Have You Read Psycho-Cybernetics? (& Know of Similar?)

[0VO]

I was wondering if anyone has Read the Book "Psycho-Cybernetics" by Maxwell Maltz? (I heard the recommendation from Bob Proctor, he said to get it right away, so I did.. lol)

It is a book I will defiantly be coming back to again and again! Packed full with interesting information!


Also, can anyone can recommend any books similar in nature?

 

Don't like ads? Remove them while supporting the forum. Subscribe.

[Jakeeck]

I was wondering if anyone has Read the Book "Psycho-Cybernetics" by Maxwell Maltz? (I heard the recommendation from Bob Proctor, he said to get it right away, so I did.. lol)

It is a book I will defiantly be coming back to again and again! Packed full with interesting information!


Also, can anyone can recommend any books similar in nature?

Biology of belief.

Some parts of the book are pretty scientific and hard to read through, but it's f'in gold imo.

 

[ChrisV]

@ApparentHorizon and I were just speaking about this ironically enough.

I’ve read it and I hate to burst anyone’s bubble but i have some major issues with Psychocybernetics

The Author of that book (Dr Maxwell Maltz) was a plastic surgeon with no training in psychology. I see this all the time and It’s always dangerous when a doctor steps outside their field of expertise. The way that he determined “21 days to a habit” was totally unscientific and just plain wrong. It might take an hour to develop a habit. It might take a year. It depends on the habit. But my issue is how he came to this conclusion. You can’t just say ‘i noticed people people get used to their plastic surgery in 21 days so that’s how long it takes to develop a habit’ ... you can’t make statements like that lol.. plastic surgery has nothing to do with habits and even if it did you can’t make blanked rules based on 100 or whatever patients lol.. that’s not how science works

He makes claims that hypnosis can alter the physical body (a totally wacky, disproven claim) and tells a story of someone developing a welt from imagining a hot poker on their skin

None of what he says jives with what we know about psychology.

If anything I’d do Dr Peterson’s Self-Authoring course. It aurally does what Dr. Maltz’s program claims to do: Intro to SelfAuthoring

Self Authoring - What is Self Authoring?

I’m not being a hater here, I just hate to see people go down these paths. They’re long and by the time you realize you have wasted so much time on this crap.

Some parts of the book are pretty scientific and hard to read through, but it's f'in gold imo.

There’s nothing scientific about Bruce Lipton’s work. He’s another scientist who went off the deepend. Him and Maxwell Maltz are prime example of pseudoscience. They use big words that sound sciency so people with no training in the fields get suckered in by it.

Bruce Lipton - RationalWiki

He claims that DNA can be altered with thoughts (what? lol)

Epigenetics: It Doesn't Mean What Quacks Think It Means

Bruce Lipton: Quack, Creationist, Buffoon, PhD

Honestly, they need to make it so that PhDs can be revoked when guys like these start doing shit like this.. nothing they’re saying is the view of the scientific community

But if you really wanna ago down this path, there’s the The Secret Law of Attraction (Bob Proctor was in that one.) If you really want to get to the hardcore stuff go straight for Ester Hicks. She was in the original The Secret movie, but Rhonda Byrne told everyone “we don’t need to draw up contracts because The Universe will provide,” lolol so when The Universe decided that it DIDN’T want to provide, everyone started suing the shit out of everyone. Translation, Rhonda Byrne kept every penny for herself so she attracted like 42 lawsuits and she had to pull Ester Hicks out of the movie.

Well anyway, if you want some hardcore Law of Attraction stuff Ester Hicks is where it’s at. Again, she was in The Secret. Ester Hicks.. according to her, it’s not Ester speaking and she channels the spirit of ‘Abraham' who are a group of intergalactic spirits who spoke to her after she read Napoleon Hill’s Think and Grow Rich and now ‘Abraham' teaches people to raise their vibrations to get rich via the Law of Attraction. (I’m not joking about any of this.. this is where that Law of Attraction stuff comes from)



But wait... if you sue a teacher from The Secret do you have to get yourselff a LAWyer of Attraction?!?! ba dum tssaa).. so when The Universe failed to provide she sued Rhonda Byrne.

