| Topic: | Re:Re:Re:Re:Re:Re:Re:Re:Re:Re:Re:Re:Re:Re:Re:Re:Re:NLP Changework vs. Therapy and Coaching |
| Posted by: | nj |
| Date/Time: | 29/04/2003 02:41:00 |
|
Hello, Mr. Schertzer. 1. You wrote, "I guess what I'd like to know is how (specifically) the following responses relate to my posts or Dr. Grinder's, and, if so, how they equate? 'How damning your motivation process might be for someone who already feels compelled to produce art.' 'If you are an artist, scientist or researcher, you can create the art you want to find in the future. The future won't force you to produce art you don't want to produce.'" I don't know why you ask how the two statements equate. Are you asking if the two statements presuppose exactly the same assertions? Some scientists and researchers describe work products as if the work products are products of art. Some scientists and researchers have made comments about the aesthetic appeal of their own work products. I've heard and read the adjective terms "elegant" and "beautiful" used to describe the work products of scientists, researchers, engineers, and artists. I don't think the criteria termed "aesthetic appeal" and "functionality" are the same logical type of criteria useful to decide if work products are valuable or important, but I won't deny that some researchers could think so. So some researchers could have described the value and importance of their work by using adjectives like "elegant" or "beautiful". A scientist is a researcher who applies a particular method during scientific work. Not all researchers apply scientific methods during research work. I consider a researcher to perform work of a higher logical level than a scientist performs. So in this post I might have refered to scientists and researchers by the term "researcher". For my intentions with this post, my intended meaning communicated with the tokens "scientist" and "researcher" belong to the same logical type. To answer your question of how the responses you quoted relate to your post 23/04/2003 17:30:32 and Dr. Grinder's post 24/04/2003 06:34:32 would take writing I don't want to perform. You could reread my posts to this thread and offer me some interpretation(s) of what I was thinking. When you reread my posts, you could check if I assumed that the work products or work processes of different endeavors were of the same logical type. You might find a logical error in what I intended to communicate. I have a question for you, Mr. Schertzer. What effects do you think a Science Of Representations might have on future artists? -nj |