| Topic: | Re:Re:Re:Re:Re:Re:Re:Re:Re:Examples of f2 transforms |
| Posted by: | nj |
| Date/Time: | 13/01/2004 21:55:27 |
|
Hello, JS. You wrote: 1.1 "45 years of self observation has taught me that what is usually called internal dialog is not just a continuous babble going on in my head, but a number of movies playing at the same time, some that have sound and self-talk involved, and some that don't." which I interpret to state that: 1.2 John Grinder shares the logical type he terms "internal dialog" with most other people, and that logical type's name refers to a number of movies that are playing at the same time, some that have sound and self-talk involved, and some that don't, during a person's mental representation experience. If you agree with my interpretation [1.2], then my question is: 1.3 How do you know that Dr. Grinder shares the logical type "internal dialog" with most other people? As part of my evaluation of your answer to my question [1.3], I will assume that: 1.4 Dr. Grinder might believe that he shares the logical type named "internal dialog" with most of his readers, when in fact his logical type that he names"internal dialog" is very different. 1.5 If Dr. Grinder believes that he shares the logical type named "internal dialog" with most others, while he in fact doesn't, then he might not have listed the objects of that logical type for others to check their "internal dialog" logical type against. If you think that: 2.1 Dr. Grinder considers "internal dialog" to include what he experiences as internal auditory discussion. then my question is: 2.2 Why do you think that he should have refered to other phenomena, internal movies with sounds and images, than the phenomena of his logical type "internal dialog"? to evaluate your answer to question [2.2], I will assume that: 2.3 Dr. Grinder wants to do what he names "silencing internal dialog", for good and adequate reasons, reasons verified by his experiential work as an NLP trainer and user. 2.4 You do not have experiential basis to contradict Dr. Grinder or Ms. Bostic St. Clair's use for a state of silenced internal dialog, because you might not experientially know how that state is used, or what that state is. If you think that: 3.1 Dr. Grinder meant his use of the term 'internal dialog' literally, AND he was not casual or inconsistent in his use of the term 'internal dialog'. than my question is: 3.2 How do you know that? To evaluate your answers to all my questions, and particularly question [3.2], if you reply, I will assume that: 3.3 Dr. Grinder is aware of his internal movies, and their connections, if any, with his internal dialog. 3.4 Dr. Grinder has a logical type for internal movies in the context of altering or reducing experiences of his logical type "F2 experience", but one that he may not have adequately named or described to ... us. -nj |