Mirror time psychological constructivism therapy helps a person to empower him/herself by using a mirror to reflect reassuring and empowering words when spoken and listened to by the individual.  The use of words to ingrain thoughts has long been understood by Kuhn (2000) as representing a process of subtle power that influences imaginary exchanges.  Just before Kuhn died in 1996, he wrote about his language as being the way to influence cognitive and behavioural changes in the worlds of humans.  Psychological constructivism is a clinical 'world' that supports the human ability to utilise language for cognitive and behavioural change.  
In his book, Human Change Processes, psychological constructivist Mahoney (1991) describes his discovery of mirror work as being initiated by Adam who presented with depression, bulimia and personality disorder. Whenever Adam looked in the mirror his reflection told him that he looked a lot better than how he felt. How this contrasted with his understandings about his ‘reality’ led Adam into an awareness that, with the therapeutic help of mirror therapy, eventually led him to greater self-awareness and clarity.  
The Label Feedback Hypothesis of Lupyan (2007) suggests that verbal labels can change individual perceptual processing where phonetic repetition of a word supports verbal labeling.  Lupyan says that hearing yourself rote repeating a word like “chair”, compared to simply thinking about a chair, promotes the visual system as a better “chair detector”.   What this means is that talking to yourself when learning to classify an object furthers your ability to remember the object, both visually and linguistically. In terms of mirror therapy, words that are spoken instead of simply thought about, help to promote classification stability  in an experiential way. Hearing yourself saying something out loud puts a label on it and helps to facilitate a clearer way of identifying objects.
Psychologist Linda Sapadin says that talking to yourself is a sign of sanity in an otherwise “insane” world.  She suggests that talking with yourself helps to ease feelings of loneliness, clarify your thoughts and firm up any decisions you might be pondering over.  However, for the self-talk to be productive, it must be directed at your best friend who is you and deserving of your utmost respect. Linda says the self-talk, that could make you feel better about yourself, should be full of self-compliments, be motivating and be about decision making and goal setting.  
In an Age where being seen seemingly talking to yourself with a mobile phone pinned to your ear, reflecting using mirror therapy presents as a reasonable option if seeking a way out of emotional anguish.  Talking to yourself in the mirror also seems to offer a respectable way of gaining more confidence.  However, should Lupyan’s (2007) verbal labeling hypothesis be correct, neuroscientist Greenfield (2014) words about how digital technologies change our brains, might be the one to watch. 
​
 ©  Chris Tyne 16/09/2017

References:

McLeod, J, 2013, An Introduction to Counselling, 5th Ed, Open University Press.  
Mahoney, MJ., 1991, Human Change Processes: the scientific foundations of psychotherapy, Basic Books.
Kuhn, TS., 2000, The Road Since Structure, Philosophical Essays, 1970-1993, University of Chicago Press.
Greenfield, S., 2014, Mind Change, how digital technologies are leaving their mark on our brains, Penguin, Random House UK. ​

