Posts Tagged ‘hypnosis’

Saturday, February 5th, 2011

I rarely show early drafts of my work but I’m writing a piece for publication in the National Council of Hypnotherapy Journal and i’m very conscious of making potentially complicated and abstract concepts into relatively easy reading. I’d really appreciate feedback, as always. This is the first part of 3;

A Clients’ personal flexibility or how to ride your bike on the Underground.

My poor bike. It’s windy and I’m cycling through North London to Swiss Cottage Library. It’s a Saturday, and I generally take a break from seeing clients and have some self-reflection and study time. I’ve recently had a pattern of cycling to a random location and reading some of the work of Gregory Bateson – who the following musings are largely inspired and indebted to. Bateson was a anthropologist, cyberneticist and philosopher among other things. John Grinder, co-creator of Neuro-Linguistic Programmng often credits him as being an influence upon his thinking.
I’m not really thinking about these things as I’m cycling though, I’m more wondering why I didn’t just get the tube. Camden Town to Swiss Cottage is just a few stops, although I’d still have to deal with the wind when I came out of the underground and walked to the library. Whereas the beauty of cycling is that you can pull up right out the front door.
There’s a much more abstract concept at play here, though. Although such a simple decision isn’t necessarily a collarary into thinking about the nature of one’s own existence – it nevertheless exists inherently within it. It’s a principle that lies at the heart of Bateson’s posthumous work finished by his daughter Angels Fear – An Investigation Into the Nature and Meaning of the Sacred.
On the tube, there is a very definite route which one can go to in a determined groove. It will be fast and it’s pretty certain where exactly (within a small margin of platform difference) your destination will be. It doesn’t allow for flexibility though and the choice of speed or route is very much determined by an other (ie the tubedriver and in turn, the tube controller.)
On the bike, I have a huge range of flexibility (within reason if I’m choosing to stay within the confines of the law) and now within a much larger boundary, but a boundary nonetheless, I can determine my own speed and journey – presumably in relation to the traffic around me. Yet, even with an indicative map in my pocket, I have little idea of the terrain around me or the traffic on this particular day.
It occurs to me as I’m blowing in the wind that the tube seems so attractive today. I wouldn’t have to make the choice out of a couple of options that currently all seem like they all have a slight taint of the unattractive and weather beaten.
Dealing with those conditions, when the tube would have lead me to the same place anyway – but would it have been the journey itself that mattered?
It’s one of a series of questions that has plagued and excited philosophers, the religious, the curious and scientists for generations and I don’t intend to solve it within my brief two wheeled expedition. I’m too busy gripping on for dear life for that and avoiding unyielding black cab drivers who I’m convinced have a sole intention this morning of removing one more cyclist from the hoard!
It’s interesting when we place these questions within the context of the therapeutic work we do. So many different methodologies, practices, subbranches, principles, presuppositions, ideas and models – before we even begin to look at the diversity in the clients themselves. Accepting the idea that at least at an unconscious level, every client has an intention in being in this space with you (otherwise they’d simply be somewhere else doing something else,) what principles or ideas are going to operate at the level of deterministic thinking over free will? Are you going to encourage your client to ride the tube with all it’s rigidity but certainty? Or are you going to encourage your client to ride their bike with all it’s flexibility but overwhelming choice?
I think, only from personal observation, that there’s a left leaning liberal factor to being a therapist. It’s certain inherent in the original presuppositions of NLP and Korzybski’s ‘The map is not the territory.” I think it’s a wonderful premise to work from which is my thinking for a consequence for clarity would be to consider that the territory is not the territory either. I’d imagine, and hope, that most therapists would instinctively presume that they don’t particularly use much ‘tube thinking’ with their clients. Railroading ideas and imposing their own maps, and what they perceive to be their values and beliefs on other people.
Stop and consider, though. How many times, if any, have you suggested to a client that as a result of seeing you they will now notice a change? Even if you haven’t suggested it explicitly, it’s implicit in the the very fact they came to see you with an issue or a problem. How many times, if any, have you said because of the anchor or the suggestive induction, they will now be free of their phobia or temptation to smoke? This is all endemic of Cause and Effect thinking.
A caveat here. Cause and Effect, which you may recognise as being utilised to a large extent by Milton Erickson, is embedded within our language. It’s there every time we ask a ‘Why’ question and it’s because (there I go again!) of this, or rather as a consequence, that it can be difficult to leave behind the shackles of tube line thinking.
There’s an argument to be had here that generally someones issues or problems in life are as a result of cause and effect thinking- so isn’t it better that we use the same thinking patterns to deprogramme them? It can work, and it can work effectively but is it ethical? Are we not merely turning a person from an unhappy robot to a happy robot, rather than encouraging a deeper epistemological change at the unconscious level into not being an obstacle in the space in which the development of a fully functioning human being unshackled from such restraints can flourish?
By way of demonstration, in his most accessible work Mind and Nature; A Necessary Unity – Bateson asks us to consider playing billards. We could take the best mathematicians and geometrists in the world, and they could correctly predict to an amazingly accurate quantification the exact angle and location at which the ball will cease to roll at once hit with the snooker cue.
If you replaced the billard cue with an animal, a cat for example, and chose to kick the cat (I really don’t condone animal violence but the hypothetical serves the example well) – there’s no possible way of ever predicting where the cat will land. The cat has choice. It can run, bite , scratch, hide, or give us a behaviour we could never expect. The cat is it’s own organic system within the wider system of the context of the situation and interacting with the other systems (ie The person kicking it and even the observers of the experiment.)

