Please leave your email to receive our newsletter. Get our free report "10 Essential Things You Have To Know About Making Decisions" when you subscribe
We value your privacy
MythoSelf Morphology 401
Neurobiological Development as Nature-Nurture:
Specifically, what’s interesting re: the MythoSelf® work and the underlying Soma-Semantic™ modeling is the neurobiology (another “academic” term you can feel free to use) associated with language use and development. Maybe a quick review would make sense (ala the material we covered in the Soma-Semantic™ Modeling module in the Mytho2 training in California last month). As simply organized as possible what I’m referring to by using the terminology “neurobiology” is the biological underpinnings of the neurological system, and most specifically the brain and the connections within it and from it to/throughout the body proper. The neurobiological stance as it’s used within the MythoSelf® model is all about the developmental process – i.e.: the stages of development, the process by which these stages unfold, what occurs as a result of the developmental process, etc., etc.
Specifically what’s among the more interesting aspects of the neurobiological developmental process are the specific cognitive/behavioral capabilities that appear at specific developmental stages. There are two considerations to the appearance of these capabilities: 1) the biological development and readiness of the system (neurological, muscular ... and the integration thereof) and 2) the learning process that occurs primarily as a result of socialization (from my point of view) - this is the classic nature/nurture debate. Yet what virtually every finding I’m coming across is pointing to is that there is no nature/nurture distinction in the ordinary way it’s been conceptualized, i.e.: nature or nurture, it’s not even nature and nurture, it’s more like nature-nurture as simultaneously parallel events that are so intrinsically linked as to have become one thing. This is a symbiotic biological consideration. For an example think of lichen, is it algae or fungus, or is it algae and fungus, or by virtue of the symbiotic relationship and intertwining is it a distinct entity apart from both algae and fungus? I’d opt for the later as I opt for nature-nurture being in the same category as body-mind being an interactive symbiotic entity that is neither and both.
Neurobiological Development and Language:
What’s important to us here is that this nature-nurture experience literally crafts the brain/neurological system into forming the way that it does. That is there is evidence that the use of language, i.e.: symbolic representation, both verbally and non-verbally communicated, shapes the physical characteristics of the brain during these developmental stages. This is not to say that language is the determinant factor in the physical development of the brain, but rather one of the determinant factors. Specifically, the use of lack of use of language will determine how the brain develops to use language and the corresponding abilities associated with language usage. This is further complicated by the potential for the specific language in question that is learned and used (or not) and the obvious neurobiological differences in male/female neurobiological development. ... I know it’s a lot to consider!!!
What’s also significant is that the use of language, and possibly the use of a specific language and the specific usage of that specific language, during the developmental process will determine to some extent what occurs developmentally during that phase, and all phases of subsequent development as dependant for their unfolding on the quality and completion of the previous phases of development. The system builds upon it self. For example the first phase of development includes a significant amount of resources being devoted sensory-motor control and integration. The first phase of this phase (sensory motor control and integration) is the differentiation between sensory experience and motor response and it goes on from there.
Neurobiological Learning: Direct Non-Representational Access
Within the “new” MythoSelf® Process model there is an heavy emphasis on uncovering the specific neurobiological developmental stage that you are addressing in the work you are doing with the client by tracking the empirical evidence of the cognitive-behavioral expression of the individual you are working with in regard to the underlying neurobiological process that this represents. The evidence you are working with is ultimately all behavioral when you consider cognition and speech acts as forms of behavior as I do. By tracking this evidence you will become familiar with the level of neurobiological development and integration being expressed by the client behaviorally and then from there you can begin to work with the client on developing a developmental learning process contained within the technology of the MythoSelf® Process model to create a more complete expression of the full development and integration of that aspect of their neurobiological process. Ultimately this will lead to a fuller development and integration of the entire neurobiology of the individual that will express itself behaviorally. I call this process of updating the neurobiology in a way that leads to a richer lived experience for the individual with more behavioral options available to them – neurobiological learning.
Within the MythoSelf® Process model the premise we are working from is that the neurobiological basis that the individual operates from is the foundation of the ontology of the individual and this is a somatic consideration. The ontology of the individual is pre-representational and within the way I am using the terms, pre-epistemological. This removes the issue of beliefs from the ontological consideration within the structure of this model, that of course also makes the ontological position non-philosophical or metaphysical as these terms are ordinarily used. So simply within the MythoSelf® Process model the ontological position is a functional neurobiological/somatic operating position, that is pre-representational. This means we can and do use non-representational means to access this position using direct sensory and somatic processes and technology. This is a distinct aspect of the MythoSelf® Process to which you were privy in California as I worked with you at the front, as well as when you watched me working with others – especially on the last of the four days we spent together.
Neurobiological Learning: Representational “Reverse Engineering”
What’s interesting to me is that you can “reverse engineer” the ontological position from the epistemological position using representational forms including language feedback. We do this using hypnotic protocols, both verbal and non-verbal protocols, that are integrated to access the developmental process and update it.
The way this is done within the MythoSelf® work is that it is with deliberate and specific attention paid to the neurobiological impact this “reverse engineering” is having on the individual. We are not doing the representational work to update the “software coding” that the individual uses to operate, or their “thinking” patterns – ala cognitive-behavioral therapy, emotional-rational therapy or even most NLP/hypnosis protocols. We are instead working with the client to reform the hardware structure and integration so that the essential, raw data is processed differently at the hardware level of the neurobiological system. Since we know that this system is not confined to the epistemology patterns of the brain and the cognitive processing done within it we address the entire system at the somatic level as a total hardware processing entity. This is where we are using these representational forms, e.g.: language patterns, to reform the hardware of the system so that the software runs on an updated platform. This is a critical distinction of how we are addressing and using the communication and hypnotic protocols of the MythoSelf® Process model.
The rest is for another post some time, maybe MythoSelf Morphology 402? ...
Joseph Riggio, Ph.D.
© 2005 Joseph Riggio & Applied Behavioral Technologies, Inc. - All Rights Reserved.
| Back |