Steve's Emergent Self Model

[Steve Saunders]

So, I wrote the below, intending to send it and leave, letting go being in the community, and then Phil's latest response on posts encourages me to stay a while. Anyway what is below is my stuff! It follows an emergent pattern for those who wish to anaylse it from that perspective.

Emerging Self Revelation

[Anything I project out is ultimately a message for me, but maybe it might be useful to others, too?]

Walking early morning in the countryside over the last few months has enabled me to observe phenomena that are emergent over long timescales. For example, three different herds of cows consistently are grouped tightly together (bunched) at first light, and then disperse over the full field over the next 2-3 hours. I made an assumption that this is the legacy behaviour of a prey animal; probably 4000 years since domestication in the UK and about 1000 years since even wolves disappeared from our countryside. So why would this behaviour persist for so long? I mean, cows live up to say 20 years and breed by 5 years old, so at 20 generations a century thats 800 generations since domestication. I wondered therefore as to potential causes; a) they still are a prey animal - we are their predator - we keep them to eat, for their leather and to drink their milk, b) there has been no mutation of a gene that might shift this behaviour, c) it is a transmitted, copied behaviour, d) it still serves to keep them warm at night - so is this not the case in hotter climates?, e) there has been no stimulus or advantage or need to change the behaviour, f) it reflects us.

So I therefore wondered about humans, reproducing say 5 generation per century: that would be about 100 generations since 0 CE, 200 generations since the concept of the one god arose; 250 since human-animistic gods were worshipped and 300 generations since animism was prevalent in Ancient Egypt. And humans are still very superstitious; “touch wood” has been passed on long since “science’ emerged over the last 400 years, but then the English have only been widely educated, including science for 100 years, and indeed much of science has only been learnt and spread over the last 50 years.

While Freud can be ignored nowadays, I have ever increasingly come to respect and agree with a lot of his work - especially the defence mechanisms and projection. Maybe, therefore, humans are far more primitive and instinctive than we would like to think. We only have to look at the former Yugoslavia and Cambodia to see how quickly humans can engage in the primitive.

So, humans group together in villages, cities and towns; very few live in isolation; in England say 60% of the population lives inside the M25 (lets not be pedantic its about stats). And most of the rest live in the other major cities (20), and then most of the rest in large towns (10), the most in small towns (5), then large villages (2.5), then small villages (1.25), then hamlets (0.625), then isolated farms (0.31), then hermits (0.15)! So there are instinctive, economic, procreative, intellectual, emotional, security and communication advantages to herding in humans.

Now, are humans prey or predator - or maybe a mix, do we have both in us all or are some humans predator (hunter, isolated) and other prey (herd, community). And so I wondered then about the Clean Community. Starting with David, a rebel and non-comformist in the psychological community who hunted out new ideas. Around him, at a distance, formed a new community - the clean community, now looking forward to its fist conference - a wonderful step.

And I wondered about myself, a kindred spirit with David in innovating and researching new ways. In my case a series of information and signal processing technologies before coming to human development. David told me it might be 30 years before the community would be ready to hear what I know. I did not want to believe him, but he’s probably right - he just about always was; another shared curse! Having seen myself as a lone wolf until about 40, I lived the illusion of NLP etc having enabled me to change this and become a community person. But the cap just does not fit.

So what do I know now? (the default but not only emergent pause question) Maybe genetics, cultural and upbringing environments shape the personality immutably? Maybe its all genetics (nature), or all nurture, or a bit of both? As within, so without; if the animal kingdom has predator-prey, so does humanity. The hunter, like the shaman or witch, lives more outside the community than within; what these folk do is outside the pale (Irish metaphor - my male ancestry) of the normal rules of the herd. He maybe returns or pops into visit, but neither are comfortable with his presence; its too scary for the community and too difficult for him to stay bound by the normal rules. So the decision is made, the offer is made, the psyche revealed. There’s a reason why the clean conference clashes with the wedding of a close friend.

I’m the hunter type. I know things the community does not wish to know about. I see things in the community not to my taste and also good things. I wish the community only well and good and growth and prosperity and learning and development. I may dip in and out, as a hunter does, but I accept my path to be outside. My karma is what it is.

I offer the bold few who genuinely wish to learn more about emergence to seek me out and I will facilitate them learning and acquiring of that which is requested. Yes, it might sound arrogant, but I really do completely understand EK, GM and CS, their provenance, their why’s their wherefores and the next generations of developments, such as my truth work, rescaling, story busting, clean motion (emerging moving or some similar to be revealed name).

