?

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

Мета сенсорика не является сенсорикой

One kind of meta is changing the point of view to some other point in space than seeing out of the eyes, a pure process intervention that usually changes the content attended to. Examples are the V/K dissociation for phobias, seeing an image of your future self, as in the swish pattern, “reviewing a past behavior,” taking “other” or “observer” perceptual position, etc.
A second kind of meta is changing the categorization of an experience. The new category could be at the same logical level of abstraction, or could be at a more specific or more general level. Changing a category is not a pure process intervention, because it introduces the content contained in the new category. Examples are “redescription,” content reframing, eliciting the positive intent of a troublesome behavior, any negation, any emotional response, etc.
A third kind of meta is viewing an experience while changing only the scope of what is seen in space or time, a pure process intervention. Examples are “seeing the big picture,” context reframing, “seeing something in perspective,” “focusing in on what’s relevant,” etc.

Ни одно из тех разновидностей «мета», указанных в данном перечислении Стивом А.:

(1) Изменение точек зрения
(2) Изменение логического/ системного уровня
(3) Изменение «масштаба» видения

…не являются перспективными для выявления и моделирования искомого нами «переживания мета».

К слову, весь «experience called “Meta”», разговор о котором начал Стив, есть один только опыт прямого зрительного восприятия. Из построений Стива невозможно представить на что похож сенсорный опыт мета в звуковой и кинестетической модальности.
В отношении поиска метапрактика мы ищем «сенсорную мета», которая бы:

--не являлась одной сенсорной модальностью
--не являлась сенсорикой

Платоновский порядок?

--не являлась одной сенсорной модальностью
--не являлась сенсорикой


Нечто типа платоновского порядка?

При этом Анаксагор отмечает, что Нус организует элементы в порядок из беспорядка: «Все вещи были вместе: затем пришел ум и привел их в порядок»; «…[Ум] вдруг начав действовать, связал воедино все, находившееся ранее в беспорядке». Анаксагорическая концепция Нуса как движущей силы ...

  • 1