|Topic:||Re:Re:Congruency and modeling|
|Posted by:||Martin Messier|
I agree with you that we tend to impose a value judgment upon "congruence" and "incongruence." The more we discuss it and I ponder it, the more I perceive congruence as a resource or a tool that we can leverage, and the same with incongruence.
In "Turtles All the Way Down," John discusses his ability to cleanly shift states from the task of doing his personal work to -- if I remember correctly -- caring for the horses on the farm. Wouldn't this be a great example of mastery of congruence/incongruence? He has his resources aligned towards the performance of a task, he successfully disaligns to change states, and realigns into another "configuration" appropriate to the context of taking care of the horses.
In talking with my brother about our moments of congruence, we discerned that they involve a close-to-total suspension of our filters. In those moments, we have no beliefs, no meta-thinking, no language. It's almost entirely pure doing without any thinking. Auto-pilot, and perfect execution. I hallucinate that this matches the experience of women who, in extreme situations, lift cars to save their child. This implies a full alignment of resources for the execution of the task, and a complete suspension of filters.
I also intuit the concepts of "commitment" and "contextual markers" associated to congruence. Commitment in the sense of committing your resources. Contextual markers in the sense of knowing where to begin and close the session. Again, John and Judith address these concepts in "Turtles," tied to Viola Léger, a French Canadian actress who played the character of La Sagouine. She could only congruently play the character because she committed all of herself to becoming La Sagouine, and because she had cues (anchors) to enter and break state. But while she was in state, Viola Léger and her filers literally ceased to exist.
My biggest question at this point is: how can I or anyone trigger congruence at will? Does this require the engineering of states for each individual context, or can we come up with a meta-pattern that would leverage unconscious resources by design, and overarch any context?
I must confess, I still haven't read Whispering, and I will as soon as I return to North America. I have the feeling that John and Carmen have a ton of answers in there and that it's just a matter of getting multiple descriptions at this point to lock in the understanding.
Rock on, folks!
|Topic||Date Posted||Posted By|
|Congruency and modeling||09/01/2003 04:12:48||Martin Messier|
|Re:Congruency and modeling||09/01/2003 13:12:51||Lewis Walker|
|Re:Re:Congruency and modeling||09/01/2003 14:59:23||Zhi Zhi Chien|
|Re:Re:Congruency and modeling||09/01/2003 15:09:14||Martin Messier|
|Re:Re:Re:Congruency and modeling||11/01/2003 17:44:40||John Grinder|
|Re:Re:Re:Re:Congruency and modeling||11/01/2003 19:17:55||Lewis Walker|
|Re:Re:Re:Re:Re:Congruency and modeling||12/01/2003 06:28:38||John Grinder|
|Re:Re:Re:Re:Re:Re:Congruency and modeling||12/01/2003 10:55:13||Lewis Walker|
|Re:Re:Re:Re:Re:Re:Re:Congruency and modeling||12/01/2003 17:48:59||John Grinder|
|Re:Re:Re:Re:Re:Re:Re:Re:Congruency and modeling||13/01/2003 20:52:07||Lewis Walker|
|Stalking||15/01/2003 23:25:34||Lars Ejstrup Gredal|
|Re:Stalking||16/01/2003 15:21:00||Lewis Walker|
|Re:Re:Stalking||16/01/2003 23:04:25||Lars Ejstrup Gredal|
|Re:Re:Re:Stalking||17/01/2003 16:47:37||Lewis Walker|
|Re:Re:Re:Re:Stalking||17/01/2003 19:21:11||John Grinder|
|Re:Re:Re:Re:Re:Stalking||17/01/2003 22:24:41||Lewis Walker|
|process/content||18/01/2003 00:15:36||Lars Ejstrup Gredal|
|Re:process/content||18/01/2003 18:58:51||John Grinder|
|Clean third||19/01/2003 00:01:17||Lars Ejstrup Gredal|
|Re:Clean third||19/01/2003 14:01:35||Jon Edwards|