I thank Phil wholeheartedly for staying with me on the recent interactions. Indeed I was only say to Marion yesterday that the clean motion would need a new verbalisation and delivery style (like GM, CS and EK each have their own delivery style) - and its due to one of Phil’s posts that I realised this: the poetic rhyming in response to all the “ings”. It’s clear that chanting or singing or poetic verse or some genre like that will underpin the delivery of the linguistics.

So, email me at steve@holigral.com if you’re interested in emergence; I’m going to address this privately hereafter. “So long, and thanks for all the fish!” And thank you again for letting me be present for this short duration.

And seeing the latest EK post from Phil, I'm "hanging on in there"!

with love


Steven Saunders
“Loro Riendo”

[Steve Saunders]

So, I'm still posting posts too dense; and yet this is me, my system, my way of emerging; middle-out, one-word statements grow to phrases grow to sentences grow to paragraphs grow to pages to books. So some see a book where I see a sentence. Blimey, so how ARE we going to communicate?

So, WWIL2HH?
Well, to be accepted for the posts I make and ask for clarifications where the deletions are too big!

1&What Else?
To learn how to explain this to non-experts in EK and its latest phases.

2&WE?
To feel that others understand so I can let go the torch. Why? Because its not my path, I'm doing my own thing, and I'm only here to help the EK to E. It's easier if there is a cooperative chain of people at stages of understanding - or is it?

3&WE?
Well, does it matter anyway? Well, does it? Maybe, maybe not. Yes it does, legacy is as it is, its a duty.

4&WE?
Well my son just gave me back my Bescherelle (12000 French verbs) - and so I realise I've been studying grammar and etymology and Thesaurus and hieroglyphics and they all relate:
symbol communication of symbols. Roget's Thesaurus has 6 categories - of course; grammar is spatial in nature, hieroglyphics (literally "ordered graphics") relates to the drawings and words of emerging client systems; etymology connects english to hieroglyphics, Roget connects grammar to etymology and hieroglyphics. So I'm emerging still, and that is cool; there is more to understand about our roots and beginnings if cultural cosmological boundaries are to be undone.

5&WE?
And, a new language is required; to represent moving living (life), so this needs a new grammar or a copy of a grammar in use for moving languaging, and this needs new wordings new symbolling maybe, who knows yet, but there is something new to create and that is my job. I innovate; its what I do!

6&WE?
So, I would like to leave the leading of emergent discussion to John for a while - if John would like to accept that challenge. He'll use a lot more words and put in the needed context and examples I expect! A good pacing, then ;-) and, I would like to get on with emerging moving cleanly and its languaging, its verbalising and F'ing.

&WDIKN?
Aaaah, that feels better. See, you can self-F emergence. Well, I can and its works for me!

Over n out again.

Steven

[Steve Saunders]

Where do we (rest of CL forum community) come in?

Wherever "we" wants to. The more dialogue the better.

Where else do we come in?

Making sure EK is properly understood, which I felt it was not by the clean community before.

Temporarily back to me:
I felt I had a duty to pass on my privileged access to David and the EK developments. And I do things "ALL OR NOTHING" - bursts of activity and then nothing again. I was prodded by noticing a few things just after David died 1) a clean conference of which I was not aware, 2) talk of a presentation on EK to the NLP conference, 3) talk of a book on EK . I felt isolated, I was in my own response (Kubler-Ross pattern) to his death and saw people talking of EK who I knew had little or no understanding, and I saw this as a threat that might discredit EK and therefore also my own interests. With hindsight these appear smaller if not irrelevant now.

And where else does we come in?
Wherever you want.

And where else does we come in?
Maybe staying in space, maybe learning EK from space world view, maybe even moving into emerging; whatever you want to explore.

And where else do we come in?
John and you can take EK forward, I'm off to pastures new - and maybe emerging moving fits under EK for a while maybe it disappears into a holigral blog.

And where else do we come in?
Well I hope that the clean community finally makes sense of DG's work and I'm very happy to help, and I'm not sorry if my knowledge upsets a few egos - anger etc are just signals for emergent journeys. The more buttons I push the more others can develop themselves if they so choose. and vice versa!

So, WDIKN?
You do and be as you wish; you respond as you wish; you police as you wish. I still believe whatever is perceived of me is the other's projection.

