|
|
 20 Apr 2008 @ 10:57, by deepwater. Communication
Reflections on how the individual system responds to being confronted by its own actual state of being and the physical, mental and emotional manifestations of its resistance to becoming aware of and clarifying its understanding of the true nature of its situation (its relationship with reality), and the specific therapies best suited to address them.
A better way to view the images included here is to visit my blog,
[link]
Thanks to Mortimer we can now see these diagrams in the comments!
Gratitude for the help bro. More >
|
|
|
|
8 Apr 2008 @ 06:31, by deepwater. Communication
After
much reading, research and web-surfing it has become apparent that
many people are operating with serious limitations upon their
cognitive equipment, of which for the most part they seem oblivious.
There
is, unbeknownst to many of us, an enormous amount of conditioning
that we bring with us in our most vital piece of equipment....the
mind.
Without
the awareness that our minds are operating in ways that can distort
or corrupt information, we are powerless to apprehend the truth of
the subjects we seek to understand.
This
situation can lead to all manner of unnecessary miscommunications and
frustrations which can hamper even the most well intentioned
conversation.
Even
the suggestion that ones thought process may require adjustment can
lead to episodes of denial and reactionary behaviour that seriously
undermine even the best effort to communicate around any other
issues.
There
are multiple, inter penetrating layers of confusion, distortion and
pre conceptions which form and reinforce each other as a result of
the subtle nature of this conditioning of the cognitive lens of the
mind.
It is
worth bearing in mind at this point that each of us will find
ourselves in this predicament at some stage and that we are all
fundamentally innocent of any ill intention, it is just that we are
unknowingly subjected to a proliferation of conditioning influences
over which we have no control.
Fortunately
there are many tried and proven methods by which to become aware of
and overcome these conditioning influences with a willingness to
participate being all that is required.
Given
that each of us has a unique, individual point of conscious
perception, then each of us will require a subtly different method of
approach to the clarification of their cognitive equipment. However,
clarifying the mind is the common and necessary goal for each of us
who seeks to operate effectively within the context of the best
possible outcome for all.
If we
can overcome the general tendency to consider our own self interest
as more important than the good of the whole, then we can begin to
work in the direction of manifesting a situation in which the greater
good can be served and the individuals who comprise that whole also
benefit as a result.
What I
am endeavouring to accomplish with this discussion is to suggest many
and various ways that individuals can approach the subject of mental
clarity, each to their own, with the hope that this better enables us
to reach a holistic understanding of the Nature of Reality, and a
greater ability to function in ways that foster right human relations
and greater peace and harmony between members of the human race.
More >
|
|
|
|
22 Feb 2008 @ 16:36, by ming. Communication
Blogging is a bit too much like publishing. I mean, writing articles to be published.
Of course different people use the medium differently. Some people still just write about what their dog had for breakfast. But, with few exceptions, the blogs that are interesting to read consist more or less of articles that people write.
But that makes it less fun and useful to write. Writing an article is for me connected with deadlines and trying to match the expectations of the audience. Where I'd rather write a weblog for me, and then maybe share it with others as a second thought.
So, what happened to the idea of "log" or "logging"?
See, a log is really something more directed. One might keep a log if one is working on something. A record of one's progress, one's discoveries.
Like, a learning log, or a research log. One is working on finding something out, solving certain problems, arriving at certain goals. And one keeps a record, which charts the path, maybe for others to learn from too.
That's not how I use a weblog. I'd like it to be. But that would require a re-framing.
In that case one would set a theme or a goal. It is quite possible that the process would have an end, as one either reaches the goal, or one no longer is interested in the subject. So, one would open up new logs, keep them going as one is continuing exploring the subject matter, and one closes them when one is done.
That doesn't work so well with the way we currently use blogs. I'd expect a person to have preferrably one blog, which I can subscribe to in my blog aggregator. If they have several, it is a little annoying, and if they close them down and start new ones, it would be more annoying.
Regular blogs have categories or tags. Which of course can be used for particular threads. But typically one tries to subscribe to everything one person is blogging, and you might get a mix of postings on very different postings. Which is why most blog owners feel obliged to keep a certain uniform atmosphere in all the postings, as if it were a magazine, with a certain style and theme.
