Topic: | Re:Re:Re:Re:Congruency and modeling |
Posted by: | Lewis Walker |
Date/Time: | 11/01/2003 19:17:55 |
Hi John, I found myself in an almost incredulous state when I read the following: "to have integrity, a person must demonstrate that he or she has a choice when unexpectedly and forcefully confronted with a stimulus that typically activates a synesthesia circuit. In this sense, achieving choice implies having the option of responding using the typical synesthesia circuitry or operating with an interrupted circuit so as to select your response, down to and including the immediate physiological reactions." Incredulous in the sense that it seems to me you are suggesting an "in the moment" ability to change the response to a hard-wired synesthesia. Up until this moment I had thought that such synesthesias (assuming "negative") required the attentions of some sort of anchoring format (collapsing, change personal history, re-imprinting...)so that NEXT time you met the stimulus the response could be different. How does one go about operating with an interrupted circuit and selecting a response "in the moment"? You also wrote: "there is a need to develop in an explicit form transition strategies for moving cleanly from one state to the next....especially at high speed." I have no idea how to go about this! It seems you are suggesting, as a minimum, an exit strategy, a decision strategy (choice of next state) and an entry strategy. This obviously is operating unconsciously at high speed to allow you to be fully congruent in the next context. How do you do that? (and the answer may well be ...you'll find out when you do the training...!) Best wishes, Lewis. |
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 |