| Topic: | Re:Re:Re:Re:Proposal for Refinement of distinction between modeling and applications |
| Posted by: | Lewis Walker |
| Date/Time: | 03/01/2003 21:18:14 |
|
Hi Patrick, As I see your model it seems to me that level 2 and 3 are actually at the same level of application. Sure there are some differences, but not enough for 3 to be at a higher logical level than 2. They are both conscious mind applications of tools of modelling, some of which (if not all) have been created consciously. Modelling the modeller in this way (your 3) is the same logical level as the modeller modelling the model (your 2). Level 3 would appear to me to be the unconscious uptake by the modeller prior to conscious interpretation and application, as per Whispering. This is a more inclusive set which subsumes those below it in a holarchy. Of course Level 4 would then have to be something like "Universal Mind" whatever the hell that is! As I see it level 2 competencies are the kind of area that someone like Steve Andreas excels in. That is, using already modelled tools such as submodalities to further explore areas such as self-concept and create useful patterning from that. He clearly however does not do an unconscious uptake from his model first. I think that tools such as metaprograms are consciously developed and are useful in a more effective way than the Myers-Briggs which it seems to me has influenced their development and usage considerably. Iwill be interested to see John and Carmen's responses to your proposals. Regards, Lewis. |