Ian Rowland and Mind Power (?)

[Clancie]

Well, I was a bit puzzled when I heard him speak about this at Cal Tech last year and, apparently it came up again at TAM2. I'm just curious....any thoughts on what he means by the idea of using "Mind Power"?

And...what keeps the concept from being "woo-wooish"?

 

[Nyarlathotep]

Well, I was a bit puzzled when I heard him speak about this at Cal Tech last year and, apparently it came up again at TAM2. I'm just curious....any thoughts on what he means by the idea of using "Mind Power"?

And...what keeps the concept from being "woo-wooish"?

Well, he didn't seem to go into any great depth about it but it seemed to be things like "visualizing a goal helps you work out strategies to accomplish that goal". It sounded more like pop psychology than anything else to me. Not "woo-wooish" but kind of vague and nothing someone couldn't figure out for themselves if they thought about it for about fifteen minutes or so. I wasn't impressed to be honest.

Now (using the same example) had he suggested that visualizing a goal somehow magically could make it real (without qualifying it as he did) THEN it would be "woo-wooish", IMO.

 

[Renfield]

Sounds getting into the Anthony Robbins'ish motivational speaker crap instead of woo woo crap now. Instead of telling lies for money he's telling people the obvious for money. Guess its a step up.

 

[Jeff Corey]

Yeah, I was not impressed with his so-called "motivational" pitch. He said that changing attitudes is the key to changing behavior - he has that bass ackward, and that "visualization" inproves performance. There's no evidence for that.
I dismissed that part of his talk at TAM2 as being half-baked pop psychology to con gullible businesspeople out of big bucks for a "seminar".
But, what the hay. He is a professional trickster.

 

[Iamme]

Mind power sounds like something special. But just plain thinking is mind power.

 

[Mercutio]

Yeah, I was not impressed with his so-called "motivational" pitch. He said that changing attitudes is the key to changing behavior - he has that bass ackward, and that "visualization" inproves performance. There's no evidence for that.
I dismissed that part of his talk at TAM2 as being half-baked pop psychology to con gullible businesspeople out of big bucks for a "seminar".
But, what the hay. He is a professional trickster.

seconded. but then, his job is not to research this stuff.

 

[Wyvern]

Not woo woo, Clancie, but (IMO) the basic stuff that we all use to get through life. We determine what it is we want, and then we figure out how to go about getting it. Nothing magical; just yay-yay, rah-rah, you can do whatever you set your mind to.

I have to admit that when I first saw Mr. R's show at CalTech, I must have been overly impressed with his showmanship charm and good looks, as I thought it was a superb show. I saw much of the same material at his show at TAM2 and I was completely unimpressed.

I also disagree with some things he said (I believe it was during a panel session) regarding the use of cold reading techniques to get what you want in a variety of situations including romantic relationships. I have not read his book on cold reading so I cannot comment on the specific techniques, but the concept of using these "techniques", especially in a relationship, to get what you want strikes me as deceptive and manipulative. But . . . maybe that's just me . . .

 

[Clancie]

Well, I think Rowland's presentation has an interesting challenge and contradiction...balancing showmanship and deception with skepticism. I thought it worked in some ways, but not in others (like all the "Mind Power" things which, I agree, seemed to be aspirining to be a motivational speaker, even if it meant feeding people pop psychology platitudes that were of little or no intellectual value. There seems some inherent conflict in that, somehow.

And, Wyvern, I was right with you as far as thinking that was how Ian presented himself until he got to the part of pretending to pick bugs out of that one woman's hair and throw them on the floor and squash them (it was a time filler, folks). That really turned me off...and taken together with the "Use cold reading techniques to take advantage of people in real life! They work!" schtick....well, I just was a lot more impressed with the first part of the show, and with his appearance on "Prime Time Thursday".

I was just surprised he would try that motivational speaker/mind power thing again at TAM2. I agree with Jeff that it seemed designed to get corporate speaking engagements....but it just seemed the wrong venue for that, somehow, selling yourself that way in an auditorium of self-proclaimed skeptics.