It’s getting cold and I need to concentrate on the road. To be continued….

UPDATE: I appreciate that the Journal Publication are fairly stringent in that their articles should ONLY be published in the journal. However, this first draft will be so unrecognisably different from the finished product, I don’t anticipate an issue. It is only the themes that shall remain the same and this is merely a playground in which to present them.

Saturday, January 15th, 2011

This week has been a really interesting week of working with people; From seeing people with phobias, to anxiety disorders, addictions, depression and obsessive behaviour.

Something that’s really struck me about the work I do with people is their bravery. There are very few universals in the clients that I see- and everyone is very unique and different- but there’s something deeply touching about people’s wants, needs and desires to change. Often when people have come to see me, they’ve given up in the past and that’s how they’ve let their problem(s)/issue(s) get to a level where they really desire to make a change or they’re so keen to improve their lives from the state they feel they’re already in- that they go at it with full force.

I was reflecting on this when I read a passage last night from Irvin Yalom’s “The Gift Of Therapy” and there was a short passage which really struck a chord;

“Heddeger spoke of two modes of existence; the everyday mode and the ontological mode. In the everyday mode we are consumed with and distracted by material surroundings- we are filled with wonderment about how things are in the world. In the ontological mode we are focused on being per se- that is , we are filled with wonderment that things are in the world. When we exist in the ontological mode- the realm beyond everyday concerns- we are in a state of particular readiness for personal change.”

The key phrase I believe is the latter. Clients don’t usually get through my door until they’re already ready to begin to make that personal change- and being ready to make a difference in any aspect of your life often requires bravery.

The Catch 22 is that i’m not wholly sure if it’s the bravery that creates readiness or vice versa or if actually they’re both just fueling along. Ultimately, it doesn’t matter- the important part is the decision. Are you ready, and indeed brave enough, to make changes in your life?

Zack Polanski is a Cognitive Hypnotherapist at 1 Harley Street, London. W1G 9QD

The Lewis Clinic is a clinic of hypnotherapists working from the centre of London at Harley St, but also includes many clients from North, South, East and West.

Anthropology, Motivation and Schismogenesis in Therapy; Aka Where did I put my keys?

Sunday, November 14th, 2010

One of the workshops I delivered this week with a colleague was all around the principle of ‘Words that Change Mind.’ It was all around the language of influence. One of the questions I was asked in an open frame question session was ‘Why would you want to manipulate someone who had lost their motivation into doing things?’ The simple answer was ‘I wouldn’t.’ I gave a long answer at the conference and after a short demonstration, the questioner accepted he had understood. I was going to write the answer up here…..

I started to consider some of my interests in anthropology and the ecology of situations, people and connections. Particularly interested in The Tipping Point (a la Gladwell) in which the idea of when a species reaches extinction is discussed or when a meme really catches on. How do ideas breed?

I wasn’t sure how these things necessarily linked, and i’m still not entirely sure i just know they’re important and then….

