Forum Message

Topic: Re:Re:Re:Meta-model violations
Posted by: nj
Date/Time: 16/10/2003 21:24:45

Hi, GSM.

I have a suggestion for you.  My suggestion is:
(1) rather than collect ideas right now, you could share what problems you have with your hypotheses, your hypotheses about why people produce meta-model violations in their speech to you.

I think it's a challenge to:
(2) notice what motivations or inferences you ascribe, by habit or emotion, to other people.

If you find fault in your determinations about what motivates people, and what inferences you ascribe to them, then share your discussion of those faults, just like you have asked forum guests to do.

I have:
(3) evidence procedures I use to decide what someone's motives or thoughts are.

My evidence procedures for getting information about someone's:
(4) motives
(5) thoughts(inferences)
are selected according to context, and may or may not be any good.  In any case, to try to list them all to you, along with example contexts that illustrate them, would be too time-consuming, and also too personal.

I will say that, in an argument I make to myself, in which evidence I gather by these procedures form the sum of the argument premises, the argument conclusion is reached by convergent support of the conclusion. 
By convergent support, I mean:
(6) Each premise adds some support to the conclusion, and invalidation of some of the premises does not remove all weight from the conclusion.

A fault I sometimes find in how I decide that someone thought something, or had a motivation, is that I rely on scanty evidence, or a short list of premises, to form a conclusion/conviction, a conviction that I go ahead and act on.

There's a communication technique, called:
(7) perception checking

The perception-checking involves the steps:
(8) giving your communication partner a description of his problem behavior (verbal or nonverbal behavior)
(9) offering at least two interpretations of your communication partner's inferences or motives,  that you hypothesize are part of his problem behavior
(10) requesting feedback from your communication partner, feedback that contains the content of your communication partner's inferences or motives, inferences or motives that were part of his problem behavior.

When doing step (9), it helps to:
(11) offer an interpretation that you wish is true, if you will also offer other interpretations that you wish are false.


Entire Thread

TopicDate PostedPosted By
Meta-model violations16/10/2003 15:13:06GSM
     Re:Meta-model violations16/10/2003 18:26:56John Grinder
          Re:Re:Meta-model violations16/10/2003 19:05:53GSM
               Re:Re:Re:Meta-model violations16/10/2003 21:24:45nj
                    Re:Re:Re:Re:Meta-model violations17/10/2003 10:02:27nj
               Re:Re:Re:Meta-model violations16/10/2003 21:25:42Jim R
               Re:Re:Re:Meta-model violations17/10/2003 00:15:04John Grinder
                    Re:Re:Re:Re:Meta-model violations17/10/2003 02:13:07Martin Messier
                    Re:Re:Re:Re:Meta-model violations17/10/2003 11:20:39GSM
                         Re:Re:Re:Re:Re:Meta-model violations17/10/2003 21:44:14nj
               Re:Re:Re:Meta-model violations17/10/2003 22:19:37Jim R
                    Re:Re:Re:Re:Meta-model violations17/10/2003 23:35:14GSM
                         Re:Re:Re:Re:Re:Meta-model violations18/10/2003 00:04:04Ryan Nagy
                              Re:Re:Re:Re:Re:Re:Meta-model violations18/10/2003 08:15:21GSM
                         Re:Re:Re:Re:Re:Meta-model violations19/10/2003 01:31:06Jim R
                              Re:Re:Re:Re:Re:Re:Meta-model violations19/10/2003 03:45:04.
                                   Re:Re:Re:Re:Re:Re:Re:Meta-model violations19/10/2003 07:45:12Jim R
                                        Re:Re:Re:Re:Re:Re:Re:Re:Meta-model violations19/10/2003 10:06:35GSM
                                             Re:Re:Re:Re:Re:Re:Re:Re:Re:Meta-model violations19/10/2003 10:07:29GSM
                                             Re:Re:Re:Re:Re:Re:Re:Re:Re:Meta-model violations20/10/2003 01:12:26Jim R
                                                  Re:Re:Re:Re:Re:Re:Re:Re:Re:Re:Meta-model violations20/10/2003 12:03:53GSM
                                                       Re:Re:Re:Re:Re:Re:Re:Re:Re:Re:Re:Meta-model violations20/10/2003 14:35:27Jim R
                                                            Re:Re:Re:Re:Re:Re:Re:Re:Re:Re:Re:Re:Meta-model violations20/10/2003 15:06:18GSM
                                                                 Re:Re:Re:Re:Re:Re:Re:Re:Re:Re:Re:Re:Re:Meta-model violations20/10/2003 17:19:52Jim R
                                                                      Re:Re:Re:Re:Re:Re:Re:Re:Re:Re:Re:Re:Re:Re:Meta-model violations20/10/2003 17:31:00GSM
                                                            Re:Re:Re:Re:Re:Re:Re:Re:Re:Re:Re:Re:Meta-model violations20/10/2003 17:03:21.
                                                                 Re:Re:Re:Re:Re:Re:Re:Re:Re:Re:Re:Re:Re:Meta-model violations20/10/2003 21:31:26Jim R
                                                                      Re:Re:Re:Re:Re:Re:Re:Re:Re:Re:Re:Re:Re:Re:Meta-model violations20/10/2003 21:57:57.
                                                                 Re:Re:Re:Re:Re:Re:Re:Re:Re:Re:Re:Re:Re:Meta-model violations20/10/2003 23:44:17nj
                                                                      Re:Re:Re:Re:Re:Re:Re:Re:Re:Re:Re:Re:Re:Re:Meta-model violations20/10/2003 23:57:59GSM
                                                                           Re:Re:Re:Re:Re:Re:Re:Re:Re:Re:Re:Re:Re:Re:Re:Meta-model violations21/10/2003 01:50:12nj
                                        Re:Re:Re:Re:Re:Re:Re:Re:Meta-model violations19/10/2003 22:46:34.

Forum Home