Cleaning up my queue of articles on which a MindBlog post might be based, I came across this piece by Casey Schwartz titled “How to Hack your Brain (for $5,000)," which immediately triggered my bullshit detector. It uncritically describes what seems to me a circus act devised by internet age flimflam men, Jamie Wheal and Steven Kotler, whose company (the Flow Genome Project, based in my own new hometown of Austin Texas!) is “dedicated to gathering the latest science behind flow states. It’s board of advisers includes neuroscientists, filmmakers and a kiteboarder.” The result seems to be this kind of gibble-gabble of hand waving about various neurotransmitters. From Schwartz's article:
“Flow,” they write, is associated with six neurotransmitters: dopamine, serotonin, oxytocin, norepinephrine, anandamide and endorphins. Knowing the neurochemical profile of flow means, in theory, people can devise ways of achieving it more often, more reliably and more quickly.One tries in vain to find anything of substance on their website, such as a list of the neuroscientists, or references to work on the neurotransmitters mentioned. Their core video presents the two bright-eyed and bushy tailed entrepreneurs engaging you with their personal stories and lots of kewl graphics of spinning brains and neurons. Since I'm being so negative, I felt obliged to buy the Kindle version of "Stealing Fire" by Kolter and Wheal.
The bottom line is that it is an creative, wide ranging, everything but the kitchen sink, whacked out, exuberant, off the wall advertisement for Flow Genome which doesn't offer much substance. It has detailed references and what looks on the surface like a very respectable bibliography. I can't even begin to describe the confusion and chaos that lies below this veneer if one simply begins to follow through on any of the reference threads. Clicking on footnotes that purport to be supportive of the 'science' gets you a mishmash of review articles. There are several references to "The knobs and levers being tweaked in the brain: See www.flowgenomeproject.com/stealingfiretools." This link does not work. Or, "And if you’re interested in helping further this research, visit: www.stealingfirebook.com/research/". This link does not work.
I have great respect for Mihaly Csikszentmihalyi’s original writings on the state of ‘flow,’ which clearly lays out Kolter and Wheal's' "four signature characteristics underneath: Selflessness, Timelessness, Effortlessness, and Richness, or STER for short." However, my 75 year old curmudgeonly brain is not sympathetic to the package offered by the Flow Genome Project, whose claimed positive outcome I suspect might best be described as a mass placebo effect induced by a pseudoscientific charismatic religious act...If you believe it works, it works!
When I see things like that I always think of the beautiful lecture on scientific method by Richard Feynman.ReplyDelete
He says "Another thing I must point out is that you cannot prove a vague theory wrong. If the guess that you make is poorly expressed and rather vague, and the method that you use for figuring out the consequences is a little vague - you are not sure, and you say, 'I think everything's right because it's all due to moogles, and moogles do this and that more or less, and I can sort of explain how this works ... ', then you see that this theory is good, because it cannot be proved wrong!"
I wish I had Deric's insight before taking two classes from the Flow Genome Project (FGP.) The first class - Flow Fundamentals - was a great group of people and built a sense of community. The FGP did little to facilitate this effort with the exception of taking approximately $500 from each participant. The second course - Flow Performance - should have been titled "Pseudo-Profound Bullshit." There is a great paper that won an Ig Nobel Prize that has this as part of its title. Of course, they keep waving "Stealing Fire" in front of people, and claiming "if you take the next class, we will reveal all of the secrets in that book." That was the promise of one took Flow Performance (a promise that was not delivered), and for subsequent private coaching, all at a very high price. It should be noted that "Stealing Fire" makes very big claims without validating a single claim. When you start to win an argument with a pseudo-scientist, they will start throwing credentials and cohorts in your face (rather than defending their work). So it is with the Flow Genome Project.ReplyDelete
I'm pasting in here an email from reader Mike Walterman, who indicated he encountered a glitch in trying to post his comment directly: Hi Deric,ReplyDelete
I read your commentary on the Flow Genome Project (FGP) with great interest. Your suspicions about this "effort" are spot on, and I wish that I had your insight before taking two of these classes from the FGP. By the way, Steven Kotler is an alum of UW-Madison!!
The first class (Flow Fundamentals) was a great community of people, and I learned much from them, and nothing from the FGP personnel. The second class (Flow Performance) was pseudo-profound BS (PPBS.) There is a great paper that won an Ig Nobel Prize titled "On the reception and detection of pseudo-profound bullshit." I have attached a PDF version of this paper to this email. The paper perfectly described every aspect of this class!! The instructor - Jamie Wheal - is more interested in impressing people with PPBS than realaying any useful information. Also, each class is prefeaced with the promise that "All the secrets of Stealing Fire will be revealed in this next class." I stopped when this promise was not delivered in Flow Performance; but, was promised for private coaching (at an extremely high price).
Anyway, I tried to respond to your blog and am not sure that my posting made it though (weird interface glitches). There is so much more I can say about my 12 weeks wasted with the FGP. It could fill many pages.
All the best,
Thanks Deric. Here is a bit more organized version of the above email:Delete
Your suspicions about this "effort" are spot on, and I wish that I had your insight before taking two classes from the Flow Genome Project (FGP.)