I think, emotion is a result of a thinking process that interprets feeling in a way that can be shared with others. One huge problem with the linguistics of emotion is how it entangles true feeling, re-routing true feelings into the rationale world of the mind and eventually into a sense of disconnectedness. What humans interpret as emotion in animals is a mis-interpretation of the mammal's very real sensory world of feeling: And animals are extremely sensitive which is why our lack of connectedness with true feeling is torturing them. Human babies and small children share a mammals heightened sensory ability to feel the feelings of others. It is only when the rationale emotive world of linguistic thinking clicks into the minds of humans that we begin to lose this sensitive consciousness and begin to develop ideas and beliefs about our emotional control over the world of feeling. This doesn't become more prevalent than in the self management of chronic pain. It is extremely difficult to share the depth and power chronic pain inflicts on the body, other than through emotive linguistics. Try as you may, no matter how much emotion is expressed, the feeling is unable to be transmitted to another who is only fluent in emotions. This is because words are limited in meaning. In this way, emotions are not remnants of animal instinct, they are a suppression of it. Humans linguistically control the 'animal' instinct with rationale emotive words. "I am angry" a man says when in fact, if he felt his truth instead, he may find that he simply feels tired with the anger more related to his story of injustice.
Emotion is very human while feeling is universal. The fact that humans are so obsessed with their emotions is why they're loosing contact with the pain and suffering their emotive behaviour is having on those who depend on them. 
Mammals feel deeply and we share this because we ARE mammals, whether we want to recognise this or not. 
Humans control deep feelings with emotive behaviours the most predominant of which is language and how we use language to think and express how we think we are feeling.
Change your thinking, change your life (which represents our cover) is based on the premise that thinking, in your language of culture or choice, can over rule the natural (feeling) order of the body. You can process what you want to see differently by simply shifting your thought processes like the actor of your own play. This is why I think, emotions are not the root of humans, but the creation. Emotions are not a remnant of an animal instinct, but the product of a thinking mind. A mind that has become used to putting tags on feelings, whether those tags clearly identify what is being felt or not. Human language has the power to convince its own mind that what it feels isn't true and nothing is a finer example of this than the industrialised practices of stoicism. http://www.iep.utm.edu/stoicmind/ I'm sure there are other, even better, examples, and if you know of them, please share.
​©  Chris Tyne  4/02/2016

The elephant in the room is animal agriculture and we're all ignoring it. I want to do something about it because it's absolutely HUGE. However what is interesting about it is karma. If you think about it, our demise will be vindication for the atrocities we're all committing in the name of food. Sustainability in the livestock industry is all about growing profits. Politics is such is that it doesn't seem to matter that in a very short period of time it will not matter how much profit is generated for whatever reason because dead water, land and air will put a stop to that. The trillionaires who have the power to make a difference have chosen traditional constraint over cultural enhancement. Globalisation will not replenish resources because continual economic advancement equates to even more ecological extinction. Their belief that there is another globe of earth beyond the ice sheets of Antarctica, well founded or not, isn't going to save our home. Only we can do that and the only way to do that is to influence supply and demand. In a capitalistic world, supply and demand represents the socialism of trade practice. The more we consumers buy of a particular product, the more it is produced and along with the theoretical economic law of supply and demand, when supply increases the price will tend to drop and where demand increases the price will tend to increase. But and it's a Big BUTT, this theory does not apply to the meat industry. Demand for that pound of flesh is increasing and supply cost seems to be leveled or decreasing while the real cost of diminishing returns remains hidden. That cost is our home. Consumers are paying for the taste of animal flesh with our water, our oxygen and our land. In short we are eating Earth quicker than our culture is able to change to change it. And while the idea of this is nothing new, the reality of it is earth shattering. The globalisation of western meat eating tastes isn't going to cut it either, particularly when globalisation contains control measures like ID stamping that are now being implemented for when the dung truly does hit the fan. Philanthropists know that culturalism is about what people can't change as opposed to what they can, after indoctrination that we've all been through as children. Yet what we have been raised to believe about eating others is about to come back and venomously bite us in the proverbial jugular. I know it's hard to believe or care about for that matter, especially when in the third age of your life, that the destruction of your world is the result of a bad meat eating problem. But rather than simply ignore or worry, I think what can I do to help myself, my family and others to change direction and I do admit to shaking my head from side to side often. Is it the responsibility of governments to tell us what we can or can't eat because of ecological and environmental destruction? Not that I think they will while the shit that is hitting the fan is able to be kept hidden along with the real flow of money. Should governments force us to change as opposed to continuing the non censoring of scientific research about our impending doom? Are the trilionaires right, we are not worth caring about because we would not thank them for it, instead wanting the industrial 'privileges' they have, and we have Buckley's chance of ever getting. Modern animal agriculture is the biggest karmic volcano we've got coming to us and it's like we're trapped in an arena with a dung filled crater about to implode us all down its thunder-box. Just sayin' 
©  Chris Tyne  12/10/2015
 see http://www.cowspiracy.com/