I am so different to most people that I've rarely met people who understood me or accepted me; they loved my innovations and exploited them, time after time; no worries for me as I've an inexhaustible supply of innovations, so I give them freely.

Phil, I am just sharing, freely and openly. I may post some musings on transitions between the thought forms of EH, GM, CS & EK but if its not welcome then I'll keep it to the notes I give to my students. I'm stopping posting in formal EK now; that's John's job to pace any learning now. My interests are fully in the moving emerging F'ing.

I've also never been political or interested in it, rarely even voted. I never understood company politicians, I always acted in the highest and greatest good, and it always scared the politicians.

-----
[This was posted as Phil suggested I post something like it!)

love Steven

[Corrie van Wijk]

"And when [I respond as I wish], how does that work for you, Steve?"

Love,

Corrie

[Steve Saunders]

how [else] does it work for me?

1. It is communication; there is learning for me in what you say. We have different world views, which can be celebrated or challenged.

2. I'd like to keep the thread on moving emerging to moving emerging rather than space thinking. But you do what you do. Free will ;-)

3. I experience my emotional and intellectual responses to your response. I smile or I reply or both. Often your insight triggers something I feel like emerging from within. That works.

4. More comes from you responding than from silence. So please keep responding.

5. So more emerges from me, whatever your response; so it seems to counter-intuitively go against removing F does it not? Something emerges however clean the post!

6. It works for me that you respond. How? It just does.

SWDIKN?
That I'm getting what I asked for!

And what do you know now?
And how does it work for you?

[Corrie van Wijk]

Hi Steve,

Thank you for responding to me; I wasn't sure if you'd allow me into your self-development space, but since you addressed us, among which me, I thought it would be the most appropriate space to make a clean move by asking a question.

I'm very grateful that you share all this with us, I know it's hard for some people who don't have your scientific background. David said to Keiko on our way to Bath that most psychotherapists don't have a clue what emergence is about, but it is common knowledge among physicists. You are our bridge between those two worlds, we need you, and if you can't make it to the conference, so be it: it shows that you've got your priorities right, and that there are worlds into which you do belong and in which you are not on the boundary. We'll have a second Emergent Knowledge Conference of our own, and it seems to me that we're doing the preliminary work already. I'll catch up with you and make sense of it for everybody, but as you can see, I'm doing some self-questioning myself to finish last autumns salon. I could use some help on this double bind, so feel free to make a clean move.

Love,

Corrie

[Steve Saunders]

0 Well, as I wait until I'm asked for a question, now that I've been invited to make a clean move I have to work out what clean move to make. So, I read the latest posts of the other self-modelling thread, and so I can start musing on what best to do or ask.

1. what kind of move could I make?
Well, something is already emerging and the system is self-engaged and asking for a clean move. Do I help by making a clean move - does that pull me into the system? Yes, it would pull me in, no choice - mutually interacting human-being particles. So a move must be clean for the receiver of the move.

2. wedika a clean move that I could make
deep inbreath and exhale, centre myself, still and calm, be nothing, let the currents of the world flow though me, in-breath, exhale, inhale,exhale ..., deeply, yawns. I intuit something, probably mine, another deep breathing and yawning. How about my move is to impart that I'm present and with the receiver of the clean move.

3. we...
David said binds did not exists for him. Do I wish to buy into a bind reality. Represent the bind - the details are not required and not wanted to be written - a bind on the bind so definitely double from their point of view. So by chunking up a level to represent the double bind, it escapes the receiver from working inside where they "do not want to be" - triple if not recursive. So a move must be to do with something they can do and would like to do - and as they like wwyl2hh that is a candidate move, but too early from my philosophical perspective.

4. we....
Keep representing the bind of the bind of the bind and keep representing the bind that binds that.

5.
hmmm, that's quite an instruction, am I ok with giving such a big move? what could the consequences by? Is it too large? Maybe a smaller move: represent the bind and the bind that doubles it - this is adjacent to what is expressed - a bind.

6 ...
ok, so represent the bind and then represent anything else that goes with that bind.
and then represent anything that might go just around that.

This indicates that I'm safely not going to go inside, and that I'm asking about what is already known or adjacent to that. Feels about the best thing to do as a move if I am to do a move.

So, how do I indicate the move. Well, either I post it on the other thread or I wait until it is found here.

