You and me

[Corrie van Wijk]

For Steve:














(some space)

Love,

Corrie

Over to Steve

[Steve Saunders]

Ok, so what would "you" like to have happen in this space?
What kind of space is the space between "you" and "me"?

[






]

over to "you"

[Corrie van Wijk]

It's up to you; give you some dwelling time as well .................................................. .









Over to you

[Steve Saunders]

So, "give you some dwelling time as well"

What is the purpose of this space between you and me?

Answer: "you and me dwelling time."

OK, WWYL2HH with a sextuple bind?

[Corrie van Wijk]

And when ['you and me dwelling time'], then what happens?

[Steve Saunders]

is then what happens when ['you and me dwelling time']

An F'ing dance is a dance involving F's in the here and now ... ;-)

[Corrie van Wijk]

And when [here and now], then what happens?

[Steve Saunders]

and now what is happening?

[Corrie van Wijk]

Steve: "As I think you may recall, my father did commit suicide. Who can blame him, with a son like me, huh? (Just joking, may as well make it myself.) He left no note, he walked out with a gun, sat on a bench outside the police station, put the gun in his mouth, and blew his brains out. This was no cry for help, it was a decision."

Sorry to intrude on your expression (in another thread) about this event in your life: it is just one of those things about you that starts me thinking. And thinking in your world view means 'mind', so until I reached your (Buddhist?) 'no mind' allow me to reflect on this.

It is not the events in our life that 'an sich' that influence us, it is how they affect us. Our brainbody must be able to deal with what happens to us, if we do not manage that at the time they occur, we need to do some homework and reflect on it later on until it makes sense to us, or we accept it doesn't.

(You don't have to respond to this; or you may do so off-line.)

How did your environment deal with the fact that you lost your father? Did anyone ever ask you a clean question about it?

People tend to come to your rescue, but usually they just attempt to deal with the fact that they have to deal with you.

How would anyone think that showing you any film might help? The lady in the shop just googled for 'suicide' in her mind, which triggered her knowledge of films about it. How naive a wife was that who went along with it?

You say your father made a decision; what had to be true for him not to hesitate anymore? How many cries of help preceded that?

Children tend to take the blame for what happens to their parents; perhaps it is better to be in control like that than having to deal with the fact that it doesn't make sense.

[Steve Saunders]

Corrie: How did your environment deal with the fact that you lost your father? Did anyone ever ask you a clean question about it?
1. it was all too busy with its own stuff mostly. 2. Nope, of course not, way before I met clean language, and while my mother had trained with David then, both she was in her own 'coping' and I was not looking for any therapy.

Corrie: How would anyone think that showing you any film might help? The lady in the shop just googled for 'suicide' in her mind, which triggered her knowledge of films about it. How naive a wife was that who went along with it?
Reply: Er no, I've no idea if they discussed that - she just asked for films to cheer me up. I think it was inspired, and the perfection of the universe, not naive, nothing other than the perfection of the universe giving what I needed.

You say your father made a decision; what had to be true for him not to hesitate anymore? How many cries of help preceded that?
Reply: Over 30 years earlier he had talked of how he would commit suicide if he did - and he did exactly as he said. I do not believe this kind was a cry for help. To suggest otherwise would not be clean!

Corrie: Children tend to take the blame for what happens to their parents; perhaps it is better to be in control like that than having to deal with the fact that it doesn't make sense.
Reply: Lots of people blame themselves for their environment. While this is normally maladjusted perception, at the deepest level, we do each create the world around us ... and maybe we are to blame for what happens to those around us - co-creatively to blame as many people are around each person, but then also we would not be to blame for what we do ourselves - we would then be absolved ... and that underpins war crimes etc.

Clean questions are most needed in sacred space - i.e. psychoactive space/flow/... Unclean questions and comments are relatively safe when the space is not psychoactive because the person's defences are then in place and their boundaries are not porous. Profanity is the unclean during the psychoactive. This is damaging. It is also what I have been led to believe is what cults (not naming any) do when they get people into their core, open state, porous and open. They profane in the name of their belief system/religion at that point.