Anyway, all those guys... Bob Proctor, Bruce Lipton, Maxwell Maltz, Rhonda Byrne, Ester Hicks or any of that group are going to leave you full of disappointment.

Again, Dr Peterson’s Self-Authoring program is legit. More info on the studies. His Self-Authoring course will get you the results that you’re trying to achieve with Dr Maltz’s work.

And sorry if i’m raining on anyone’s parade, again.. I’ve seen many many people disappointed with this type of material.

 

[0VO]

Biology of belief.

Some parts of the book are pretty scientific and hard to read through, but it's f'in gold imo.

That looks interesting, Thanks!

 

[0VO]

@ChrisV I'm not exactly looking for "Law of Attraction" per say. More psychology.. (I want to pick up David Buss evolutionary psych, it's like $200...).

I've read and listened to The Law of Attraction. The problem I feel with this, is that it's looked at like the entire pie. When it's really only a real small sliver. The whole thinking into existence.. yes and no. If you think, period, then nothing will happen (without action). But if you don't think, how can you possibly act? (on what thoughts will you act?)

I see where you're coming from, but I want to put this out there, and maybe you can help pull me up / bridge the gap. I see you're saying Maxwell lacks essentially the scientific proof to back his sayings. He wrote the book explaining his findings and experiences, that is not to say it's a scientific book, merely one individuals experience.

But what if science hasn't come to that conclusion yet? (Ie: If you have a terminal illness for which there is no cure, but a company develops an experimental drug that may help. It helps some people and doesn't help others. Would you not say "how can I explore this drug" even though the FDA has not confirmed it's a "cure". So then would it not be wise to look at the information in the book and say how does it or does it not apply to me? (even if it may not be proven science, but has effectively helped thousands?)

Or if Science says someone can't walk ever again, and they do, science calls it a "miracle" due to lack of scientific-explanation.

The Claim for example, that hypnosis can alter the physical body. Maybe science has not proven this. I am a huge magic-fan and I've seen this very concept applied in magicians acts (where they do the same act across the country over and over). Now one could argue that's like saying, my car runs fine with the check engine light on, all cars do. But is it really, if it reliably works on a consistent basis?

I was looking at Dr. Peterson's course and I have to say it does have a different "Feel" to it. More "Scholarly" and practical if I can call it that? Have you taken it? (It sort of gives me a Jack Canfield sort of feel to it)

Bob Proctors Born Rich, never leaves me disappointed. Quite the opposite, it's actually like a "Booster" for me when I find my mind starts to get off track. Get's me focused again.

 

[rogue synthetic]

Psycho-Cybernetics is an amazing book. The behaviorist psychology behind the prescriptions is a good 60 years out of date now, but the therapeutic what-to-do advice in the book is just fine.

If you really need a more up-to-date theoretical justification than the simple cybernetic servo-mechanism (which is fair, if unnecessary), then you'll want to look at cognitive behavioral therapy (which includes talking and writing therapies) and all the cool work on intrinsic motivations and self-determination theory. Deci & Ryan are who you want here for the technical stuff, though Dan Pink's Drive and Gabby Oettingen's Rethinking Positive Thinking are more digestable popular nonfiction.

These are all cognitive-psychological theories, so there's none of the goofy 'operant conditioning' behaviorist stuff that nobody has cared about since the 1960s. But prescriptions are similar.

And if the prescriptions work, they work.

 

[ChrisV]

If you really need a more up-to-date theoretical justification than the simple cybernetic servo-mechanism (which is fair, if unnecessary), then you'll want to look at cognitive behavioral therapy (which includes talking and writing therapies) and all the cool work on intrinsic motivations and self-determination theory. Deci & Ryan are who you want here for the technical stuff, though Dan Pink's Drive and Gabby Oettingen's Rethinking Positive Thinking are more digestable popular nonfiction.

I agree, both of those books are very good.

I'm not exactly looking for "Law of Attraction" per say.

oh thank god lol

I was looking at Dr. Peterson's course and I have to say it does have a different "Feel" to it. More "Scholarly" and practical if I can call it that? Have you taken it?

