3 ms·

My field is hypnosis, or more generally, "changework" which is jargon, but essentially hacking the psychology of clients to get desired outcomes. There's been

My field is hypnosis, or more generally, "changework" which is jargon, but essentially hacking the psychology of clients to get desired outcomes. There's been a renaissance of study in placebo effects, meditation, and general frameworks for how people change belief for therapeutic purposes or otherwise, but to me, that's been going on for a long time and is more about acceptance than being a new development. One of the most exciting developments that's been coming out recently is playing with language to do what's called context-free conversational change. Essentially, you can help someone solve an issue without actually knowing the details or even generally what they need help with. It's like homomorphic encryption for therapy. A therapist can do work, a client can report results, but the problem itself can be a black box along with a bit of the solution as well since much of the change is unconscious. It works better with feedback (a conversation) of course, but often can be utilized in a more canned manner if you know the type of problem well enough. I'm working on putting together an automated solution that's based on some loose grammar rules, NLP, Markov chains, and anything else I can use to help a machine be creative in language to help people solve their own problems, but as a first step as a useful tool for beginner therapists to help them get used to the ideas and frameworks with language to use. So essentially, I'm getting a good chunk of the way toward hacking on a machine that can reliably work on people's problems without having to train a full AI or anything remotely resembling real intelligence, just mimicking it. Before you go thinking, "Didn't they do that with Eliza?" Well yes, in a way, but my implementation is using an entirely different approach.

sandbags 10y ago
Is there a useful introduction reference to 'context-free conversational change'? The Google results did not appear promising.
- bitshaker 10y ago
  The place I learned it was hypnosistrainingacademy.com and where he derived his teachings from was a man named John Overdurf who had a program called beyond words. I'd start with Igor's material first. He calls his version (which is based upon, but wholly distinct from beyond words) mind bending language. There are even card decks and training programs to consume. Or free articles if you wish to check it out.
sindoc 10y ago
Sounds interesting. Would you care to share any references?
- bitshaker 10y ago
  Most certainly. This current work I am doing builds upon the mountaintops of huge amounts of work built by two men who base their work on yet more huge foundations. Igor Ledochowski - http://hypnosistrainingacademy.com http://hypnosistrainingacademy.com John Overdurf - http://JohnOverdurf.com http://JohnOverdurf.com As far as context-free therapy goes, that's a bit of an advanced subject, but can be learned and mastered through some of their programs. The key tenets are simple though. As a model, consider that human language builds around 5 concepts: Space, Time, Energy, Matter, and Identity. These 5 also map cleanly to questions (5Ws and H) and language predicates in human language. Space is Where, Time is When, Energy is How, Matter is What, and Identity carries two with Why and Who. Every problem you've ever had is built up of some combination of the 5 in a specific way, unique to you. The pattern of all change is this: 1) Associate to a problem, or in other words, bring it to mind. 2) Dissociate from the problem, or basically get enough distance from it so that you can think rationally and calmly. Similar to a monkey not reaching for a banana when a tiger is running after it, your brain does not do change under danger and stress well. It can, but that usually leads to problems in the first place. 3) Associate (think about, experience) a resource state. Another thought or experience that will help with this one, for example if someone were afraid of clowns, I'd ask a question like, "What clowns fear you?" It usually knocks them out of the fear loop for a second. 4) While thinking about the resource, recall the problem and see how it has changed. Notice I said has changed. It always changes. You can never do your problem the same again. Will this solve things on the first go? Maybe. Maybe not, but it's enough to get a foothold and a new direction and loop until it's done. Which is what makes this fun and exciting to do in person and fun and exciting to help teach a machine to mimic it to.
  - charlieflowers 10y ago