As serendipity would have it, I was in a group myself this weekend that were talking about the idea of intention (and how it can get confused sometimes.) It’s a subject that comes along once in a while with actors – which brought about that adage ‘what’s my motivation?’ We often mock actors for what can be seen as a trite saying – but what if we humour them for a moment? What if we actually thought about what our motivation in life is?

If we were characters in a book or on a film, our pre-script has already been written but knowing we can influence the rest of the story- how would, and will you choose to allow it to go?

We often talk about our motivation as if it’s concrete. As if it’s something we can pick up, put down, take for a walk. It’s almost sometimes as if we’ve lost our house keys.

‘Hold on a minute, i’ve lost my motivation.’

It can be interesting when you consider for a moment how motivation was never an object. It never actually existed. It wasn’t tangible. You can’t actually hold it.

You can BE or ACT  motivated, you can even attempt to be motivatING but you can’t lose ‘your motivation.’

So, where do we go from here with this abstract idea? What’s the practical use?

Well if you’re not feeling motivated- the most likely cause is that you’ve lost your criteria for being. If it’s a job for example, what’s important to you about a job? If you can list your 3 main things, you can pretty much work out what makes you tick.

An example could be cash, challenge and progression. If for that person, the cash wasn’t enough, the challenge wasn’t happening anymore or they felt as if they were stuck- then it’s unlikely they’re going to want to go through the journey of being motivated if they’ve lost the direction.

As soon as one of those is subtracted, it’s interesting how quickly the process of being motivated can become stagnant.

What’s important to you about your life? What do you want? As soon as you’ve got your criteria- you can probably recognise how when those things are there; you feel motivated. If they’re not, then there might be work to do.

Aristotle thousands of years ago had a really simple principle. The pleasure/pain principle. He asked us in our lives to identify every time that we make a movement, an action or a behaviour- are we moving towards pleasure? Or are we moving away from pain?

Regular readers of the blog and indeed the people that I see regularly will be well aware of my basic foundations of believing that we have choice. We can make our own decisions; we can just sometime be unconsciously interrupted into not being congruent with what we really want. This can be termed secondary gain.

An example of secondary gain is the smoker who doesn’t quite want to quit because she’s concerned about how she’ll relieve stress otherwise. We can consider subjectively that if she wasn’t putting toxins into her body, and found other outlets to breathe- the tobacco wouldn’t be necessary. It’s much easier to notice these small tendancies though from a disassociated position.

And this is where we can start to tie things together. The concept of schismogenesis is the connection pattern here.

Schismogenesis is essentially the beginning of a rift or a division of sorts. We can look politically and see examples of it throughout the past 4 years. Gordon Brown taking over the Labour party caused a rift to get larger; The Expenses scandal was an example of a schismogenesis between the public and politicans.

We can also see it from sociological perspectives, functionalism and throughout mainstream religion.

There’s internal schismogenesis though, too. There’s those moments where if we tell ourselves we’ve lost our motivation, without thinking of it as a process, there’s a risk of the rift between what we want to do and the ‘motivation’ to do it (there’s that noun again) – this is when things get difficult.

How do we avoid the schism then? Well once it’s created, it’s done. We can move on. It’s what we do to repair it or even create something new, which is where the real wonders can happen.

As always, I’ve written a lot more about this topic, particularly around the ideas of the unconscious and ideas of anthropology and i’m more than happy to e-mail the drafts to any particulary interested parties – just drop me an e-mail at info@zackpolanski.com

Zack Polanski is a leading Cognitive Hypnotherapist at 1 Harley Street. For a free phone consultation, call The Lewis Clinic on 077380888632.

The Pleasure/Pain Principle

Sunday, October 24th, 2010

This was an idea of Aristotle’s that I often find that I talk about with clients, and other therapists.

If the thought of philosophy or science usually makes you want to switch off- hold on there with me because it’s a really simple principle to grab hold of once you’ve heard it.

The idea is simply when we’re motivated to do something- we’re either moving towards something we want or moving away from something we don’t want. There’s been a lot of talk in Politics this month around the Government’s attitude towards Banks- whether to go for the stick or the carrot. Often they’re just deciding whether to help incentivise them or plonk sanctions on them.

