true. Would they?

I don't disaparage anything that works. However, I think it is best to get
rid of elements in any treatment that are not actually necessary, if only
from the standpoint of not wasting the client's time, effort, and MONEY.

Best,

Bill P.

[R_Marken]

[From Rick Marken (981117.0720)]

Bill Powers (9811170304 MST)--

Rick was trying to point out that if you just relive the incident
by remembering it, there is no necessary level change.

Welcome back!!

How about a report on the IAACT talk? I need some material
for the first issue of the new CSG Web page, ideas for which
are being shamlessly stolen from all over the internet, including
Ed's Responsible Thinking site, which puts monthly reports of
relevant current events on the main page.

Best

Rick

···

--
Richard S. Marken Phone or Fax: 310 474-0313
Life Learning Associates e-mail: rmarken@earthlink.net
http://home.earthlink.net/~rmarken