A clean move:
"ok, so represent the bind and then represent anything else that goes with that bind.
And then represent anything that might go just around that."

[Steve Saunders]

Quote Phil:
"Thanks for telling me that, I appreciate your trusting me. I will treat the message and information in it as you request.

It's interesting how all this 2-layer communication goes on isn't it? Public/private I wonder what the difference is. Sometime I think just saying publicly what we think and feel would be good, yet we also have the metaphor of 'washing dirty linen in public', a quasi-taboo pastime!

Given that there is a perception (mostly speculation really) about the separation and the reasons, I'll leave it to you to decide how much, if any, you want to make public."

End of Quote
-------------

My (Steven's) private message to Phil replying to his enquiry about my separation from David:

David disapproved of how he saw I treated assistants. I was overly hard on them then; my view was that if they wanted to be paid to co-facilitate then they had, like me, to look after themselves and deal with whatever comes up - we do deep work, so "sort yourself out first or the dog will bite you" was my approach. And indeed if people did not sort themselves out first then sure enough a client would trigger something - I looked after clients first and assistants later. And on a retreat that could be a week later.

I'm not as tough now, but the principles are the same; I do now address their stuff when it arises now. I also have more capacity to care for co-facs and clients because I've co-facs who can take over from me now, whereas my co-facs then did not understand the work well enough.

David thought I was in danger of "over-driving" clients - something he recognised because it was a mirror. He acknowledged that he had left lots of people incomplete and unable to function as well after workshops during those 18 months together, and he abreacted when he saw me doing similar. I cross-checked this with other people and also the effects of other leading-edge therapist's work on clients. My mother who knew him for nearly 20 years was shocked by him when we both visited her to say that we were separating. It was a clear inner-child abreaction.

David left my best friend suffering the consequences of an experiment at a systems engineering workshop and it took my friend 5 months to recover - I wondered then why he did not want to see David again. So this was mirror-mirror and his shock at seeing himself.

David had no concerns about my work with clients and loved the way he had been held safely and caringly at our home. His concern was concentrated on "over-driving" and "assistant care".

So, David parted because he felt he had to free me to follow my own path and because he felt I was not listening to him. Truly I felt not listened to by him for the last 6 months, and so we were both guilty. I did nonetheless take very seriously his concerns and I've addressed these constantly.

Nonetheless, I still accidentally overdrive a person maybe every 6 months and I constantly question and challenge my work and the work of any co-facilitators to continually improve. When something like this happens I search for the learning and apply it rigorously - "burnt hands teach best".
........
As usual, its open and frank!

Steven

[Steve Saunders]

at your request ...

1 Carole has the clean coaching manual - original
2 Debs has the inner child workshop transcript
3 Others have other manuals

I have manuals representing EK within a larger frame of "4G NLP"

It feels like trying to split hairs again to say who did what.

Clearly I have emerged "moving emerging" and posted updates on the forum, but my interactions with others enabled it to be birthed. But I don't need the credit and it is there shared, free to the world.

I feel the same about EK, put it 100% in David's name. And if you want to exclude what I have done then start from the documents above, and develop it ...

The bits separate attributable to coming out of my mouth are things like "The Issue Buster" (fractal scaling of 6 sets of 6 matching the emergent pattern), relating Emergence as WITHIN EVERYTHING, the fractal approach, 7dayweek equivalence, various new questions and forms, scaling pictures (David had loads of other scalings he made and we explored plenty!), loading B instead of David's Geometric start, emergent walking, combined space and spinning and issue busting (and the combinations within).

We playingly co-created loads of things; complementary spaces, non-question questions, driving numbers and letters, the scaling work (major emphasis), moving B, the box B, manikin B (these latter 2 came from him), ... I really have difficulty differentiating, from the first workshop we tried out interacting ideas; the idea of 2-3 samples per world when emergent navigating to the end of cosmology was from my signal processing background; he took and used that a lot - great!

Running out of will again ...

[Steve Saunders]

0: posted in EK.

1&WEDIK?
Maybe the Days of the Week goes a little far, but last night in the pub an engineering friend understood immediately and could see how it fitted with his normal flow of a working week. But: to quote Corrie quoting David, "Physicists already understand emergence".