Yea, the Self-Authoring course I’m still taking. It’s more like a series of exercises than a course, but you can take his Maps of Meaning Harvard course as well. Well there’s the 1996 Harvard version and the (newer) 2017 UofT version... but you don’t need those courses to do the Self-Authoring suite.

I’d suggest looking into the benefits. In studies it boosted students grades an average of 25%, and a lot of people are claiming it doubled their income.

(skip to 3:38)

View: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Y7RXwGQjvVc&feature=youtu.be&t=218

Bob Proctors Born Rich, never leaves me disappointed. Quite the opposite, it's actually like a "Booster" for me when I find my mind starts to get off track. Get's me focused again.

I gotta admit.. that was my first personal development book ever. I loved it at the time. I must have watched his Word Rich video serious 1000 times. I thoroughly enjoyed it at the time.

Proctor is the most rational of those guys.

I think you’d really like this.. the main character is based on Bob Proctor:

Book - Every Fastlaner should read this (short) book.

 

[ChrisV]

I'm not exactly looking for "Law of Attraction" per say. More psychology.. (I want to pick up David Buss evolutionary psych, it's like $200...).

I've read and listened to The Law of Attraction. The problem I feel with this, is that it's looked at like the entire pie. When it's really only a real small sliver. The whole thinking into existence.. yes and no. If you think, period, then nothing will happen (without action). But if you don't think, how can you possibly act? (on what thoughts will you act?)

oh then we’re gonna be good friends lol

I think this is a good place to start.. great into to neuropsychology

Neurochemistry 101 - Meet your Happy Chemicals

P.S.

For anyone who isn’t aware of Law of Attraction lol:

View: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zdtqLNeK6Ww

 

[ApparentHorizon]

I've had clients who were products of the Procter-Gallagher machine.

They have a course that teaches you how to teach their material. Which churns out wannabe psychologists, but they have the routine to keep you on the hamster wheel for as long as possible. The kind that makes you go home feeling good about yourself, but not actually accomplishing much.

Envisioning your goals, getting you to talk about yourself, making suggestions so you can arrive at a conclusion, and so forth.

Whole thing just rubs me the wrong way.

Here's a video of him giving advice....aka he's selling you the whole way. Tai Lopez must have taken notes from this guy.

 

[ChrisV]

I've had clients who were products of the Procter-Gallagher machine.

They have a course that teaches you how to teach their material. Which churns out wannabe psychologists, but they have the routine to keep you on the hamster wheel for as long as possible. The kind that makes you go home feeling good about yourself, but not actually accomplishing much.

Envisioning your goals, getting you to talk about yourself, making suggestions so you can arrive at a conclusion, and so forth.

Whole thing just rubs me the wrong way.

Here's a video of him giving advice....aka he's selling you the whole way. Tai Lopez must have taken notes from this guy.

Sandy Gallagher? That sounds painful.

 

[ApparentHorizon]

Sandy Gallagher? That sounds painful.

You're going to have a field day with this one

These guys were Gurus before the word even existed.

 

Don't like ads? Remove them while supporting the forum. Subscribe.

[ChrisV]

These guys were Gurus before the word even existed.

The Hill-bone’s connected Clement Stone-bone.. the Stone-bone to the Nightingale bone, The gale-bone’s connects ted to the Proctor-bone...

Man... these guys all passed the torch down..

I mean like I said, I liked Bob Proctor yearssssss ago. It’s like 6, 7+ years now.

I look at that whole period of my life with complete and utter distain.

I outlined why, in a recent post:

Make Excellent Money Without College

But Bob Proctor’s Born Rich was my first Personal Development book. I’d have to go back and read his stuff to see what I think of it now, but I’m very skeptical. That being said his You Were Born Rich seminars seem to be on YouTube:

View: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ttMcezYksVw

Sandy Gallagher talks about Bob Proctor's Science of Getting Rich Encore Event

Oh boy...

 

[ApparentHorizon]

The Hill-bone’s connected Clement Stone-bone.. the Stone-bone to the Nightingale bone, The gale-bone’s connects ted to the Proctor-bone...

