Topic: | Re:Re:Re:Re:Re:Re:Re:Re:Re:Examples of f2 transforms |
Posted by: | GSM |
Date/Time: | 14/01/2004 11:38:33 |
John, You wrote: 'My argument with him is -- if you want to call it an argument -- is that the sensory modes clearly have pretty much the same, if not more, of a warping effect on what comes through them.' I think the point with f2 transforms is that they are at least 'one step' removed from the sensory experience and type of referants from which they were derived. So a word 'tree' is not the see, hear, feel aspects that we have of a tree. A map is not comprised of the the roads we see and drive along. A music manuscript is not our fingers playing the piano and the music we hear. A recipe is the not the actual meal we cook and eat. Beliefs in terms of complex-equivalences and cause-effect relationships are not the actual see, hear and feel experiences around us. There is the difference between f2 and FA. f2 is a way of thinking about (a guide to our VAK experiences) what we see, hear and feel - but is not what we see, hear and feel. John Grinder please correct me if I'm wrong in this regard. Best, GSM |