 

[shanek]

I also disagree with some things he said (I believe it was during a panel session) regarding the use of cold reading techniques to get what you want in a variety of situations including romantic relationships. I have not read his book on cold reading so I cannot comment on the specific techniques, but the concept of using these "techniques", especially in a relationship, to get what you want strikes me as deceptive and manipulative. But . . . maybe that's just me . . .

No, I agree 100%. It's just that kind of manipulative bull$#!7 that I hate in dating and relationships. Just be open and honest with the other person. Why can so few people do that?

I was unimpressed with Rowland, too.

 

[Ian Rowland]

First of all, to everyone who was unimpressed with my performance at TAM2, join the club. So was I. Like any other performer, I'd love to be on top form and deliver a great show every time, but that's not real life. For various reasons you don't want to know about, I was under-prepared and not on best form. I knew it at the time, I admitted it at the time, and I was sorry about it then and I'm sorry about it now. But it's not like I can turn back time and fix it.

Clancie asks about the 'mindpower' theme. Briefly... it seems to me that almost every time someone goes on about 'powers of the mind' and so forth, they are either peddling pseudo-scientific psychic twaddle or re-working assorted New Age themes. This is a shame, because the human mind really CAN do extraordinary things. What's more, if you are pusruing particular goals in your life, or trying to bring about positive change, then your own mind is a darn good place to start because the way you apply your mind to your goals can have a significant effect on your success. That's basically all I'm saying. It isn't earth-shattering and it isn't meant to be. Sometimes, simple points are worth making. In the lecture to which people are referring here, I don't have a lot of time to expand on these points, but on other occasions I have and I do.

I see the dreaded 'manipulation' point has been raised once more in this thread. * Sigh * . In my cold reading book, I deal with this ethical point. Suffice it here to say I have never, and do not, ever advocate manipulating people. To say that cold reading can be applied to situations x, y or z is not to say it should be. To those here championing simple honesty and truth, yay, that's my song and I'm glad to be part of the choir.

 

[NoZed Avenger]

Walking into an audience of skeptics, many of whom had studied cold reading (and had your book, to boot, as I did) was a very gutsy thing to do, in my opinion.

A bunch of JREF'ers at a convention would be about the last people I'd want to try a demonstration on, so full marks for stepping up and agreeing to the demo, regardless. I thought that there was not any phenomenal information from the demo, but I thought it was comparable to a number of Larry King Live appearances by "psychics" that have also been discussed on the boards.

Very nice presentation of the envelope effect, by the way. Much enjoyed it.

N/A

 

[Brown]

First of all, to everyone who was unimpressed with my performance at TAM2, join the club. So was I. Like any other performer, I'd love to be on top form and deliver a great show every time, but that's not real life. For various reasons you don't want to know about, I was under-prepared and not on best form. I knew it at the time, I admitted it at the time, and I was sorry about it then and I'm sorry about it now. But it's not like I can turn back time and fix it.

Ian, let me say: Balderdash. YOUR performance as a whole had me scratching my head more than that of any other performer. The cold reading aspect may not have produced as many lucky hits as could be hoped for, but I still found it to be interesting and educational.

I'm currently reading your "Cold Reading" book, and I am seeing in the book many of the nuances that I missed during your live performance.

I have not yet seen much in your book that constitutes a discussion of mind power, but I agree with you entirely. Many of the folks who peddle 'mindpower' schemes are selling junk. But some of them really do teach useful mind techniques. Harry Lorayne's memory techniques, for example, have enabled me to do some startling memory stunts, such as memorizing an entire football roster (over 100 players, their player numbers and their home towns) and determining what playing cards are missing from a deck after seeing the other cards only once.

The bottom line: Harry's techniques work.

I tried some other 'mindpower' techniques, peddled by a popular personality, whom I choose not to name. I found that these techniques didn't work at all. Not one bit. The bottom line: All of the promises he made were false, and his techniques were worthless.