    It seems like the missing step, right between 3 and 4, is "and then a miracle occurs." That's why I made my original comment. Maybe you're not a charlatan, in which case I'd have to conclude you're thinking irrationally and have been deceived by some form of magical thinking. You have not proposed any mechanism by which these steps can form a consistent treatment for problems that individuals have struggled with for years. You've merely declared that it will, and a whole lot of faith is required. Other posts in this thread mostly propose a mechanism, even if we readers don't have the prerequisites to fully understand it. For example, consider the proposal that machine learning could be applied to the mundane tasks a radiologist performs. It may or may not pan out, but it has a basis.
te 10y ago
Your interesting comment made me think of Oblique Strategies cards, which "can help someone solve an issue without actually knowing the details". https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Oblique_Strategies https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Oblique_Strategies
- bitshaker 10y ago
  Thank you. Those are great and I should look at incorporating more of those ideas into the work I'm doing.
charlieflowers 10y ago
fancy words, exciting claims, and absolutely no detail whatsoever. with all due respect, said politely, it is my opinion that you are a charlatan.
- bitshaker 10y ago
  Thank you for expressing your opinion. I wasn't interested in long citations or garnering proof of my work in particular with training a machine to do this work. I simply wished to add to this thread and did so, in order to show someone out there, maybe even you, what else is going on that is exciting in my little corner of the world. I'm not that good of a programmer, so it's not in a state that it does work yet. I hope my original comment didn't suggest otherwise, but let me be perfectly clear here: I have no working machine implementation that can do what I want yet. It can work with simple canned responses like Eliza, but it's not enough. I am working on employing all of the techniques and tools mentioned, but progress is slow. However, this is work and change I employ daily with my clients professionally and I can assure you that it does work. You don't even have to take my word for it. Consider....seriously consider: who would you not be if you weren't you? If you thought about that one for a sec and felt a little spaced out for a second, you did very well. If you came up with something quickly like "me" and didn't really actually consider the question, allow me to pose another to you. Again, seriously consider this. Read it a few times. Imagine emphasis on different words each time. Who are you not without that problem you are interested in solving? This work can be made more difficult by text only and seriously asynchronous communication, which is why I mentioned it being easier within conversation. If you are interested in more, google "mind bending language" or "attention shifting coaching" and find Igor Ledochowski and John Overdurf. Their work has helped me change the lives of thousands.
  - kaoD 10y ago
    I'm not GP but I'll give it a try: > You don't even have to take my word for it. Honest question: how not? > who would you not be if you weren't you? Depending on how you parse the sentence, either "someone else" or "that's just a paradox". Essentially the concept of "me" as an entity is fundamentally flawed. Playing with the meanings of "me" and "not me" in a subjunctive form doesn't make the question very interesting (as in non-trite), to be honest. I guess the intent is not to be fresh but to be thought-provoking or similar, or setting the listener in a certain mindset? Still, sets my mind in the "meh" state. > Who are you not without that problem you are interested in solving? I'm not my problems. I'm also not not-my-problems. Actually I am not (I isn't?). I don't see how this helps with anything, though. Either way, your questions pose (to me) more philosophical thinking (which I already do, anyways) than mindbending or whatever. Maybe my mind is already bent... and I have to say it didn't go very well ;) A long time ago I came to the conclusion that these questions are merely shortcomings in how language and cognition works. Metaphysics, ontology (and even epistemology) are just fun puzzles with no solution, which I'm ultimately obliged to answer with "who the f--- cares". Kant was right. Not that anything you said is directly contradicted by Kant. In fact I'd say it fits very well within the idea that "human mind creates the structure of human experience". It's just never been really useful to me in any way. I really, really, want to know more of (and even believe in) your changework but, often being presented with vague ideas, no one has ever made a solid case on how it isn't, as GP said, charlatanry.