It’s worth noticing that almost no one is solely motivated towards, and almost no one is solely motivated away from – they’re contextual. Where it can be useful though is if you’ve become stuck in a pattern for one particular context, it might be worth considering what other options could be available to you if you change your strategy.

Take two people, for example. Alex and Lee. They’re both pretty motivated people when it comes to working out and going to the gym- but they have completely different ways of doing it.

Alex goes to the gym by having a chart on his wall. On this chart, he ticks off how many bench presses he’s done and how many weight’s he’s lifted that week according to his 5×5 programme. Just ticking off the boxes is a huge thing to him, and he really enjoys seeing the progression. He’s really moving TOWARDS those goals that he wants to achieve.

Lee goes to the gym, in another way. She considers how overweight she’s going to look if she doesn’t go. She’s even got a picture of her from 5 years ago wehn she was really unhappy with her weight and she never wants to look like that again- she really wants to move AWAY from that side of her. Anything but that.

Now instinctively when we read these- we often want to consider ourselves TOWARDS people. Society has often moulded us to be positive and optimistic. Those things can be great; but again it’s contextual.

Take a Fireofficer for example. If Mark loves putting out fires and going in places just to rescue people. He loves that feeling of moving TOWARDS saving a life- it can be fantastic. What Mark really needs though for the safety of himself and the rest of the team is Lucy.

Lucy loves saving lives too- it’s why she does the job she chooses to do BUT she’s very good at spotting potential problems. She knows when to move AWAY from the building for the overall safety of everyone amd knows when to nip heroic acts in the bud and do whatever is necessary to be efficent, safe and caring all at the same time.

It’s interesting in the concept of business how towards people (i imagine like Richard Branson or Simon Cowell) are constantly moving towards things and coming up with new projects.

There are often stories of people though who are motivated by moving AWAY from esentially poverty. They come up with a fantastic plan, but then once they’ve made a successful business- they become complacent and self-sabotage it, almost. This is often usually because the criteria for the motivation has been removed from the situation.

And how is this relevant to therapy?

In Cognitive Hypnotherapy, we believe in working with the individual and their behaviours in the current moment. If your behaviour that’s unwanted, still has a positive intention- are you moving towards something you want different even pleasurable or are you moving away from something that’s going to be painful?

Either way, I’m happy to help and your intention is just one piece of the jigsaw. If you’d like to discuss any of these ideas or your personal circumstances, i’d be more than happy to chat to you on the phone (07738088632) or alternatively just drop me an e-mail (info@zackpolanski.com)

That Aristotle really knew his stuff.

Zack Polanski is a Cognitive Hypnotherapist working at The Lewis Clinic on 1 Harley Street. He is also an NLP Trainer having been trained by John Grinder, Carmen Bostic-St Claire and Michael Carroll. He works with a wide range of issues from smoking cessation to trauma, phobias, depression and confidence issues. Every individual is treated as just that- an individual and all work is confidential.

For Media Enquiries or actors/models/politicians, I am happy to liase initally through a recognised agent.

Wednesday, May 12th, 2010

It’s been a really interesting week.

Not just politically and not just because the weather has been going to and fro but a really common theme in everything that i’ve heard both with clients and the public around me is this idea of resolutions and compromise

Some of them have been the obvious stuff like ‘i want to lose weight,’ or ‘i don’t want to smoke anymore’ and some have been more unusual. I saw a father for his final (5th) session who’s final aim was to be more understanding with his children. And then interestingly, there was one lady who’d experienced a form of trauma and wanted to start this month by leaving it behind.

As always in my blogs, I checked that she didn’t mind me talking about it as long as I left her anonymous.

The abuse aside, looking forward to the future was a real moment for her. She’d never taken that time to really think about what she wanted. And the actual content of it, in the end, turned out not to matter- much more important and profound for her was the process of how she was going to get it and how she was going to divert around not getting what she’s not wanting.

We spoke on the phone, just an hour ago which prompted the blog entry- and she just said that she felt the hour together had really made an impact on her life.

The idea of “What makes us tick?”

Tony Robbins would suggest that there are several factors;

1) Certainty – Do you like surprises? Ha. Only the ones that you wanted. Everything else we label as a problem.

2) Uncertainty- What happens if you only had certainty in your life? You’d be bored, right?

