?

Log in

No account? Create an account

Previous Entry Share Next Entry
Моделируем "meta experience" (1) Онтология "meta experience"
И
metanymous wrote in metapractice
http://realpeoplepress.com/blog/what-is-the-experience-of-meta?utm_source=feedburner&utm_medium=email&utm_campaign=Feed%3A+SteveAndreasNlpBlog+%28Steve+Andreas%27+NLP+Blog%29

What is the Experience of “Meta”?

Posted by: Steve Andreas in: Articles

What is the Experience of “Meta”?
A dialogue between Steve Andreas and Michael Hall

Some time ago, I (Steve) made the following general proposal to Michael for a dialogue to exemplify a respectful exchange of views in the field:

In the past, you and I have had significantly different fundamental understandings on a number of issues that could be the basis for a public dialogue between us, such as:

1. Whether or not it is important to distinguish between two uses of “meta” to refer to large scope (“the big picture”) or general category — a topic I explored at length in my Six Blind Elephants books.

2. My description of your concept of “layering” as the reverse of nested categories in the logical levels of naïve set theory, as set forth in Elephants, pp. 114-116

3. Whether Submodalities are meta or subdivisions of scopes of experience.

Of course you may have changed your views on one or more of these issues, or you might prefer to choose others. Assuming we could agree on an interesting issue on which we have differing views, I have some fairly specific ideas about how to create a respectful dialogue to avoid misunderstandings, side issues, etc.

Privately one of us would write up a position statement on the selected issue, and the other would respond to it in writing. Then we would each edit or revise our positions until we are both satisfied that we have had an opportunity to present our position fully, respond fully to the other’s position, and that we each understand the other clearly, to avoid problems like, “Well, that’s not what I said,” or “That’s what I said, but what I really meant was—” etc. This would also be an opportunity for each of us to notice any “ad hominem” arguments or other logical fallacies, and remove them.

After we are both satisfied with the result of this process, we would jointly offer this to the public (the summit group, your and my blogs) and invite comments from others.

I think this could serve as an example of working toward clarification or resolution of important issues that currently divide or confuse the field. Please let me know if you might be interested in joining with me on this, and/or if you have other views on how we could better accomplish the goal of presenting contrasting views in a way that could provide a productive dialogue.

Michael agreed in principle, and sent me a number of different extensive position statements on the meaning of “Meta,” and I take this as an invitation to focus on this topic. I prefer to begin with a more concise statement for our dialogue, but other writing projects (and my struggle with greatly diminished energy due to Parkinson’s disease) have delayed me until now. ... http://realpeoplepress.com/blog/what-is-the-experience-of-meta?utm_source=feedburner&utm_medium=email&utm_campaign=Feed%3A+SteveAndreasNlpBlog+%28Steve+Andreas%27+NLP+Blog%29



Мета опыт

http://ljsearch.metapractice.ru/



  • 1
The Greek term “meta” literally refers to something “above, beyond, or about” something else. As a relational term meta speaks about a thought about a thought, a feeling about a feeling. In meta-communication we communicate about our communications. In meta-linguistics, we use and/or develop language so we can talk about our language.

“The ability to communicate about communication, to comment upon the meaningful actions of oneself and others, is essential for successful social intercourse. In any normal relationship there is a constant interchange of meta-communicative messages such as ‘What do you mean?’ or ‘Why did you do that?’ or ‘Are you kidding me?’ and so on.” (Bateson, 1972, p. 215)

In the NLP Strategy Model, the meta-move is a move along a set of representational steps in which a person as it were “steps back” or “reflects back” onto a previous step or response and responds to that response. (NLP, Volume I, pp. 90, 91-92, 96, 109-110)

Steve has identified three definitions of “meta” and detailed them with some thought experiments. I fully agree with those and then see several additional definitions of “meta,” especially the role of self-reflexive consciousness. My guess is that this is the source of our differences, hence the emphasis (below) on self-reflexivity.

Relying on both Korzybski and Bateson, I have relied on and run with the idea that Korzybski put forward about “the theory of multi-ordinality” as the source of so many human disasters. “Going meta” for him meant that the ability for an infinite regress of responses explained how the same word at different logical levels would have very different meanings, his introduction of multi-ordinality as an important linguistic distinction.

From that I developed the Meta-States Model as one expression of delving into a theory of multi-ordinality. When Richard Bandler asked me to review the history of the Meta-Model and write a book that we would jointly author, I added “multi-ordinality” to the extended Meta-Model (Communication Magic, 2001).

«Мета» от Бейтсона алгоритм извлечения диалоговой инф

“The ability to communicate about communication, to comment upon the meaningful actions of oneself and others, is essential for successful social intercourse. In any normal relationship there is a constant interchange of meta-communicative messages such as ‘What do you mean?’ or ‘Why did you do that?’ or ‘Are you kidding me?’ and so on.” (Bateson, 1972, p. 215)
«Способность общаться об общении, комментировать значимые действия самого себя и других людей имеет важное значение для успешного социального общения. В любых нормальных отношениях существует постоянный обмен мета-коммуникативными сообщениями, такими как «Что вы имеете в виду?» Или «Зачем вы это сделали?» Или «Вы издеваетесь надо мной?» И т. Д. »(Bateson, 1972, стр. 215)


С БиГов пошло обрезать Коржибского:

«Карта не является территорией, но ее полезность определяется структурным подобием с территорией».
http://metapractice.livejournal.com/296407.html


Точно так, что вкладывает в «мета» Бейтсон следует извлекать, например, из его «Металогов», а не из дурацких цитат Холла:

Металог
http://ljsearch.metapractice.ru/?_utf8=%E2%9C%93&q=%D0%BC%D0%B5%D1%82%D0%B0%D0%BB%D0%BE%D0%B3&mode=exact&in=titles&journals%5B%5D=metapractice&user=


Бейтсонианское «мета» есть ещё и развитый/ распространённый алгоритм извлечения диалоговой информации.

  • 1