Steve Saunders
17-02-2008, 11:29 AM
Factors
1. From the "present A" - the A in the moment, the client has to be able to answer a next question or there is little point in asking it.
2. Asking a "big leap" question is making the consciousness "jump"
3. F has less idea of what is going on with big-leap question jumps
4. a cosmological boundary or normal boundary might be jumped by a big-step question
5. Ancient practices like yoga meditations of various forms involve moving awareness adjacently - for a purpose. It is training the mind to move smoothly.
6. It is easy to answer about something close to the present focus of attention - least effort, least resistance, most flow of information
SWDIKN?
Well, there's a few of the reasons why adjacency, but not even getting into GM, CS or EK.
So in GM, there's seeking the equivalent metaphors and then developing a landscape, and again stepwise explored the landscape materialises and jouneys in the landscape can then evolve step by step.
In CS, one can jump spaces or use small movements to nearby spaces, like leaning a bit, and there's packed information in the nearby. In 3G NLP this is used to change perception.
In EK the jump from A to B can be traumatic - alien concept "what does B know?" "nothing its a piece of paper" ... cosmological boundary where some people cannot second position.
In Moving Cleanly, movements transition adjacently naturally. and so do emergent streams of consciousness.
ADHD is a condition of jumping awareness - for me that is a signal of severe dissociative trauma and lack of parental attention (judgement I know).
SWDIKN?
quoting penny & james - "riding a bicycle down a dark forest path at night with a small torch" is their metaphor for learning SyM navigation as an F. So its adjacent always - its THE RULE underpinning all Clean Process.
In EK, adjacency has led to me look between the dots more - and I've heard so was David - so its like there's a set of questions between "what A knows about B" and "what B knows about A" and so a stepwise navigation from A to B is required to enable a self-referenced client to get to B's knowledge about A.
So, taking the "loading and depleting" metaphor to its limits, with a client, as F, I would have them load B to exhaust all that which has to be downloaded - and this comes out with the "and what else?" type of adjacent question. With loaded text and drawing one can then ask what might be in adjacent spaces using "what could be/go [just] there?" types of questions.
So - I'm doing this to learn how to explain adjacency by the way, not to teach anyone! And its emerging as it is - as usual! I love emergence!
So I'm now realising that to teach emergence one must help the learner stepwise from where they are - my earlier posts were far to far from the reality of metaphor or space thinking to stand much chance of being understood.
So, as David started by developing Emergence using space language, there is a role for the now discarded intermediate processes to aid in the learning transfer for folk from CS tradition. Cool!
Now, what was David doing in the early days of CS - what was discarded from the early experiments as he moved from Metaphor - this will also be informative. and so also will therefore be what he did in the early days of developing GM.
Wow, right, now we're into going from Ericksonian Hypnotherapy to NLP (very briefly) to GM to CS to EK and we have to fill in the movements between the dots in order to readily pace folk incoming to Clean and especially EK.
OK, food for thought, over n out!
Steven
1. From the "present A" - the A in the moment, the client has to be able to answer a next question or there is little point in asking it.
2. Asking a "big leap" question is making the consciousness "jump"
3. F has less idea of what is going on with big-leap question jumps
4. a cosmological boundary or normal boundary might be jumped by a big-step question
5. Ancient practices like yoga meditations of various forms involve moving awareness adjacently - for a purpose. It is training the mind to move smoothly.
6. It is easy to answer about something close to the present focus of attention - least effort, least resistance, most flow of information
SWDIKN?
Well, there's a few of the reasons why adjacency, but not even getting into GM, CS or EK.
So in GM, there's seeking the equivalent metaphors and then developing a landscape, and again stepwise explored the landscape materialises and jouneys in the landscape can then evolve step by step.
In CS, one can jump spaces or use small movements to nearby spaces, like leaning a bit, and there's packed information in the nearby. In 3G NLP this is used to change perception.
In EK the jump from A to B can be traumatic - alien concept "what does B know?" "nothing its a piece of paper" ... cosmological boundary where some people cannot second position.
In Moving Cleanly, movements transition adjacently naturally. and so do emergent streams of consciousness.
ADHD is a condition of jumping awareness - for me that is a signal of severe dissociative trauma and lack of parental attention (judgement I know).
SWDIKN?
quoting penny & james - "riding a bicycle down a dark forest path at night with a small torch" is their metaphor for learning SyM navigation as an F. So its adjacent always - its THE RULE underpinning all Clean Process.
In EK, adjacency has led to me look between the dots more - and I've heard so was David - so its like there's a set of questions between "what A knows about B" and "what B knows about A" and so a stepwise navigation from A to B is required to enable a self-referenced client to get to B's knowledge about A.
So, taking the "loading and depleting" metaphor to its limits, with a client, as F, I would have them load B to exhaust all that which has to be downloaded - and this comes out with the "and what else?" type of adjacent question. With loaded text and drawing one can then ask what might be in adjacent spaces using "what could be/go [just] there?" types of questions.
So - I'm doing this to learn how to explain adjacency by the way, not to teach anyone! And its emerging as it is - as usual! I love emergence!
So I'm now realising that to teach emergence one must help the learner stepwise from where they are - my earlier posts were far to far from the reality of metaphor or space thinking to stand much chance of being understood.
So, as David started by developing Emergence using space language, there is a role for the now discarded intermediate processes to aid in the learning transfer for folk from CS tradition. Cool!
Now, what was David doing in the early days of CS - what was discarded from the early experiments as he moved from Metaphor - this will also be informative. and so also will therefore be what he did in the early days of developing GM.
Wow, right, now we're into going from Ericksonian Hypnotherapy to NLP (very briefly) to GM to CS to EK and we have to fill in the movements between the dots in order to readily pace folk incoming to Clean and especially EK.
OK, food for thought, over n out!
Steven