"The Path of Least Resistance" is a concept used throughout Physics, coming from the work of Lagrange who invented the maths of solving minima/maxima with regard to solving things like gravity; the apple falls through the path of least resistance, the roads in Boston follow the cow trails - a rare American City with non-straight roads! English footpaths and side roads wiggle from the same principle. Nature appears empirically to be efficient and to use least effort, and so can humans take the hard way and the easy way. Water flows downhill.

2&WEDIK?
I suggest that the evolution of facilitation has tended towards making the experience easier for the client and the practitioner, ever-more efficient. It is the natural way. And so the work of clean facilitation has become ever easier to learn, to do, and to receive. Certainly my own experience of training NLP was that each time the quality of graduates surpassed the previous generation. With 3 retired psychotherapists each with about 30 years experience present during a 7-day retreat, we calibrated the equivalent progress, and they estimated 150-200 issues reprenseting about 400 sessions (10 years Pt), and they also said that so much more is achieved in the retreat, so no real comparison. With Emergence we can now address a lifetime in a week for a fairly normal person and over probably 6 or 7 retreats the lifetime of a quite damaged person.

3&WEDIK?
On the title - EK. EK is limiting to Knowing - staying within ontology and within a cosmological boundary. I prefer Emergence (E) without the nominalisation of knowledge. It then holds the complete frame, because if all life really is expressed through emergence then at last we have something that can fully address the human condition.

4&WEDIK?
The name and the initial assumptions constrain the box of thinking and what can be. If something of the human experience were not to be "emergent" then it would be precluded from The Study of Emergence.

So, is there something human that is not "emergent"?

Wiki: In philosophy, systems theory and the sciences, emergence refers to the way complex systems and patterns arise out of a multiplicity of relatively simple interactions. Emergence is central to the theory of complex systems.
The term "emergent" was coined by the pioneer psychologist G. H. Lewes, who wrote:
"Every resultant is either a sum or a difference of the co-operant forces; their sum, when their directions are the same -- their difference, when their directions are contrary. Further, every resultant is clearly traceable in its components, because these are homogeneous and commensurable. It is otherwise with emergents, when, instead of adding measurable motion to measurable motion, or things of one kind to other individuals of their kind, there is a co-operation of things of unlike kinds. The emergent is unlike its components insofar as these are incommensurable, and it cannot be reduced to their sum or their difference." (Lewes 1875, p. 412)(Blitz 1992)

5SWEDIK?
Any experience for a human being would seem to be able to be placed under the topic of Emergence. So what meaning is left? So what I am now left with is the initial clean philosophy of "working with the symptoms to aid them doing their job". In other words, "homeopathy without the pill". What then is this property of Emergence, and does it have a scalar quantity? In other words, is one process more "emergent" than another. Or is this more about "maximising client-only emergence" while minimising unhelpful F intrusion.

6SWDIKN?
The principle of least resistance (or maximum flow) together with homeopathic principles seem to combine to suggest that client system-centric emergence for completing the job of the symptoms - and thus relinquishing the symptoms - is a scalar property that is maximised when the F uses minimum dose, minimum projection and the client can flow the emergence to be flowed with least resistance.

My Physics analogy would be that Resistance = Potential Difference / Current

So the F has to use the least potential difference "clean move" - which is why adjacency is SO IMPORTANT - it is the minimum dose and the smallest step.

&WDIKN?
Well, as usual with emergence, I start with one thing and one intention, and up end somewhere completely different. The down-side of emergence; you do not always get what you thought you were going to. Not the easiest thing to market or explain "that it really was what your system required to resolve!" Hmmn, clients and practitioners might prefer to stick to outcome-oriented approaches even if they don't address the core issues IMO.

So now what?
I'm experiencing a somatic pattern - finger tapping, so going EM/ME ...
and then a series of kinaesthetic signals then nothing, peace.

live life one day at a time, one hour at a time, one minute, one second, on instant, NOW.

[Steve Saunders]

and what was happening?

re-reading words while sitting down I notice I'm drumming my fingers repeatedly; moving my awareness to my fingers hand the moving changes rhythmn; then falters and stops. no thoughts then in the silence of no moving I realise the fingers provide moving to enable thinking flowing. I realise I need to be moving to be thinking well. I realise that I used to jig my leg and recall people saying "stop that / stop fidgeting / stop jigging": I would and then my flow would stop. B*****DS! So I will jiggle when I'm thinking; it is fine. But now do I need to? Is it de-somatised purely through the emerging moving and conscious realisations or is there something else. My thinking is slowed down by this typing. And self-aware the typing stops and It's like forcing the letters out one by one now. Peace emerges and is affected by expressing. stop.