3) Significance- We’re all striving for this in some way. Some do it through financial means, others by striving for intellectual precidence and others by meaning something to their partner. We often see it in youth through violence; if there’s no other way out, they can strive to cause damage to others.

4) Love/Connection- Everyone wants the first, but sometimes when we get scared; maybe we can just settle for the second. This is what Robbins suggests in his most recent book.

Whilst I think these are useful models, I think it’s important to take them for what they are- models. Ultimately, it has to be about what does the individual want?

So here’s the question?

What do you want in your life right now? Do you want to be free of that phobia? Not feel anxiety any more? Not to suffer from lack of confidence or insecurity?

And if any of those, what is it that you actually want?

Do you just need to feel ok? Or how about maybe, just maybe, you want to feel great?

Whatever it is, intentionally setting a conscious target can only point you in the right direction.

Zack Polanski is a Cognitive Hypnotherapist and NLP New Code Practitioner. For information prior to booking an appointment, call on 07738088632 or alternatively e-mail at info@zackpolanski.com

What is Cognitive Hypnotherapy?

Monday, April 12th, 2010

Trevor Silvester of The Quest Institute:

When we’re approached by someone interested in hypnotherapy training this is the question that we have to answer most often. And it’s not surprising; the term clinical hypnotherapy is used by many hypnotherapy courses which teach very different syllabuses, and which operate from many different organising beliefs. We wanted people to be able to recognise what they’re getting from our hypnotherapy course that they couldn’t get from someone else’s, and so we called our approach Cognitive Hypnotherapy, because it borrows many of its principles from Cognitive theory, neuroscience and evolutionary psychology, and uses a very different idea about the nature of hypnosis and trance than the traditional approaches that commonly fall within the labels of clinical hypnotherapy or clinical hypnosis. But, because Cognitive Hypnotherapy is a synthesis of many ideas, describing that difference isn’t easy with just a brief phase.

I could say “Cognitive Hypnotherapy is a brief approach which uses a modern understanding of trance to enable the client to let go of what restricts them, and create what would empower them.” But that doesn’t help that much, it needs more detail. So if you’re really interested in knowing what it is that makes this approach so different, read on…

Whenever I’m asked what Cognitive Hypnotherapy is I normally have to start with what it isn’t.

• It isn’t an approach that sees trance as a special state, certainly not one created by the hypnotist.
• It doesn’t believe that depth of trance is a significant factor in the success of a suggestion or technique, or that trance is necessarily a state of relaxation – some trance states are packed to the gills with fear, anxiety, panic and any others that can jam themselves in.
• It doesn’t believe that the therapist’s role is to come up with answers, only questions that guide the client to finding their own.

Let’s start with Orr’s Law (What the thinker thinks the prover proves) because it has such an important place. In many important respects the world is what we believe it to be. If our thinker thinks something is true then our prover will bring information from the background that confirms it, and leave in the background everything that contradicts it. This filtering of information is achieved by what Bandler and Grinder described as ‘universal modeling processes’, deletion, distortion and generalisation – how the mind filters information from the senses and fits it into its model of the world. I’ve suggested that these three processes correspond to the nine major trance phenomena – they are how the mind deletes, distorts and generalises. This places trance centrally in the normal spectrum of human experience. We spend much, if not most of our time in states woven from these phenomena and it is from these states that many of the patterns that form our belief systems arise.

Trance phenomena are a fundamental part of the problem pattern of the client, and a fundamental part of the solution. In many respects Cognitive Hypnotherapy involves waking the client up from the trance they’re in while they’re ‘doing’ their problem, or at least helping them create a more pleasant trance.

Much of our brain is devoted to identifying patterns of information from our surroundings. It uses our interpretation of our past experiences to give meaning to our present and to calculate the possible consequences to us in the future. I suggest that the mind uses three basic algorithms to perform these calculations: A=B (this is the same as that), C>E (cause and effect) and A=notB. In simple terms the purpose of these calculations is Freud’s pleasure principle – our unconscious seeks to move us towards pleasure and away from pain.

