Clean within clean

[Corrie van Wijk]

Clean within clean is a concept Steve and I are developing right now.

[Corrie van Wijk]

This is great!

[Corrie van Wijk]

Clean within clean is about clean pronoun-interaction.

[phil]

Could you describe it in more detail or give a few examples of a clean pronoun interaction and perhaps a counter example?

Phil

[Corrie van Wijk]

If you make a pronounscape first, you can set-up several AB's. Clean within clean is about how clean we treat ourselves. e.g. 'I' can ask 'myself' what it would like to have happen?

[Steve Saunders]

As this is about facilitating oneself using clean facilitation (emergent-style, not metaphoric), its is not about work David did himself, so according to Phil's rules, the thread belongs in the "developments section"

As Corrie has said, this is something we are exploring, mainly off-forum. It is more than just self-facilitating, it is also about "living emergently" which may be the same as "living cleanly" but maybe not.

So "F" is one pronoun of the self-collective, and facilitates the other pronouns and their scapes ...

[Corrie van Wijk]

You're right Steve, this emerged from our conversation and was your idea.

It's just that I don't agree with Phil's separation and refuse to go along with it.

[Note from Phil: I acknowledge that you disagree with the separation of David's EK work and what others develop from it. My purpose in doing so is a) to seek to distinguish and preserve David's contribution to a field that is in continuing development and b) to distinguish and honour the contribution of others to that field. To that end, I have moved the thread to Emergent Knowledge Developments (http://www.cleanforum.com/forums/forumdisplay.php?f=90)]

[Corrie van Wijk]

Steve: "it is also about "living emergently" which may be the same as "living cleanly" but maybe not."

I think living emergently is different from living cleanly. Clean is something you do to others, including your own other pronouns; living emergently is acting and making decisions in the here and now, based on what your organism comes up with.

E.g. I cannot make a do-want and a don't-want list, but I do know what to approach and what to avoid right now. So my greatest challenge is approach what I cannot avoid.

[super_yacht@hotmail.com]

I’m interested in this train of development but it brings up a question for me.
In NLP we used to create parts (of us) to interact with to achieve resolution. ‘If we were unhappy we asked can we speak to that part of us that is unhappy and what needs to happen’. The NLP community disregarded this because it separates and personifies those parts of us. It was could cause factures in the persons identify, a kin to schizophrenia.

While pronoun work is effective when you are chasing each pronoun, do you think that if you get them to interact, as you have said

‘If you make a pronounscape first, you can set-up several AB's. Clean within clean is about how clean we treat ourselves. e.g. 'I' can ask 'myself' what it would like to have happen?’

Is this the same as the parts theory in NLP? You may setup a similar scenario? You are allowing the pronouns to develop relationships.

Just a question probably one that requires a load more work to answer, but I bring this up because of the unintended problem that may occur later. I was talking with a leading psychologist form the States recently and she was saying the film ‘The Secret’ has created a whole load of work for psychologists, from client who total immersed in the teachings and now struggle to function in the 21st century.

Musing
John

[Steve Saunders]

Very aware of this one John as I'm sure you know. This not like the RAPSI parts dialogue which results we know about.

If one aspect (me here and now) facilitates the rest of me - is this possible? to what extent is it possible? Or does self-facilitating require deconstructing the pronouns entirely and commencing "inging"?

I favour that only the pronoun-free way can work, but we are playing with it ...

steven