But, say I wanted to log several different of my interests and activities. Like me right now, I'm interested in photography, rollerskating, genealogy, Ruby on Rails programming, plus a whole bunch of other things I'd be more likely to write about on my blog. But, say I wanted to have a log of my experiences as a novice photographer. There are lots of blogs like that, where people share their photos, talk about their equipment, etc. Just like there are lots of blogs about genealogy, where people talk about their research, resources they find, etc. But if I mixed all of that together, it might not be fun for readers who aren't interested in those things, who just want to see me write about alternate dimensions or new civilizations or something. So, would I have a different blog for each? That would be quite feasible, if they were ongoing interests. Less so if they were more short lived. I don't think it is very comfortable to maintain several separate blogs, though.
From the user perspective, the author, the logger, me, I'd really want just one interface for an assortment of logging subjects. I wouldn't want to log into a different account for each one. Rather, one interface where I freely can add new subjects, and add log entries for any of them. Some of those subjects would be just for me, others I would choose to share, and maybe make public.
Of course, those logs that one chose to make public could be channeled into what appeared as different blogs for the rest of the world. But I wouldn't experience it like that. I'd just log stuff in my logging application.
And it would open the door to a different way of presenting or interacting with such logs. I mean, if each one logs the evolution certain subject, which maybe now is done, I'd like better ways of dealing with that sequence of events as a whole. It wouldn't just be an abandoned blog, but simply the log of a finished project.
People do put stuff like that on their blogs, but it might be hidden between lots of other things. A log of remodeling my garage is a perfectly valid and complete project. Doesn't have to either hide between posts about totally different things, or be a very short lived and abandoned blog.
If one keeps a log of actually going somewhere, trying to accomplish something, it also invites additional functionality to give the full picture. A project or a quest isn't just a series of equally important log entries. Some things will be more important than others. There will be key discoveries, reevaluation of priorities, ups and downs, a growing body of knowledge.
As one example, one might have a wiki-like area, functioning in parallel with the log, in which one puts the more permanent record of what one has learned or accomplished, the subject matter of the log. And maybe its versions would be synchronized with the log, so that one could see the evolution of the more permanent part. At the point of that particular log entry, how did the list of links look? How did it look the week after that?
It ties in with a project I'd like to do, but which I haven't carved out enough time for yet, which is to structure environments for particular purposes. Dynamic webpages that are structured so as to support what one is trying to do. A brainstorm takes a different structure and different tools than does a research project or the process of starting a new company. Each one involves some combination of logs, notes, permanent records, links, lists, outlines, ordering, sequencing, randomity, and more. If you don't use an environment that supports what you want to do, it doesn't work so well. A blog or a wiki or a forum do different things and inspire different kinds of behavior. The right constellation of interdependent tools can accomplish something more precise in a more appropriate manner.
This post here could be said to be a log entry in the project of building such things. But putting it right here doesn't help me much in keeping a record of my progress. More >
|
|
|
|
9 Jan 2008 @ 22:45, by ming. Communication
Somebody asked for permission to use my old graphic here in a training course for field epidemiologists in Kazakhstan. Which is kind of funny. And I don't remember if I ever posted it here, so why not. Below is the article that goes with it. Although I thought it was kind of well hidden on the net, I do get these kinds of requests from time to time. ... And now that I notice it, this is actually the #1 "I feel lucky" entry for "Communication Model" in Google, which I can't complain about.
There is always a sender and a receiver in communication. At least there is an intended receiver. In the diagram above A is the sender, B is the receiver.
A and B have different personal realities. They each have their own world formed by their experiences, their perceptions, their ideas, etc. They will perceive, experience, and interpret things differently. The same event will always be perceived a little different by each of two people.
For the consideration to communicate to appear at all there must be some kind of shared space. The participants must have some kind of concept of each other's location and of a possible channel of communication existing between them. They must agree sufficiently on these to agree that communication is taking place.
The sender will have some kind of meaning she wishes to convey to the receiver. It might not be conscious knowledge, it might be a sub-conscious wish for communication. What is desired to be communicated would be some kind of idea, perception, feeling, or datum. It will be a part of her reality that she wishes to send to somebody else.