However, problems arise because our mind is modular, not singular. We have an executive module that we feel is our ‘self’, our authentic identity. This module lives under the illusion that it controls all of our actions and plots our course through life. It doesn’t, most of what we do is the result of unconscious processes and drives, our ‘I’ just spins a convincing story to itself (and anyone else who’ll listen) about why it’s spent its life the way it has.

The unconscious is part of this modularity, there is no single unconscious in conflict with the conscious, rather a host of ‘parts’ that perform a particular function or are triggered into action by particular circumstances. Problems are often caused by the inner conflict between these conscious and unconscious parts, or where a part is using a particular interpretation of past information that creates a limiting version of present reality. How they come to do so is explained by the tenets of Cognitive Psychology. It has two main organising themes:

1. Actions are caused by mental processes.
2. The mind is a computer.

Let’s look at both of these in turn, and if you are a technophobe, don’t panic because we are not going to mention gigabytes,googlebots or teraflops once.

1. Actions are caused by mental processes.

Psychology is the science of human behaviour. Its area is seeking why humans act the way they do. Cognitive psychology proposes that we are all psychologists, seeking to understand our actions, and the actions of others. From the earliest days we are trying to work out what’s going on and why.

As such we are creatures who seek meaning, and, just as we believe that everything that happens around us has a cause – I get wet because I walk in the rain, my dog barks because it has heard something outside – so we attribute our behaviour to our mental processes (thoughts) – ‘I got angry because I thought my girlfriend looked at someone else’, ‘I laughed because I thought someone falling over in front of me was funny’. For most people this is not news. It broadly corresponds to how ‘folk’ psychology has operated, probably for hundreds of years. What is different is the precision with which cognitive psychology describes these mental processes. It calls them computations, I tend to use the term calculations and use the idea of the three algorithms as the means by which the mind (or part of it) makes the calculation.

2. The mind is a computer.
This does not mean that the mind uses the operating principles of a computer, like the use of binary code. We know it doesn’t. Basing themselves on the work of British mathematician Alan Turing, cognitive psychologists define a computer as a set of operations for processing information.

This is an important distinction to make, because it means that the computer is software, not hardware. The essence of a computer does not lie in the materials from which it is made, but in the programs it executes. You need a machine to run it on, but you could use many different types of machine. The mind is thus a very complicated program, which they seek to describe in terms of information processing, without needing to focus on how the brain (the hardware) actually does it. In the words of Dylan Evans and Oscar Zarate,”The key to behaviour is the program, not the materials out of which the machine is made.”

From this idea we could envisage the mind as a series of programs that develop from both a genetic base and as a reaction to experience. Wolinsky would probably describe these programs as trance identities, the followers of Fritz Perls would probably call them parts. My son would probably say, “Whatever!” And he’s right. The term we use isn’t as important as the idea it conveys; that our mind is made of different programs that have different agenda’s. There is more than one ghost in the machine. Sometimes these differences cause conflict. Trance phenomena are the means by which each program/trance identity creates the illusion of reality it requires to perform its function.

We look to Evolutionary Psychology for the basis of this conflict between different programs. The premise of Evolutionary psychology is that, if cognitive psychology shows us that the mind exhibits a very complex design (there are more connections between cells in the brain than stars in the universe), whose purpose is to process different forms of information, and evolutionary biology tells us that complex designs in nature come about only by natural selection, then the design of the mind must have evolved by a process of natural selection – i.e. each part of the mind has been created by mutation, and retained because of its usefulness in solving particular problems.

None of these mutations are likely to have arisen in the last 10,000 years. The brain and mind we have is adapted to solve the physical and social problems that arise from life in a small group of hunter-gatherers on the savannah. The most important adaptive problems in this environment are thought to be:
• Avoiding predators
• Eating the right food
• Forming alliances and friendships
• Providing help to children and other relatives
• Reading other peoples minds
• Communicating with other people
• Selecting mates

All of the abilities shown above are crucial for passing on your genes. That being the case, evolution should have designed mental modules to achieve these objectives in the ancestral environment.

These modules obviously continue to have a use within the modern situation, but, bearing in mind that their purpose is processing information, if the wrong computation is made then the behaviour the module generates as a result is likely to be wrong as well. Beside each module I have put a ’software fault’ that might be attributed to it.

