Hope for stroke

‘Into Me See’ series of essays

By Graham Little

These essays summarise and extend the conclusions from the intellectual position in the book The Origin of Consciousness. Excluding this work, there is no general theory of psychology, no general theory of knowledge integrated with a general theory of psychology, no general theory of cause. This means that all historical lines of thinking have failed. Our options are to seek to revise what has been previously offered, or find a new start point. Near forty years ago my research lead me to conclude that everything able to be said had been said, every wrinkle possible had been explored.  I judged further re-treading the historical lines of thinking would prove fruitless.

We need a new start point if we are to fully understand who we are, where we came from, what is religion, what moves us, is there a God, do we have a spirit, what is science, what is truth, do ideas exist, and the other ‘big’ questions. I began by building a new social science methodology, applied it to the system ‘person in their environment’ then interpreted the resulting theory.

I do not have opinions on intellectual issues, what is offered is not ‘opinion’ but conclusions. I believe that truth and verisimilitude are not found in opinion or belief, but in methodology and argument. Where I do apply a judgement unsupported by method or argument, making it an ‘opinion’ or a ‘belief’, I aim to make that clear.

After reading these essays I hope you will then read the book The Origin of Consciousness to fully understand yourself and others, why you are here, why you are as you are, and how to find spiritual fulfilment.

Titles of the essays are listed in the menu to the right. The print copy of the book is here, print.  

We all know stroke. It is the rupture of a blood vessel in the brain causing damage to the energy flow paths and operation of neurons of the brain. It is frequently accompanied by paralysis of some part of the body. Rehabilitation programs are not very successful. And frequently stroke victims are advised their condition is permanent. 

This essay and chapter addition to The Origin of Consciousness arose from TVNZ Sunday current affairs segment on the stroke recovery work of Mike Ansari, a Les Mills personal trainer. You can request your own copy of the segment from TVNZ, here http://www.nztvarchive.co.nz. The show is Sunday, on Sunday July 20, 2014, the segment on Mike Ansari, his web site http://mikeansari.com.

In summary, Shirley was crippled with stroke for 16 years, she could not move the toes on her left leg, could not walk without support, and her left arm was totally paralysed. A Professor from Auckland Medical School agreed stroke was one of the most common reasons for paralysis, and significant recovery was not common.

In the segment Mike Ansari asked Shirley “to think about the time you used to move your toes”. Shirley paused, and then the almost immediate result was her toes twitched for the first time in 16 years. The segment then followed three months of therapy where Shirley was walking without support, and had an arm wrestle with Peter Williams, the TVNZ Presenter, using her left arm. An amazing, wonderful result. The segment also interviewed other people who have had similar results by following the therapy with Mike.

Mike Ansari has no degrees, no formal training.  His own explanation for what happens is summed: “The power of the mind is limitless. I use that power to create a confidence which overcomes the matter”.

 Peter Williams and the Medical Professor agreed that there seemed some things science cannot explain. That ideas on mind, visualisation etc. are there, but not fully applied or validated, nor fully accepted within current views by academe and medical professions. Shirley had undertaken rehabilitation with the ideas that are there, as had other people, and it had not worked. Why? What was different? This essay is in response to the lack of explanation, pointing out that apt and appropriate methodology applied appropriately can explain, and does.

Current formal academic and medical opinion is that the mind is scientifically reducible to the brain. The immediate assumption by those adopting the current accepted scientific view is that if the brain is damaged, then the mind is also. 

The current accepted view applied to Shirley is that her brain is damaged and nothing can be done about it.  

The theory in ‘Origin’ is built on careful analysis of the methodology appropriate for building any theory, but especially theory in social science. Application of the theory to the system ‘person in their environment’ results in a clear and precise system of variables and relationships between those variables. Specifically, the theory offers a clear and definite solution to what has historically been called the body-mind problem different from the current accepted scientific view.

The solution to the body-mind problem in ‘Origin’ is as follows:

·         Mind and brain are separate.

·         The brain is the mechanism of mind, this accounted for by the emergent understanding that knowledge is not continuous.

·         The brain is best understood as the environment of mind.

·         The mind does not move our body. We, via our mind, learn how to move our body by interacting with our brain which then moves the body, but the brain does not have feedback systems relating to its own operation, therefore we do not know how we move our body we just know we can.

For stroke, applying the theory, there are two ways this system can fail.

1.      The actual ‘hard wired links’ between the brain and the limbs is damaged, and the brain is not able to move the limbs.

2.      That in mind the person loses touch with how to move their limbs. That the ‘wiring’ is intact, but the mind has lost the capacity, the learning of how to do it.

The third manner of failure within the theory is some combination of the two.  

The current medical paradigm has it that only failure type 1 exists. They do not seek failure type 2. Therefore any failure type 2 is not addressed or corrected by current standard medical and academic practice.

There are various points of view, as summarised by the Medical Professor, but as I have pointed out, the failure of rehabilitation indicates that they are not effectively applied, and there remains the question of whether appropriate technique is applied and understood within a theoretically appropriate rationale.  Second, it is very typical people are told their condition permanent, hence they accept that. Rehabilitation fails.

In the program, a crucial point of technique was missed, I suggest due to the manner of thinking about the issues, and acceptance of the current scientific paradigm.  Specifically, Mike did not ask Shirley to visualise moving her toes, he asked her to think about when she could last move her toes. To think of this, consider a computer problem, and the computer is returned to a historical restore point.  Immediately problem solved.

The mind-brain system is not mechanical, we are not computers. But the analogy is apt. Shirley reflected on when she last could move her toes, and found the restore point, albeit weak and needing much work. But the beginning is made, hope lifts, work is done and she can now walk unaided and use her left arm neither of which she was able to do for 16 years. Will Shirley continue to improve and be further rehabilitated... we do not know. But she will clearly continue to work on it, perhaps her stroke is a combination of the two, and her progress will be limited by point 1 above. But clearly some of Shirley’s condition was from point 2, she had lost touch with how she moved her body, she needed guided back to a ‘restore point’, and to relearn how to move her body.

Our brain is the most precious and most important tool of mind, but we need learn how to use it. Much learning of how to move our body occurs in childhood, but we can lose that learning, and when we do we will not be able to move our body. And if told by those of medical and informed authority that it is permanent, and we will never move our body... our search stops, there is no relearning because we are told by authority it is not possible, we slump into our condition, ‘making the best of it’, as they say.

Mike has no formal training no degrees no medical knowledge. From experience, trial and error and his deep compassion he has discovered a technique without any theoretical rationale, and at odds with current medical opinion. Mike’s somewhat romantic idea of why it works is fully understandable. He knows that nowhere in academe and in our current ideas on medicine is there any explanation that gets close. But in ‘Origin’ there is full intellectual and theoretical explanation, providing the depth of rationale and insight to explain that which Mike discovered by experience and practice.

In summary, the current medical paradigm for the solution to the mind-body problem is physical monism, which leads to the study of neurons. The paradigm arising from the dualist theory in ‘Origin’ is that studying neurons offers no insight into people. That to understand people one needs understand their mind within their brain, and understand their spirit the central core of their mind. For the modern medical physical monist at the supposed cutting edge of understanding ourselves, the problem becomes at once simpler and more complicated, since people are more complex than any system of neurons. 

I hope the ideas are reflected upon and adopted by the formal medical profession. And when they do, I wonder how many more Shirley’s we can find...? -§-