The first class (Flow Fundamentals) was a great community of people, and I learned much from them, and very little was contributed by FGP personnel. The second class (Flow Performance) was pseudo-profound bullshit (PPBS.) The instructor for this second class was more interested in impressing people with PPBS than realaying any useful information. Also, each class was sold with the promise that "All the secrets in the book Stealing Fire will be revealed in this class." This promise was not delivered in Flow Fundamentals, and then not in Flow Performance. I stopped when this was promised for a third time as part of private coaching (at an extremely high price).
Dealing with the FGP taught me one valuable lesson. When one is winning an argument with a pseudo-scientist/bullshitter, the bullshitter will start to throw their degrees, honors, and members of their network in your face. This in lieu of actually defending the work on its own merits.. The FGP instructor does this constantly. Not once did he back up any of the claims in Stealing Fire with any evidence (other than anecdotal). This in spite of constant requests from me to do so. I did become familiar with the identity of all of the so called experts who (supposedly) endorse the work of the FGP!!
We're actually re-launching our new website in the coming month or so to address and make more transparent the research we're working on. As for the links, that was a frustrating mistake with them being published without confirmation on the back end. The correct working links are:ReplyDelete
Sorry to hear Mike that you're still not satisfied with your experience in the course. Those marketing criticisms are puzzling as we unpacked quite a lot of information in Flow Performance with respect to that topic. The private coaching is not promising to deliver hidden information that Flow Performance does not, but rather the personal 1:1 time with a coach.
"Information" (actually pseudo profound bullshit) about pseudo-science from pseudo-professionals is of little to no value to anyone, other than building the FGP's bank accounts.Delete
Per Lucas' comment that "The private coaching is not promising to deliver hidden information that Flow Performance does not, but rather the personal 1:1 time with a coach." Here is an excerpt from an email from Jamie Wheal announcing the availability of private coaching.Delete
" I’ve only ever done this with CEOs and military leaders, never before to the general public. We’re going to combine deep dive coaching, direct facilitation through some of our highest octane tools and a behind the curtain look at what we covered in Stealing Fire. No filter. Gloves off. The most potent tools and techniques we’ve learned in over a decade of working with the best in the world, and seeing what actually sticks. "
This made after the completion of Flow Performance. I rest my case!!
Your "links" to "research" are just links to promotions for your book. That's pretty lame.Delete
During the Flow Performance Class, Jamie Wheal made the statement multiple times that "Stealing Fire [the book that he co-authored and the foundation for FGP training] is a complete fiction; a Promethean Prank." Taking him at his word, how can such a document have any scientific validity and/or application at all?! In addition, whenever a topic came up - in Flow Performance - in which certain class members had experience and deep understanding (e.g. Breathwork, DNA testing, Microdosing), the lack of knowledge/depth of understanding on the part of the FGP was blindingly obvious given the FGP's responses to deeper inquiries by those experts in the class. It is very telling when one starts addressing questions and concerns about their work with statements about their credentials, listing members of their network/inner circle, and engaging in character assassination against those who question; rather than addressing the questions directly. This was a constant problem during Flow Performance. It was the worst, but not the only, source of pseudo profound bullshit in the Flow Performance class.ReplyDelete
Per Lucas' comment that:ReplyDelete
"The private coaching [from the Flow Genome Project] is not promising to deliver hidden information that Flow Performance does not, but rather the personal 1:1 time with a coach."
Here is an excerpt from an email from Jamie Wheal announcing the availability of private coaching to all members of the Flow Performance Class:
"I’ve only ever done this with CEOs and military leaders, never before to the general public. We’re going to combine deep dive coaching, direct facilitation through some of our highest octane tools and a behind the curtain look at what we covered in Stealing Fire. No filter. Gloves off. The most potent tools and techniques we’ve learned in over a decade of working with the best in the world, and seeing what actually sticks."
The VERY same promise made for Flow Performance. A promise that was never kept. I rest my case!!