• Avoiding predators – Phobia’s.
• Eating the right food – Eating disorders, weight problems.
• Forming alliances and friendships – low self-esteem, jealousy, insecurity.
• Providing help to children and other relatives – guilt.
• Reading other peoples minds – Paranoia.
• Communicating with other people – Alienation, social phobia’s.
• Selecting mates – Jealousy, insecurity.

I introduce them to you now only to get you thinking about the modular nature of the brain, and how these faults can be likened to software errors (like computer viruses). The purpose of Cognitive Hypnotherapy becomes one of de-bugging the programs that aren’t working for the client, and so enabling a greater sense of congruency in their daily lives. Each program has a pattern that contains information about context, structure, process and consequence. This is what makes up the thought the thinker has that the prover seeks to prove. Changing part of the problem pattern changes the operation of the program and may render its purpose completely redundant.

Our brain is an expensive investment by evolution – it consumes 30% of our daily calories. It doesn’t make sense that the reward of this investment would be behaviours less likely to help us survive – unhappiness isn’t hardwired. Our problems are simply mistakes based on the brains mis-calculations – usually when our computer is too young to make good ones. The young brain is only capable of a limited complexity in its calculations, labelled by the educationalist Piaget as ‘nominal processing’ – things are black or white, good or bad, right or wrong. As we mature we become capable of finer levels of rationality and understanding, but unfortunately the results of our earlier struggles to comprehend the world and keep us safe continue to provide the basis for later calculations – just like the programming errors of early versions of Windows continue to cause crashes in later versions – so problems that start as significant emotional events (SEE’s) to a juvenile generalise into debilitating adult problems. An important principle here is that the programs running these problems have a positive intention – they’re a program trying to help, just in the wrong way – remember Mrs Toothbrush from vol I? This applies with a wide range of issues, from phobias to smoking (why would we be motivated to do something that’s going to kill us unless at some level part of us thought there was a benefit?). Cognitive Hypnotherapy is constantly looking for better ways to assist the client in re-coding the programs that don’t work for them. WordweavingTM is a central part of it because it offers a model that utilises the trance phenomena that form the problem as a means of changing it.

Essentially what Cognitive Hypnotherapy seeks to do is identify what the thinker thinks that causes the problem. This is the problem pattern. We change it in any way possible with the many techniques we have available and then prime their mind using Wordweaving to link this change to a continuing movement towards their solution state – their world without their issue.

Sunday, March 21st, 2010

Just a quick note that as well as The Lewis Clinic in 1 Harley St, Central London – I am now also practising at weekends in Hampstead, North London. For information about either service or what cognitive therapy can do for you- just give me a call on 07738088632.

Whether it be a confidence issue, anxiety, a phobia, an addiction or something that you imagine i’ve never been asked before; i’m more then happy to have a chat to you on the phone or by e-mail and give you a realistic assessment of what I can do about it and how I can help.

Using hypnosis, NLP and cutting edge techniques from different therapies across the world, we can make huge difference and change in your life in a relatively brief amount of time.

Never forget a face…

Monday, January 25th, 2010

Interesting article from the BBC today.

Particularly struck me as I have an interesting mix of different clients who come to see me.

A lot come because they are trying to get away from something- like a phobia for example, or anxiety. They don’t like something in their life which they’d much rather be rid of.

On the other hand though, I see a lot of people who just want to be ‘better at something.’ Whether it be performance enhancement of their confidence levels, a sports performance or an actor- they just want an improvement.

Isn’t it interesting how we often find human beings who have certain skills already and didn’t realise it was a skill until someone went out of their way to write an article about it?

Following is the article; If you’d like to see Zack Polanski, please contact The Lewis Clinic, 1 Harley Street, London.

Other clinics also available in the Camden area,  Westminster and Bayswater.

Many of us struggle sometimes to put a name to a face, but what if you could recognise someone many years after seeing them for a moment?

You know the woman crossing the street. But where from?

Ah, she was one of the volunteers staffing the polling station where you voted several years before. You probably saw her for a couple of minutes. Several years ago.

Sound like the kind of face you would place immediately?

It is for Jennifer. She is a “super recogniser”, someone with a significantly above average ability to place a face.

In fact, she can almost never forget a face. She first noticed something might be unusual on holiday with her family when she spotted a very minor actor on a plane. Her family were disbelieving but she was proved right.

