Brian Germain's Book: Canopy and its Pilot

[DSE 3]

Quote

[
Usually clinical psych research is not on insects, but on people. ?????

Insects have rights too, y'know?
What's an insects best pick up line?
-Pardon me, but is this stool taken?

With that sort of conversation, it would probably leave anyone emotionally scarred.

[denete 2]

Quote

Psychology cannot be specifically measured; it is at best a very educated guess made on baselines established in a unique environment.

??

Did you mean broadly measured? Specific measurement is easy.

Or did you mean that the field of psychology cannot be specifically measured?

- David

[d123 1]

Quote

Did you mean broadly measured? Specific measurement is easy.

What's the difference between those 2 measurements?

Lock, Dock and Two Smoking Barrelrolls!

[sundance 1]

I have taken Brian's canopy course (highly recommended for anyone who skydives) and I just finished reading "the Parachute and it's Pilot for the third time. I learn something valuable and additional with each read.

As DSE is suggesting, psychology is a softer and more slippery science than the hard sciences are. In fact, in the short span of 10 or 20 years, many things considered to be known in psychology have taken a 180 and one should not be surprised if this continues to happen.

I think it is important as well to consider that Germain does not have the hard core approach that maintains psycology in itself has all the complete answers. He seems more wholistic. He has a heavy Zen perspective in his writing and teaching and appears to me to blend the insights from something like Zen with those from psychology. Perhaps this is a partial reason why he may read less academic in that respect.

I personally love the way he teaches, his passion, his knowledge, his experience and the impact it has had on my experience in the sport.

My two cents.

One of the surest signs that intelligent life exists in outer space is that none of it has tried to contact us.

[denete 2]

Quote

Quote

Did you mean broadly measured? Specific measurement is easy.

What's the difference between those 2 measurements?

Easy to measure: Galvanic skin response of a 34 year-old male human seated in a climate-controlled room while watching the second-hand of a clock that moves counter-clockwise for one minute every 4 minutes. That's a specific measurement.

Hard to measure: How people feel while shopping. That's a broad measurement.

[d123 1]

I see, said the blind man

Back to topic!

Lock, Dock and Two Smoking Barrelrolls!

[DSE 3]

Now, if we could just get everyone to sit in a climate-controlled room with wires hooked connected, we'd probably have a better idea of specific psychology.
On the other hand, if one could specifically quantify the chemical composition of "joy" while skyidiving in a measurement that could be applied to everyone involved, then we'd have something. We could bottle it, sell it, and ground all the aircraft.
Fortunately, that'll never happen.

Sundance, you said it more eloquently than I could. Brian Germain is an incredibly relaxed person who causes others around him to do the same, or at least in my experiences around him (not many). Denete, figure out what makes Brian the relaxed, calming, well-educated and sharing person that he is, bottle it, sell it, you'll be more wealthy than Bill Gates.
Brian's delivery speaks very well to the emotional side of me, in terms that make sense. Given that he's writing to me and others like me...suggests he's write on target. I wish my writings were as succinct and conversational as his work.

[DrewEckhardt 0]

Quote

Now, if we could just get everyone to sit in a ]
On the other hand, if one could specifically quantify the chemical composition of "joy" while skyidiving in a measurement that could be applied to everyone involved, then we'd have something. We could bottle it, sell it, and ground all the aircraft.

Shortly after which the Anheuser-Busch would lobby the government to shutdown the competition, it would become a class 1 controlled substance, getting a natural legal high the old way would be cheaper again, and the planes would be flying within a year.

Brian's awesome.

[hackish 8]

Quote

Quote

My better half is presently working on her PhD in Clinical Psychology

Quote

her area of research is in insect behaviour

Usually clinical psych research is not on insects, but on people. ?????

Quote

So many straight lines. So little time.

I second that thought!!!

Believe it or not but animal behaviour is a very important part of psychology. Many of the primitive interactions are shared between different levels of organisms. Swat at a bee it retreats then maybe stings you. Swat at a person they pull back then maybe smack you back. Yes her thesis is more experimental and she is in the clinical program but this does not exclude the student from also having completed the human studies associated with being a clinical psychologist.

Thanks to those who responded via PM I needed to know what psychologist-skydivers understood from reading the book. To a degree things have been packaged for the general population and not for the scientific community.

As for the softness of psychology most statements can be made with only a degree of certainty. Some studies have not been repeatable, some have led to discoveries of additional variables. Let's face it humans aren't nearly as simple as insects.

Suppose you were to run a study of tandem clients and have the cameraperson wearing a pink helmet with a big "look here" written on it. Ask them when they land what was on the cameraperson's helmet.