thanks for this postReplyDelete
Hi jl, You are most welcome! I view the field of peak human performance with the utmost respect and reverence. The Flow Genome Project commercializes and demeans this all important area of inquiry with their quick buck predatory antics.Delete
Hi MTW (Mike W.?) and Deric, since you know the topic, could you point in the direction of some valuable study and practice path towards achieving flow in daily life? I once read a summary of the Csikszentmihalyi book but figured that just reading a book won't give me the cues I needed in real life...Delete
Gosh, I was about to register for the course. I thought it would be wise to check for reviews, but I never imagined there would be such devastating criticisms from course participants. 500USD saved.ReplyDelete
hey folks posting here--please be decent humans and have whole hearted debate, but don't be trolls! If what we do at FGP isn't your speed, no worries. Big wide world out there, sure you can find what you're looking for. It's ironic that you've chosen to tar us with the quick-buck info marketer brush, as we have even more of an allergic reaction to that whole scene than you guys do--it's a constant topic in our team meetings and governs everything we do (and don't). We've been doing what we're doing mostly for free, often for low pay, occasionally for high pay for twenty years. We don't share anything we don't live, practice and find essential--that means we don't teach meditation (cuz we don't do it ourselves), and we don't overgeek on supplements and smart tech--just haven't found much in either space that meets our standards. But what we have done, is unrelentingly seek a life of purpose, balance, adventure and meaning. (and along the way, researched the hell out of what works and what doesn't). And not from the safe confines of a laptop--we've led folks up Everest and guided around the world, and have been extreme athletes, along with Montessori teachers, non-profit founders, parents of an Olympic trials swimmer daughter at Stanford, and a wilderness medic/adventure guide son) and we've done it all living the things we teach from the ground up. To say that we don't know what we're talking about when it comes to science is also curious--There are over 15,000 words of endnotes in Stealing Fire which represents probably the richest bibliography to date on the state of the art of optimal psychology, transformational culture and cutting edge neuroscience. It was nominated for a Pulitzer and translated in over a dozen languages. There are hundreds of thousands of people around the world whose lives were changed by that book and dozens of companies founded using it as a blueprint for next gen experience design. (Personally, I was bummed that our editor at Harper didn't let us use superscript citations, because I like to read w a thumb in the endnotes to check all truth claims and wanted that for our readers too.) Out of 300 pages, we mention our own work for 5 pages, and debated even doing that--but decided we had to, because WTF, it's the best synthesis of the book's thesis we can find.ReplyDelete
If you guys are in fact right, and we have no idea what we're talking about, that means you are smarter than the best minds at Stanford (invited to speak twice at their Brain Mind Conference alongside Nobel laureates, and working with two neuro labs there), MIT (presented at their leadership and science summits) Johns Hopkins (coleading a research project on PTSD and breathwork) Imperial College and MAPS (advising on psychedelic research and policy) and the special operations command in the United States and the United Kingdom. I mean, you might be. But then again, that's a fairly high burden of proof. Currently I'm writing the sequel to Stealing Fire, dedicated to unpacking an integrated theory of peak states, trauma relief and social coordination involving a synthesis of delta wave EEG, vagal nerve tone, gas assisted respiratory protocols, sexual integration (collab with Kinsey Institute) and the impact of music, nervous system release and immersive technology as an open source solution to our social and mental crises. No one has tracked a cross disciplinary synthesis at this level to date. As far as our actual trainings, and the worldwide community we're growing? Amazing. For all of our advanced courses folks are required to do community service (a bunch right now are doing end of life interviews in nursing homes, others have started food kitchen and aid projects) wilderness medical training (so they can boost situational awareness, physiological knowledge and leadership skills) and deep hearted support for each other along the road. It's a humbling group of homegrown humans and we're proud to be a part of it. If that's not your jam, it's not your jam. But please understand it before you slander it. "On hearing of the Way, the wise man picks it up and makes it his own. The mediocre man studies it for a while and sets it down. And the fool? The fool just laughs! (and if it were not so, it would not be The Way.) --JamieReplyDelete
Credit to you if your intentions are genuinely to help people improve their lives. But honestly... The way you're going about it is actually embarrassing... From the diatribe of pure nonsense, the claims made and the constant repeating of vague concepts on your website. To now the way you've felt the need to justify yourself with anecdotes of high performing people (which really has no weight at all to what you're saying) as opposed to backing the tangible science of your offers... My head just hurts from it now.Delete
I lean toward Mike Walterman's point of view. I also took the first two courses, and was actually in the same second class as Mike. I wouldn't call it pseudo-science, but it's definitely sales-before-substance.ReplyDelete
My biggest irritation was all the name dropping as a substitute for results. As an example, one of their techniques was to use a company that charges you money if you fail to meet your personal goals. The motivational basis of putting cash on the line to self motivate is genuine enough. My beef was that when I quit the class, they continued to charge me hundreds of dollars. When I complained, Jamie couldn't have cared less and just sent me screen shots of the microscopic fine print that detailed this risk. When I complained about his citing chapter and verse of fine print, he started talking to me about how the founder of the company had a PhD in Economics, as if that was in any way relevant to poor user experience design.
He falls back again and again on credentials, status and fame. Just look at his responses above, a parade of name dropping. I have a PhD from Stanford ... goody for me ... it means nothing if I can't deliver in present time.
The course itself was an incoherent firehose of content. It's not that the content was bad; there was lots of good stuff in there. That's why I tried the second course. But it's incoherent in that the whole does not exceed the sum of the parts, and the whole is expensive. It also seemed their target market was hyper-ambitious masters of the universe, which is great, but it's definitely not the vibe that will heal civilization's ills.
I got way, way more direct improvement in flow from my TM training than anything from FGP. One day as I was fiddling with another irritating, recommended bit of technology I said to myself, "If they think this will get me out of my head, they are out of their minds." That's when I quit.
what are "gas assisted respiratory protocols", you mean gas like air is a gas? so like air assisted breathing? how many seconds did you sit on that before blurting?! and vagal nerve tone. you probably took too much time getting the right tone on your vagal, didnt learn that people can actually hear you are full of, gas?ReplyDelete