But it really hit home at college that she was different from those around her.

“I’d meet so many people in the first few weeks and I’d remember everyone no matter how brief the encounter. I’d then meet them at a party and they wouldn’t remember me. I’d think: ‘That person is SO fake, I can’t believe they’re pretending they don’t remember me when we met for 30 seconds in the cafeteria three weeks ago.’”

Chance meeting

It doesn’t matter if years have lapsed since seeing them.

She describes seeing someone she saw a few times as child, on the subway, now over 20 years older with greying hair and dreadlocks and knowing exactly who she was.

“People can get older but their faces look the same to me,” says Jennifer. “They don’t look different to me whether they’re children or adults. I don’t know why my mind is able to make the leap.”

It sounds like a neat party trick, or perhaps something useful in business, but it may mean more than that to scientists.

Jennifer’s ability may help scientists who are investigating people in the opposite position, those who suffer from the condition prosopagnosia, popularly known as face blindness.

Claire, a 49-year-old mother of four, has the condition.

She contracted viral encephalitis in May 2004 and as well as severe memory loss she has struggled to recognise faces.

“I was discharged home to a family I couldn’t recognise, I had to believe they were my family. I had to believe Ed was my husband and tell myself he was the man I loved and that the children were my children.”

Claire continues to have problems with faces. She still can’t pick out which are her children if they’re with their friends. But she describes a recent triumph – picking out her husband Ed in a crowd. Yet she still has to use different strategies to recognise friends and family by.

Even her own reflection can catch her out if it takes her by surprise.

Challenging condition

Learning to live with the condition and work around it takes effort, and life remains difficult for Claire.

“It’s not easy trying to re-find myself in what feels like someone else’s life and the more sociable I’m becoming, the more challenging the prosopagnosia is. We take all the knowledge and information you get from someone’s face for granted.

“You don’t think about it how you’d feel if all that information was whipped off you. I wouldn’t wish it on anybody’

It may not be the case that there are only three groups of face recognisers, those with prosopagnosia, those who are “normal” and then the super recognisers.

Instead, there may be a spectrum of face recognition, says Brad Duchaine, of the Institute for Cognitive Neuroscience and University College London’s prosopagnosia research centre.

People like Claire have acquired prosopagnosia from damage to the brain. But there is another kind often less severe is called “developmental” prosopagnosia where someone has had the condition all their life.

And the condition is surprisingly common. As many as one in 50 people will be prosopagnosic but often they won’t know.

And at the other end of the spectrum scientists are beginning to study super recognisers, often establishing contact because of publicity about prosopagnosia.

They are just starting to understand the brains of the super recognisers by scanning their neural networks and working out what might be structurally or functionally different about their grey matter.

On standard tests of facial recognition, the super recognisers usually get full marks, but even if the faces are severely blurred they still get near to full marks, says recognition expert Prof Richard Russell, of Gettysburg College.

Chance encounters are remembered for years

“One of the most exciting implications of this work is that while we assume we all see the same things, this work suggests that at least in terms of looking at faces we don’t see the same things.

“Super recognisers are looking at the world in a different way than other people and it could be that this isn’t limited to looking at faces but other aspects of seeing the world. And we think it’s going to be a very helpful tool in helping understanding of how the mind and the brain work.”

While not suffering difficulties, like those with prosopagnosia, the super recognisers sometimes still choose to modify their behaviour.

Jennifer admits lying when asked whether she has met people before. Some would find it unsettling that someone remembers their face and name after a momentary encounter many years before.

Just walking around in the city can produce a tissue of recognition.

“It’s not necessarily every single person who’s walking by me in a rush of people on the street but if I notice someone then I will remember them

“I really don’t have to have an important interaction with people.”

Significantly, even if the faces have changed considerably they are still recognisable

“People can get older – for some reason their faces still look the same to me. My mind is able to make the leap.”

And certain sectors of society should try to avoid the super recognisers.

“I do always tell people that I think I would be the perfect witness for a crime,” Jennifer says.

Zack Polanski M.N.C.H (Lic) Dip CHyp HPD PNLP

Cognitive Hypnotherapist and NLP New Code Practitioner

1 Harley Street, W1G 9QD

Mobile: 07738088632

Email: info@zackpolanski.com