Something will be transmitted across a distance in the shared space. We can regard it as an object, a particle, or as a wave, or flow. It might be sound vibrations, rays of light, words, pieces of paper, cannon balls, body language, telepathy, or whatever.
Between humans there will be several layers of the message being sent. There will often be a verbal portion, something that is being expressed in language, spoken or written. And there is also a non-verbal portion, covering everything else, most notably body language. Sometimes the verbal and non-verbal messages don't agree with each other, they are incongruent. If they do agree we say that they are congruent.
Based on what the receiver perceives, and based on her interpretation of the verbal and non-verbal input, she will form a concept in her reality of what the meaning of the message is. It will mean something to her. It might or might not be what was intended by the sender. In successful communication the perceived message will approximate the intended message to the sender's satisfaction. However, the sender will only know that if she receives a message back that is congruent with what she had in mind.
One can never take for granted that the receiver has the same reality as the sender. One can never take for granted that the receiver will interpret the message the same way as the sender intended it.
Communication is not an absolute finite thing. Particularly, communication with language is always vague and misleading to some extent.
If A says a word, like for example "trust", she has a certain meaning attached to it in her reality. She has had certain experiences with the subject matter, she has made certain conclusions about it, and she has certain perceptual filters concerning it. The meaning of the word is all the stuff it is associated with in her reality. However, because words also have nice, finite dictionary definitions it might appear as if the word is something very precise.
What travels across the communication channel is NOT all the associations that A made about the word, and NOT the intentions she had with using it. What crosses the distance is symbols.
When B hears the word or sentence she will interpret it based on her experiences, perceptions, and opinions. She might supplement the verbal information with non-verbal information such as body language. She might also hallucinate what it is supposed to mean. In one way or another she arrives at the meaning she assigns to it.
There is wide agreement, at least within a particular culture, on what common physical objects are. When you say "car" or "refrigerator" most people will have an understanding very close to yours. But if you say words for abstract qualities, like "trust", "love", "right", "wrong", and so forth, then there is wide variance on what people mean.
To have effective communication one needs to take all the factors into consideration. The different realities, the space the communication takes place in, verbal as well as non-verbal messages, the intended meaning versus the perceived meaning. More >
|
|
|
|
  26 Oct 2007 @ 08:09, by feecor. Communication
HERE SOME QUESTIONS:
Is there a “store of knowledge" which we learn about, and jointly explore, share, and apply ??? - see the context, the frame, and the why we should learn? and what??
Should we use Signs, and Symbols, Images, Analogies, Maps and Models and Puzzles to help us digest and share what we know about the world?
See here the http://www.zeit.de/2007/44/Kanon-Auftakt and the themes in our German ZEIT Magazin.
So how to come to shared references or "order" ? as a pile of stone is not a house or canon. How about making use of Intelligences, Minds, Reason, ? and see them as one and combine them - because it is hard and misleading to be one-eyed and self centered only, leaving levels, times and others "out of the picure" instead of comming "down to Earth"?
Pls. see also below regarding grounding and purpose and responsibilities the question to Al Gore about "up to the moon" ? or "down to Earth" !
I hope the texts and references in the "corpus" below make sense and help us to make what we can know more real and shareable. More >
|
|
|
|
 10 Sep 2007 @ 02:45, by jhs. Communication
Just a few words on some words that have been usurped by various parties in order to confuse or diffuse the clarity of people's thinking:
Originally, pronoia denotes the knowledge (noia) of the inner working and the way things are going, in Hermetic Ifa the knowledge of the Odu, the 256 fractal components of the Multiverse.
Epinoia denoted in gnostics the 'knowledge of the center', resulting in the 'pleroma' effect or, if super-charged with the Girapoli process in a peakstate specific to the polarity invoked.
Paranoia originally was the 'knowledge of the beyond'. Of course, for any modern scientist this would equal craziness and so it has been coined successfully. Congratulations to all those twisters for rendering a sacred term to being the equivalent of lunatic.
Morphonoia, much less known, is the knowledge of the Multiverse via its intrinsic structures, some say 'sacred geometry' as if there would be also an 'non-sacred geometry'. In Hermetic Ifa we explore/exploit this knowledge systematically via Skywork.