Man... these guys all passed the torch down..

I mean like I said, I liked Bob Proctor yearssssss ago. It’s like 6, 7+ years now.

I look at that whole period of my life with complete and utter distain.

I outlined why, in a recent post:

Make Excellent Money Without College

But Bob Proctor’s Born Rich was my first Personal Development book. I’d have to go back and read his stuff to see what I think of it now, but I’m very skeptical. That being said his You Were Born Rich seminars seem to be on YouTube:

View: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ttMcezYksVw

Oh boy...

It's not terrible advice. If you actually watch Bob above, and unpack it, it makes sense.

Problem is, their target market is newbies starting out, and they don't have enough experience to wade through the sales and copy.

I spent my fair share on these kinds of people as well, so I'm not bashing anyone in this thread.

 

[ChrisV]

It's not terrible advice. If you actually watch Bob above, and unpack it, it makes sense.

Problem is, their target market is newbies starting out, and they don't have enough experience to wade through the sales and copy.

I spent my fair share on these kinds of people as well, so I'm not bashing anyone in this thread.

No I totally agree. I mean I look at that part of my life like “what was I thinking” and “wow, I wish I had figured this out sooner”

I mean it’s essentially pseudopsychology

I don’t want to bash proctor because I do think he’s doing something he believes to be good.. but you can believe something is right and still lead people astray accidentally, and that’s a possibility with him. I actually lean toward thinking that slightly too.

 

[The Abundant Man]

@ChrisV I'm not exactly looking for "Law of Attraction" per say. More psychology.. (I want to pick up David Buss evolutionary psych, it's like $200...).

This has all the basics: Conditioning, Study tips, Freud's Id/Super Id, Positive Psychology, Hierarchy of Needs, child development, Modeling/Mirror Effect, LSD/MDMA etc...

 

[ChrisV]

Ohhhh, you basically want Intro to Psychology?

Boom, Crash Course is great:

View: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vo4pMVb0R6M

Here’s the rest of the course:

Psychology - YouTube

Also, I’ve read David Buss’s The Evolution of Desire and it was a classic. I feel like it’s a bit outdated but still good nonetheless.

 

[Kruiser]

Also, can anyone can recommend any books similar in nature?

Try The Magic of Thinking Big

 

[ChrisV]

Gabby Oettingen's Rethinking Positive Thinking

Going back to this: I liked Gabby Oettingen's work, but the only thing I find suspect about it is how she has like 297 papers on her WOOP / MCII shit and no one else has done any studies on it. The MC stuff is hers, then the II stuff is her husbands. Then she combined them. But regardless, no one else is researching this. Whenever I see an academic circle jerk like that I get suspect. I mean her theory sounds solid enough, but when you’re the only one researching something it’s easy to sit there and confirm your own biases a million times. Also, I’ve also read some stuff suggesting she might be wrong:

Additional basic research has helped establish that fantasizing about a desired future (compared to a less valuable present) helps tag desired future states with positive affect, mediated as they are by expectations of success.33 The importance of nearer or proximal goals has also been investigated. Such goals appear particularly important in uncertain circumstances, where many variables must be considered, and where longer-term goals have to be constantly evaluated, because of rapidly changing circumstances. Success at near or proximal goals also seems capable of enhancing distant or long-term goal commitment.
​

https://selfauthoring.blob.core.windows.net/media/Default/Pdf/WritingBenefits.pdf

 

[UnrealCreative]

I've heard Tony Robbin's "Awaken The Giant Within" is along the same lines of Psycho-Cybernetics. But I couldn't get through the whole book. It's massive.

If you're into audiobooks, get TR's "Personal Power II" program. Hugely beneficial.

 

[TinyOldLady]

I have read PC at least 3 times and highlighted a lot of parts. There is this great example that a basketball player gets better with training because he has the goal in mind of getting the ball in the basket, otherwise he would become a pro in missing the basket, since in the beginning of the training he misses more often than he hits. Its a great reminder to keep your goals in mind, align your brain towards your goals