In the peace I realise; the somatic jigging was expressing/releasing other people's stresses or anxieties projected into me. I feel at peace and now able to act as required today. I recall sensing and saying yesterday "is this your agitation filling me? I cannot do anything in this state?" I see snd feel how it was. Once again maybe I have become too open, too porous after a retreat; and this happens to others too I infer-suppose.

What makes a functional human being?
How does one recognise functional or dysfunctional?
What is functional? What differentiates human from inhuman?
Questions lead to more finger-drumming; so the soma remains.
I use the soma; I smile. Out taps the William Tell Overture! Hmmn.

I recall Joseph Campbell's "Hero with a Thousand Faces". He speaks of the return to normal life after the journey; the biggest crisis for the hero; he is no longer understood by those fragmented souls; he cannot be; he remains forever different or he re-fragments.

A refuge for heroes; hmmn, probably better than letting Rambo syndrome set in. How did Terry Waite return to normality after his release? A society of heroes?

and off to see the wizard, the wonderful wizard of Oz.

[Steve Saunders]

Emergence happens; its nature. working with it allows streams of consciousness to do their job; fighting or resisting or manipulating that which flows restricts, constrains or divert or hinders the emergence.

In Physics, the maximum flow equals the potential difference divided by the resistance. I= V/R, and power (Watts) = Volts * Amps

So minimising resistance and increasing the potential difference increases the flow, but if the volts get too big the resistance increases if the flow cannot.

The rate of flow is governed by the system's "bandwidth" of information - like on the internet broadband gives more service flow.

Right and so what?

As the empirical evidence of emergence is sequences of flowing information unfiltered by thinking getting in the way, then ... diversion, distraction, deviation ...

It is not possible to think with "inging". No way. Try it! I'm going to play and report back on inging the inging out of living!

[Steve Saunders]

Modelling the betweens shows a pattern of using the old belief system to represent the emerging new one, finally recoding the new system self-referentially. this is a bit like the underlying model within the erroneous spiral dynamics - the bit that is useful.

Basic Sequence
92 Intuitive Psychology
96 TA & MBTA
00 NLP & Erickson, Wilber (1-3G)
Own: Kinaesthetic Gesture Field, Deeper Structure for MetaProgs, Analogue Association/Dissociation Model
04 RAPSI & SyM,
Own: Direct-Engagement Modelling (Proto-forms of 4G)
05 EK & Emergence (4G) - "there and back again" - navigating the personal collective
David's Digital Dissociation Model - complements my analogue one.
Own: Scaling - many forms, Pronoun Scaling (many forms)
06 Own: Truth Work (5G) - sourcing blame in the past until positive truth emerges
Emerges from seeing the purpose and whole essence of E.F.
06 Own: Beingness/Osmotic healing (6G) - non-projecting
Gurdjieff relates
07 Own: Releases (7G / new 1G) - counter-projection
Ancient prayer forms relate
08 Grammar
Own: Inging (8G / new 2G) - releasing soma, non-projecting F
Dance Therapy relates
Why keep on innovating?
Until every form relates?
While something is missing.
So right now its the question: Can a person be recovered when the light has left the eyes? This is the question to which neither David nor I knew the answer.

We have: fix (F does it to A), metaphor (Mind), move (Body-Mind in space), emerge (body-mind generalised), source (time, other), accept (be), release (de-project), moving (emotions, body, de-minding).

Comparing this to Roget:

Abstract Relations (beingness)
Space (and time, motion)
Matter (information)
Intellect (metaphor)
Volition (release)
Emotion (release into flow)

in-betweens anon ... breaking

Why is Feldenkrais so powerful? Why does bodywork work for some people but not all. Why do we have all these different therapies and why are they not seen as a whole?

[Steve Saunders]

From my posting reply in support and feedback:

"My belief about the comment on game-playing - is that someone observes behaviours perceives "game playing" according to, say, TA definitions, "hook, con, sinker" stuff, something then happens (like when I lose the will to continue) and tedious is attached. My guesses; 1) any good at sport at school or was that for other pupils? 2) "I'm not getting what I want" so either I tantrum or get bored or both.

I feel when I'm being targeted as prey by another person from the forum; and I've felt it from you, too. Maybe in what is happened there is a message for the observer, and the healing signal is called "tedious".