I admire Wikipedia, but the terms above one got messed up badly, so don't even bother to look it up there unless you're psychiatrist (that means literally a 'sad soul', hmm) in need of a justification to prescribe some more pills for some more invented 'disorders'...
In a nutshell, if you'd call me 'paranoic', I certainly would feel honored. More >
|
|
|
|
31 Jul 2007 @ 18:07, by swanny. Communication
Humanity Sucks
July 31, 2007
Tuesday
Earth
HUMANITY SUCKS!
Well it is perhaps a given fact and truism that we must accept, that humanity or we suck. So having established this common fact. Do we want to do anything about it. We could try to change or improve ourselves or maybe just kill ourselves off, which we seem at times to be quite far along the way in doing.
We suck! Well gosh darn why didn't someone tell us. No one knew? Well okay we can qualify that a little I guess that most of us suck or the ones the run the show suck and cause us to suck in the process. The fact is that the majority of us would seem to suck and as a case in point are sucking the life blood as we know it, out of the planet as we know it. Yes things change and yes few have sustainable principles and the ones that do we have a tendancy to cruxify or assacinate which just demos our prevalance of suckiness further. And yes we adapt quite well as we seem to have adapted right into suckhood to show our suckiness?
Well s there we have it then. Humanity sucks. We suck. Don't say you didn't know. But knowing that what does that change? Well if you want to change you have to identify the offensive aspect and then take steps or measures to address if some are so inclined. Do I suck? Well I'm sort of human so I guess yes I do suck. Do you suck, well you'll have to be the judge of that but offhand chances are you do, as studies indicate that only 1 % of humanity is operating at potential.
So we've got about 7,777,777,777 suckers and 1% actually natural people.
Anyway... so what to do?
Well I guess accept our suckiness is the first step and perhaps try to define what unsuckiness is. What the actual right way of living is. Well no I don't know because I have a disability of sorts and 99% don't know so could the 1 % that do know raise their hands and help us out here?
And how or who are these "natural folks"?
Well there was Moses, and Buddha and jesus and Lincoln and Luther and Kenndey
and Billie Hughes and Mother Teresa and Joan of Arc and King Alfred and well Mahatma Gandhi and well theres a few but theyre all dead...
hmmmm?
Alfred More >
|
|
|
|
 10 Jun 2007 @ 13:10, by ming. Communication
So, since last week I'm hooked on microblogging. I don't know if "microblogging" is the best word for the phonomenon, but it will do, I guess. It is sort of a mix between chat, instant messaging, blogging, and widgets for showing one's current status or location in one's sidebar. I'm in jaiku and twitter, accessing both through twitku.
One posts maybe a couple or a handful of one-liners per day. Doesn't really take any time. Although it is a bit addictive to glance at the page often, to see what people are saying. But not that much different from glancing out the window once in a while to see what weather it is. It is sort of a peripheral thing. You notice that somebody's waiting for their luggage in an airport somewhere, somebody else is preparing a gourmet meal, a third is thinking about some important question, and a fourth got a sunburn from being outside. Nothing necessarily important, certainly mostly not anything that would warrant an e-mail or a phonecall or a blog post. But it keeps people on your radar screen. You don't have to respond, but you can, if something somehow rings a bell. It doesn't have to be your close friends either. It is surprisingly meaningful, even if it is people you've never met, but you have some kind of interest in what they're up to.
It occurs to me that it is a bit like Dialogue according to David Bohm. Oh, it is more casual, but there are some interesting correlations.
In this context "dialogue" is used about a particular type of group interaction. A group of people sit down in a circle. Initially they might be quiet. When somebody feels like speaking, they speak, and everybody listens. Nobody needs to answer it, and nobody would argue. But if you're inspired to say something else, you do so. It might have been inspired by what somebody else said, or it might not. Everybody's sort of speaking to the space in the middle of the circle. We might have different ideas about what the subject is, but we're speaking into the same space. And a dialogue develops. It will be about something, and it might not be clear in advance what exactly it will be about. It will not be about one thing, and different people go off in different directions, but there will also be a certain coherence and evolution in it.
