From: malcolm@wrs.com (Malcolm Humes)
Subject: Re: Biofeedback for meditation training...
Organization: Wind River Systems, Inc.
Date: Mon, 9 Nov 1992 19:26:18 GMT

mcgrath@cs.uiuc.edu (Robert McGrath) writes:

>As to the claim that the "entrainment devices can force the brain into
>the traditional meditative patterns"--bunk!  First, there ain't no such
>animal as a 'meditative pattern,' 

IMHO your post was more full of bunk than any of the things you were
"debunking", unless you can support your claims with somthing more
substantial.
 
Sounds to me like a classic case of "you can't prove it doesn't exist and
I can't prove it exists". My only comment is to question why you are so 
convinced there isn't? Does this threaten your personal belief systems or
do you actually have some evidence that proves your claim? I thought it 
was well supported that there are brain patterns and frequencies associated 
with meditation. I can see the skepticism of entrainment devices as being
reasonable and I've already stated that I'm skeptical of them. But I'm
still willing to try entrainment devices so I can reach my own conclusions. 
  
>and second there is no reason to think
>that any given blinking light or beeping tone is actually causing
>entrainment. 

If you're willing to believe that entrainment exists then I see no reason
not to believe a machine with sound and lights is capable of achieving
such an effect. From what I've read so far I haven't seen anyone deny 
that entrainment is possible. If there's research that proves entrainment
is bunk please offer a pointer to it.  

Also, as I had mentioned in a previous posting - even if any effect achieved 
is only a placebo effect, if it gives me a warm fuzzy feeling then I'm
happy with the result. If I can't distinguish between a placebo induced
relaxation and "the-real-thing" then what's the difference? Likewise, if
I can't distinguish between a state I reach during meditation and a state
I reach via entrainment, what's the difference?  

Seems to me that there's a judgement passed by many who meditate that 
meditation is something one has to learn and master (I believe this part),
and that it's impossible to take any shortcuts to get there through any
other means. Why are folks who've obviously never even tried entrainment 
devics so adamant that mind machines are worthless, or a cheaper or less 
fulfulling experience? I have heard comments only from one or two folks 
who've had experience in both areas.                                   

>And thirdly, "entrainment" is not "biofeedback" and 
>vice versa.

I didn't claim that it was. In fact I posted a FAQ on entrainment devices
last week. Some other poster had asserted that they thought they were using 
their entrainment device as a crude biofeedback device. If you wish to argue 
that he was wrong you're probably better off quoting his comments - you're
the one who made this assumption that anyone claimed they were the same. I 
think if you read the original posts again you might find that someone was 
claiming that they were using an entrainment device in a way that they thought
was similar to biofeedback not that the terms have the same meaning. 

  - malcolm@wrs.com 
Newsgroups: alt.consciousness