 

[Mercutio]

Ian--

You should also be warned that Jeff Corey and I are radical behaviorists, and as such were not responding nearly as much to your particular presentation as to the prescientific language of "mind" that is so common in popular psychology. Your presentation was, to my thinking, very impressive; my only wish was that the mentalistic language had been cleaned up.

On the other hand...you were not speaking to a group of behaviorists, you were speaking to people who use the language you used. I have no doubt that it was received better your way than it would have been my way. Please understand that my complaints (I won't speak for Dr. Corey) were not about your presentation nearly so much as about our language.

 

[!Xx+-Rational-+xX!]

The material mind is a delusion that has no real power! We are just machines operating under materialism!

 

[Mercutio]

The material mind is a delusion that has no real power! We are just machines operating under materialism!

get it right, towlie...there is no "material mind"....but then, you are under no obligation to make sense.

 

[Jeff Corey]

Ian-- Please understand that my complaints (I won't speak for Dr. Corey) were not about your presentation nearly so much as about our language.

Mercutio,
You can speak for me on this. I was reacting to the shopworn "Change your attitude and change your behavior" and the useless visualization schticks as a skeptic and rad behaviorist.

 

[Garrette]

Orginally posted by Jeff Corey:

I was reacting to the shopworn "Change your attitude and change your behavior" and the useless visualization schticks as a skeptic and rad behaviorist.

I'm not a radical behaviorist (or a behaviorist of any kind, that I know of), nor have I studied this area, nor did I attend TAM2.

I have, however, quite a bit of personal and professional experience in the realm of "changing" things.

I agree with Jeff. The key to changing your attitude is changing your behavior, not the other way around.

When I studied ninjutsu, I learned a very simple saying that went like this:

"If you want to be a warrior, pretend you are one."

 

[Toastrider]

Actually, Rowland's concepts are kind of interesting. You can see a similar 'pushing the envelope' effect with martial artists. And I mean the -really- good ones. While choreographing does make some movie stunts look more impressive, Jackie Chan and Sammo Hung can do things that -look- impossible -- but they just require a level of experience we don't have.

I also remember watching a martial-arts competition (forms only, I believe) and watching one young man performing with what appeared to be a short staff. He had that thing spinning so fast, I was wondering why it wasn't having a helicopter-blade effect (well, besides the fact that it wasn't angled, etc ).

Much like traditional 'magic' (illusion and legerdemain), it may look superhuman, but it's just the result of practice, devotion, more practice, and hard work.

--Toasty

 

[CFLarsen]

I admitted it at the time, and I was sorry about it then and I'm sorry about it now. But it's not like I can turn back time and fix it.

I dunno, man...if you can do that trick with cutting up a newspaper page and make two rings that are interlocked, I don't see why turning back time should be a problem....

What's more, if you are pusruing particular goals in your life, or trying to bring about positive change, then your own mind is a darn good place to start because the way you apply your mind to your goals can have a significant effect on your success. That's basically all I'm saying.

I agree with Jeff. The key to changing your attitude is changing your behavior, not the other way around.

OK. Two opposing viewpoints. Let's see the evidence, eh?

But some of them really do teach useful mind techniques. Harry Lorayne's memory techniques, for example, have enabled me to do some startling memory stunts, such as memorizing an entire football roster (over 100 players, their player numbers and their home towns)...

I'm sure that knowledge will come in handy some day...

...and determining what playing cards are missing from a deck after seeing the other cards only once.

That knowledge will come in handy some day...

The bottom line: Harry's techniques work.

How much did you win at the casinos?

 

[Garrette]

Originally posted by CFLarsen:

I dunno, man...if you can do that trick with cutting up a newspaper page and make two rings that are interlocked, I don't see why turning back time should be a problem....

Those are the tricks that impressed you?

Man, oh man, I should have gone pro. Or psychic. Those are two that I can actually do pretty darn well.

Oh, the horrors of morality! Would that I could but prey upon the vulnerable and shed this nagging concern for my fellows.