sandbags 10y ago

Is there a useful introduction reference to 'context-free conversational change'? The Google results did not appear promising.

bitshaker 10y ago
The place I learned it was hypnosistrainingacademy.com and where he derived his teachings from was a man named John Overdurf who had a program called beyond words. I'd start with Igor's material first. He calls his version (which is based upon, but wholly distinct from beyond words) mind bending language. There are even card decks and training programs to consume. Or free articles if you wish to check it out.

sindoc 10y ago

Sounds interesting. Would you care to share any references?

bitshaker 10y ago
Most certainly. This current work I am doing builds upon the mountaintops of huge amounts of work built by two men who base their work on yet more huge foundations. Igor Ledochowski - http://hypnosistrainingacademy.com http://hypnosistrainingacademy.com John Overdurf - http://JohnOverdurf.com http://JohnOverdurf.com As far as context-free therapy goes, that's a bit of an advanced subject, but can be learned and mastered through some of their programs. The key tenets are simple though. As a model, consider that human language builds around 5 concepts: Space, Time, Energy, Matter, and Identity. These 5 also map cleanly to questions (5Ws and H) and language predicates in human language. Space is Where, Time is When, Energy is How, Matter is What, and Identity carries two with Why and Who. Every problem you've ever had is built up of some combination of the 5 in a specific way, unique to you. The pattern of all change is this: 1) Associate to a problem, or in other words, bring it to mind. 2) Dissociate from the problem, or basically get enough distance from it so that you can think rationally and calmly. Similar to a monkey not reaching for a banana when a tiger is running after it, your brain does not do change under danger and stress well. It can, but that usually leads to problems in the first place. 3) Associate (think about, experience) a resource state. Another thought or experience that will help with this one, for example if someone were afraid of clowns, I'd ask a question like, "What clowns fear you?" It usually knocks them out of the fear loop for a second. 4) While thinking about the resource, recall the problem and see how it has changed. Notice I said has changed. It always changes. You can never do your problem the same again. Will this solve things on the first go? Maybe. Maybe not, but it's enough to get a foothold and a new direction and loop until it's done. Which is what makes this fun and exciting to do in person and fun and exciting to help teach a machine to mimic it to.
- charlieflowers 10y ago
  It seems like the missing step, right between 3 and 4, is "and then a miracle occurs." That's why I made my original comment. Maybe you're not a charlatan, in which case I'd have to conclude you're thinking irrationally and have been deceived by some form of magical thinking. You have not proposed any mechanism by which these steps can form a consistent treatment for problems that individuals have struggled with for years. You've merely declared that it will, and a whole lot of faith is required. Other posts in this thread mostly propose a mechanism, even if we readers don't have the prerequisites to fully understand it. For example, consider the proposal that machine learning could be applied to the mundane tasks a radiologist performs. It may or may not pan out, but it has a basis.

te 10y ago

Your interesting comment made me think of Oblique Strategies cards, which "can help someone solve an issue without actually knowing the details". https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Oblique_Strategies https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Oblique_Strategies

bitshaker 10y ago
Thank you. Those are great and I should look at incorporating more of those ideas into the work I'm doing.

charlieflowers 10y ago

fancy words, exciting claims, and absolutely no detail whatsoever. with all due respect, said politely, it is my opinion that you are a charlatan.

bitshaker 10y ago
Thank you for expressing your opinion. I wasn't interested in long citations or garnering proof of my work in particular with training a machine to do this work. I simply wished to add to this thread and did so, in order to show someone out there, maybe even you, what else is going on that is exciting in my little corner of the world. I'm not that good of a programmer, so it's not in a state that it does work yet. I hope my original comment didn't suggest otherwise, but let me be perfectly clear here: I have no working machine implementation that can do what I want yet. It can work with simple canned responses like Eliza, but it's not enough. I am working on employing all of the techniques and tools mentioned, but progress is slow. However, this is work and change I employ daily with my clients professionally and I can assure you that it does work. You don't even have to take my word for it. Consider....seriously consider: who would you not be if you weren't you? If you thought about that one for a sec and felt a little spaced out for a second, you did very well. If you came up with something quickly like "me" and didn't really actually consider the question, allow me to pose another to you. Again, seriously consider this. Read it a few times. Imagine emphasis on different words each time. Who are you not without that problem you are interested in solving? This work can be made more difficult by text only and seriously asynchronous communication, which is why I mentioned it being easier within conversation. If you are interested in more, google "mind bending language" or "attention shifting coaching" and find Igor Ledochowski and John Overdurf. Their work has helped me change the lives of thousands.
- kaoD 10y ago
  I'm not GP but I'll give it a try: > You don't even have to take my word for it. Honest question: how not? > who would you not be if you weren't you? Depending on how you parse the sentence, either "someone else" or "that's just a paradox". Essentially the concept of "me" as an entity is fundamentally flawed. Playing with the meanings of "me" and "not me" in a subjunctive form doesn't make the question very interesting (as in non-trite), to be honest. I guess the intent is not to be fresh but to be thought-provoking or similar, or setting the listener in a certain mindset? Still, sets my mind in the "meh" state. > Who are you not without that problem you are interested in solving? I'm not my problems. I'm also not not-my-problems. Actually I am not (I isn't?). I don't see how this helps with anything, though. Either way, your questions pose (to me) more philosophical thinking (which I already do, anyways) than mindbending or whatever. Maybe my mind is already bent... and I have to say it didn't go very well ;) A long time ago I came to the conclusion that these questions are merely shortcomings in how language and cognition works. Metaphysics, ontology (and even epistemology) are just fun puzzles with no solution, which I'm ultimately obliged to answer with "who the f--- cares". Kant was right. Not that anything you said is directly contradicted by Kant. In fact I'd say it fits very well within the idea that "human mind creates the structure of human experience". It's just never been really useful to me in any way. I really, really, want to know more of (and even believe in) your changework but, often being presented with vague ideas, no one has ever made a solid case on how it isn't, as GP said, charlatanry.