That would be my hypothetical modelling; and I'd hazard a guess at 14 for the pronoun."

SWDIKN? *6

1) I now take this as my initial loading and self-facilitate: I recognise that at 14 I had a knee injury that stopped me playing sport for a few months and I then lost out on being permanently in all the schools team thereafter. so thank you Phil, I got the message - not the one you intended, but the one in my comms to you, triggered by your abreaction. Whatever is yours is yours and nothing to do with me ...

2) It was very boring watching others play.
3) So I've countered by seeking to play as much as possible when I get to play.
4) I have a desire to contribute and a conflicting desire to wait until being asked.
5) I feel tearful
6) I feel a "don't know what to do" - which I translate as the 14 "I"

So 14 I is sitting on a sports hall bench not playing 5-a-side football, suntanned to the extent of being called "nigger" by other boys. [not so pc a world back then]. 14 is wearing shorts, T-shirt, socks, trainers. Typical noisy sports hall sounds - kids shouts, whistles. 14 is feeling left out and very bored.

Around is the hall, the school, the town, area, county, england, world, solar system, a book;
the cover of a book called "The Universe". I am looking at this book, I is at home, bored again - no-one to play with. Waiting for something - to be asked to play; and wanting to play. Pretend I don't really want to play. hmmn. What else to do? divert, distract, and so on. Go and annoy someone; that might work.

Note the again - this is not the first time, just an indicator - it lands into a scape I've worked on with David 3 years ago - incomplete. So a jigsaw is incomplete, and has to be finished but cannot be so i'm waiting and bored again.

Aaarghh! Again! Weight Weight Weight - better put on some weight to give a message then.
Oh my goodness; "Weighting to be asked." What a killer of a pun - telling the body that message. Way, weighing. Well that explains something. Never ever use waiting again! How about lightening? The lightning room. Alighting on butter; a fly.

Now 7 is watching the fly, its hot and sunny and the butter is melting. Germs. kill the germs - puns on Panzers. Tanking it now. Shoot the indians. garden, games, fun, play, just being a kid. Friend with a gun - hits, threatens; what is this - why is he doing this? it not playing any more. Around: tree, fair, unfair, his parents - father, hard, war veteran, tough life. Death was real - every moment could be the last. War. Conflict, famine, greed, 4 horsemen, tv, monty python, strange, nonsense, notfairness. Musing. soma - inging. Knee. Shouldering, burdening, indexing, mything, elbowing, disarming, heaeding footballing playing seeing running kicking hipping, stomaching ...
here and now ing

So, thanks Phil, now you can see: no games, just signals - its all there is - everything we do is a signal; just act on the signals and all resolves. Everything you see in me is you.

[Steve Saunders]

FROM ANOTHER THREAD:
[
I suggested that, to understand David's work, you look between the "dots" - the phases between metaphor and space, the early days of emergence, and before metaphor.

No reply and continued fixation on space appears to be the "modus operandi": fixations on the dots, and keeping the dots nicely separated.

Why was David exploring what he was? The answer is to find ever-more effective, harmless and reliable ways of recovering the "not here and now" to the here and now, and returning intruded metaphor back whence it came.
Why? Because that is what we discussed - David's real purpose in this work.
Why? Because we shared that vision and purpose.
Why? Because we both know something about human being: about the nature of human being and what happens when people meet, feel, say and do what they do.
Why? Because we looked, we asked, and we found.
Why? Because something was missing, and we would not be satisfied with less than knowing the truth thereof.
Why? Answer in my self-modelling thread.
]
OK, Why?
We both had aspects of ourselves missing, and finding/recovering that required us to develop something we could not get from existing suppliers of models and facilitation.

Why? Because this is how we are made / have become.

Why? To create what we have and will.

Why? Because the human world is in a mess and eventually an effective solution was required to end the suffering.

Why? Because its time.

Why? Because when you really know who you are, then you are obliged to act in certain ways.

Why? Because of what you know.

Why? "Seek and ye shall find."

[Steve Saunders]

David told me it would be 20 years before they would be ready. He was right. I see now the beginnings of ignoring our work and the re-creating of emergence. In 15-20 years maybe some will get to what we discovered. And they will enjoy the lengthy journey to discover the bleeding obvious. I'm off now, David: you win, you're right, leave them to it, do not teach them what we discussed. Maybe they will get there one day, but I doubt it.

Good Bye.