I'm willing to bet that few first time tandems would remember it. I'm also willing to bet that a higher percentage of second timers would remember. Studies like that can show the effect of decreasing levels of adrenaline. That to me is the science of psychology.

There are many papers out there on adrenaline and I'll be reading as many as I can before beginning to write any articles. When the time comes I'll do what I can to present a more research based article. This will take me some time as I've said that I'm no psychologist. I don't think my approach will be any better than the author's, just a different style. I think that the difference in approach explains why I had so much trouble with the book.

Some people have taken this as an attack on Brian Germain and it was never intended to be. I still hold this book highly and definitely recommend it to anyone. When I have more experience and the opportunity exists I will definitely be interested in signing up for his canopy control course.

-Michael

[174fps 1]

Quote

When I have more experience and the opportunity exists I will definitely be interested in signing up for his canopy control course.

-Michael

We had Brian at our DZ two weeks ago, had people from 4000+ jumps to students in the course, everyone learned

[dharma1976 0]

Quote

Quote

Well, given that Brian is _already_ a psychologist...

Are you sure about that?

- David

If by psychologist you mean Doctorate in Psychology I gather from resume he is not...

he does however have a neat thing which is a throwback to psychologies roots contemplative psych hmmm reminds us that psychology was the baby of philosophy...

Cheers

Dave

http://www.skyjunky.com

CSpenceFLY - I can't believe the number of people willing to bet their life on someone else doing the right thing.

[Spatula 0]

Have you considered emailing him for a more in depth discussion? He's been great in responding to me via email when I've had a random question on canopy flight. His email is on his site, give it a try.

[d123 1]

Quote

He's been great in responding to me via email

That sounds like Brian!

Lock, Dock and Two Smoking Barrelrolls!

[hackish 8]

Quote

Have you considered emailing him for a more in depth discussion? He's been great in responding to me via email when I've had a random question on canopy flight. His email is on his site, give it a try.

The main purpose of this was to see what other skydivers felt about the psychology part - in particular those with some psychology education. I've received a lot of PMs on this subject and can understand how the psychology part came about as well as where the material came from.

I have also begun corresponding with Brian. The trouble is I didn't get the point of most of the psychology section so there wasn't really a specific question. All in all I forwarded my feelings on it and hopefully feedback and contribute to improving future revisions.

-Michael

[denete 2]

You're right about the calm being "catchy". You would have to ask other people who've seen me at the farm about whether I'm generally relaxed or not. I like being that way (mellow), and it makes the "highs" even bigger (for me at least).

I read "Transcending Fear" first, and "The Parachute and Its Pilot" second. Because I had already read TF, it made the later part of TPAIP pretty disappointing. Not that the information was the same, but because the delivery was kind of blah in comparison to TF.

I did like the segment on visualization, and I've always been a huge proponent of this technique for practicing anything out of context. The segment on teaching was also good to read.

Brian has some good analogies, and definitely presents information in enough ways to get through to almost any reader.

- David

[rygon 0]

its like saying the maths behind his working is rubbish because hes missed out a lot ..yet he puts it in to words that ppl understand and need to know..yeh hes missed stuff out but the stuff he has isnt going to affect anything hes taught

To my psychology is basically watching ppls behaviour then working out why they behave like this...they way i would go about it is see how i feel when i jump ..then ask others how they felt etc and build a bigger picture. His buzzwords may not be perfect but as the maths part..theyre good enough for us lot

what i got out of it the most is f your scared you make mistakes...and youre only scared if you havent forseen what can happen...therefore practise every continguincy and you'll be ok
And also never exceed your limit

Hell most of the stuff he talks about is common sense if you think about it.. but having it down in writing makes you think of it and helps to think that someone has gone though the same experiences (and hurt themselve, done stupid things etc) and is writing down to help others.


also i wouldnt mind you posting (or pming) me the stuff you gf disagrees with...im not out to disprove germains or hers theory...just quite interested in the subject and would like to know more if thats ok

[377 21]

Brian is not a Psych PhD or a licensed clinical psychologist, but he does have some useful things to say about canopy flying and also about understanding and managing fear. His book is great and his seminars even better. I am an engineer, he is not, yet he taught me to take an entirely new look at canopy flight dynamics. He questions everything, takes nothing for granted. The commonly accepted "rule" for salvaging a blown landing approach by first leveling your canopy is wrong and he shows why. All that being said Brian could benefit from his own advice. He has broken more bones than anyone I know doing stuff that he teaches others to avoid. If you get a chance to catch him speaking, don't miss it. No matter how much you think you know about canopy flying, you will learn something new.

2018 marks half a century as a skydiver. Trained by the late Perry Stevens D-51 in 1968.