The Necessary Cognitive Adjustment
Peter F - for EIMC Internetional Ptd. Lty.
fell_spamtrap_in at ozemail.com.au
Sun Jan 30 10:06:35 EST 2005
"kenneth collins" <kenneth.p.collins at worldnet.att.net> wrote in message news:By1Ld.41770$8u5.11688 at bgtnsc04-news.ops.worldnet.att.net...
> "Peter F - for EIMC Internetional Ptd. Lty." <fell_spamtrap_in at ozemail.com.au> wrote in message
> news:y6WKd.497$t57.18363 at nnrp1.ozemail.com.au...
> | Hi Ken,
> | I still think that you might come to be fascinated, and benefit from, comparing
> | your expressed (in the form of AoK/NDT) understanding of brain-behavioral
> | dynamics, with Janov's primal theoretical/therapeutical understanding of the same.
> | Best wishes,
> | Peter
> Hi Peter, be-cause anyone who'd address Human
> behavior, in any way, is addressing the one thing,
> to the degree that their work is correct, there's no
> doubt that it'll show "similarities".
> I've held to one "rule" while pursuing NDT's dev-
> elopment -- that I work solely from the proven
> Neuroscience experimental results.
> This long-winded way of saying why it is that I
> don't stray into other theoretical perspectives.
> This said, if you, or others, wish to Champion,
> Janov's work, or other theoretical perspectives,
> I expect I'll find worth in reading, and comment-
> ing upon, such.
> It's just that I've no reason to do so on my own
> because I knew, as an undergrad, that no such
> theory was Correct, and, it's old-long-since that
> I know, with Certainty, that NDT is Correct.
I think you would find - if you looked - that not only are the central tenets of Janov's view is - like yours - based on scientific facts, but that it also is satisfyingly
complementary to your insights.
But of course, you may never care to look.
At least to that extent we live in a free world! :-)
More information about the Neur-sci