In a microblogging space, some of these things happen too. I watch a screen where a few dozen people say something once in a while, and I can say something too. Interestingly, they aren't all watching the same screen, as they have different groups of friends than I do, although they overlap. They aren't all there at the same time either, and they aren't all paying attention. But once in a while somebody feels like saying something. That will be something that relates to what's going on for them at the moment, and it will also be something they feel like saying into that fuzzy kind of space, usually without saying it to anybody in particular. They typically don't expect a response either. Other people do the same. Whether you directly comment on anything else or not, what you say will necessarily be colored a bit by what you see already on the screen.
I have tried in the past to deliberately create dialogue spaces online, usually in the form of a chat room, where I carefully would try to explain the rules. You speak into the common space, you say your truth, you don't argue or defend your opinions. It isn't a discussion, not an argument to win, rather a shared inquiry. No rules, really, other than that you shouldn't screw it up. People can say whatever they feel like saying, as long as it is what they perceive and what they feel needs to be said, and not just an attempt of making somebody else wrong. And I've found that it was very difficult to do online. Easier to do in person, where one has non-verbal queues, etc, and one knows whether one is on the same page or not. But a chat room easily develops into something else.
So, ironically, this kind of microblogging flow is a good deal more like a dialogue than what one would tend to get if one tried to create a good dialogue space online. Even though it isn't at all trying to be any space for deep inquiry or anything like that. It is not very profound that somebody is on their way to the market, or they're playing with some new website or something. But the atmosphere created is a shared space, where people say what they experience, in little soundbites, without fluff, without much need to be posturing or defending anything, and sometimes one perceives things together. And there's some kind of intangible thread that goes through that.
Although it isn't clear where that might take us, it is entirely possible that this might be fertile ground for some kind of collective intelligence to emerge in. More >
|
|
|
|
2 Apr 2007 @ 21:10, by ming. Communication
Scott Adams on Dilbert Blog:I’m reading a great book called “Influence: Science and Practice” by Robert B. Cialdini. It’s full of research and anecdotes about how to influence people. It’s a real eye-opener.
One of the most potent forms of persuasion has to do with people’s innate need to be consistent. Studies show that people will ignore logic and information to be consistent. (In other words, we are moist robots.) According to the research, humans are hardwired for consistency over reason. You already knew that: People don’t switch political parties or religions easily. What you didn’t know is how quickly and easily a manipulator can lock someone into a position.
For example, researchers asked people to write essays in support of a random point of view they did not hold. Months later, when surveyed, the majority held the opinion they wrote about, regardless of the topic. Once a person commits an opinion to writing – even an opinion he does not hold – it soon becomes his actual opinion. Not every time, but MOST of the time. The people in these experiments weren’t exposed to new information before writing their contrived opinions. All they did was sit down and write an opinion they didn’t actually have, and months later it became their actual opinion. The experiment worked whether the volunteers were writing the pro or the con position on the random topic.
Most of the truly stupid things done in this world have to do with this consistency principle. For example, once you define yourself as a loyal citizen of Elbonia, you do whatever the King of Elbonia tells you to do, no matter how stupid that is. And your mind invents reasons as to why dying is a perfectly good life strategy. It's an odd thing. We bend over backwards to appear to be normal and consistent and logical, and in doing so, we tend to become easy to manipulate, and we'll do crazy things without even blinking. More >
|
|
|
|
 8 Aug 2006 @ 05:40, by freo7. Communication
At Love Ourselves Island We want to help people...starting with our online friends, friends of friends and families because we do not want our children or grandchildren to go through what we have endured...because deep inside we have had pain and emotional wounds which *we inflicted deeply within ourselves by NOT loving ourselves unconditionally.
It can be painful to learn to love yourself...
Speaking the truth from your heart and soul takes the courage and strength of a WARRIOR.
We found out we have more courage and strength than we know what to do with... AND we all have it...we just have to find it within ourselves!
"My experience has shown me that LOVING OURSELVES is square #1 in the journey to physical emotional mental and spiritual health which is the legacy I choose to pass on every moment that I am with my friends and family. I am now a strong and honest CLYDESDALE as I love myself fully & unconditionally!"
- GA Founder LOVING OURSELVES ISLAND
*There is no cost to belong to this forum and it is PRICELESS when you get to help & be helped by others who also DESIRE to love themselves unconditionally.
*Welcome to our Island! More >
|
|
Page: 1 2 3 4 5 6 Older entries >> |
|