David used the 'sleep-it-off' approach once people reached this state - they integrated while sleeping on the floor or on a bean bag, wherever, because that was the safest, nonprojecting environment for the person to re-establish their new self.
I feel the biggest danger with having let the re-scaling out of the bag into the community of clean facilitators is a possible lack of awareness of the consequences of the period AFTER the 1:1 scale is reached. The space-held time AFTER is equally as important as the scaling process. The space has to remain clean until the rescaled frozen self is here and now, fully, with new boundaries established.

Steven

[Corrie van Wijk]

What was your story before you came up with this one?

P.S. "The space-held time AFTER is equally as important as the scaling process. The space has to remain clean until the rescaled frozen self is here and now, fully, with new boundaries established." Agreeing.

[Steve Saunders]

impertinent to ask ;-)

Steven

[Corrie van Wijk]

I knew, and I said you don't have to answer.

It's not about you, it's about me trying to grasp this.

Anyway, I couldn't resist the temptation of asking the story minus one question, since I think it's a good one. I hoped you'd volunteer as a guinee-pig. Indeed, impertinent to ask, truly sorry.

[Steve Saunders]

okay Corrie, as David had "history of goals" we can also have "history of story" ... you deserve the credit and recognition for inventing a clean process:

"The History of Your Story(ies)"... Corrie VW.

I will credit you in the Holigral Manual update, if I may use it, that is? I will choose a different topic re story ...

Story 0: I have spent most my working life in the phases of requirement-problem-solution-demonstration-handover, and I want to expand my horizons. I want to learn more about manufacturing, operations and closure.
Story -1: I have been very happy working in R&D, I made that decision in 1978 and it still works for me.
Story -2: Before then I was interested in everything, every school subject, equally, every sport, the crafts, the only thing I did not like, actually was formal gym, pirates was great.
Story -3: The playground can get a bit nasty and I did not like that.
Story -4: everything was fun, life was fun.
Story -5: Fights with my sister and challenging bigger boys. These are stories about me not by me.
Story -6: Hungry baby - also a story about me, which I got to the root of before.
Story -7: glint in the eye ..
Story -8: a speck of dust
Story -9: grind
Story -10: millstone
Story -11: albatros
Story -12: mariners and poetry
Story -13: school room, english literature, about 14-15 years old
and what is the story there?
tedium
Story before that story?
boredom
before that story?
staring out of windows, "will it ever end?" rather be outside ... humans are outdoor creatures at heart
before ...?
civilisation is the problem, that was the solution to a need, for shelter and consistency of provision
civilisation is now the obsolete solution, requiring something different, a new way, the "developed and developing world" is over-growning, growth has to end ... this is it ... literally, it is now about NO LONGER GROWING ECONOMIES, but balancing and mantaining economies, sharing on a global scale not a local scale, this is why I feel that pain, the cultural field of the world is asking for this; cut back on the new new new and maintain what is, yes there are still complete cycles, but as a consuming world, we have to be in a service where the disposal is managed, the resources are conserved, and the diversity is maintained.
Clean was in danger of extinction with such a low diversity of only two processes, now with over 100 we have a stable population, it can compete with NLP rather be absorbed and disappear.

ok Corrie: a useful process, it took me full circle back to here and now. It is different to the story busting, where the story differs each time, the recursive story and the story analysis.

We could add in also "story+1" - what will your next story be? to address a future-scape in the story flow.

Over to you... Corrie

Steven

[Corrie van Wijk]

Hi Steve,

"And when [

1. I want to expand my horizons. I want to learn more about
2. I have been very happy
3. Before then I was interested in everything
4. the only thing I did not like, actually was formal gym, pirates was great.
5. The playground can get a bit nasty and I did not like that.
6. everything was fun, life was fun.
7. tedium
8. boredom
9. staring out of windows, "will it ever end?" rather be outside ... humans are outdoor creatures at heart]

"this is the story about your life you are telling now, how did you tell this story before this one?"

[Steve Saunders]

story before ... sorry corrie that holds no interest for me.
i gave a set of stories before the one, as you asked.

ergo no attractor left ...the process worked for me.

the hint would be in my "next story" future-scape ...

why did you arbitrarily cut off 'the story' where you did, the rest was just as much my story as this was?

the story before the whole story of the post ... that i can answer ... or is it the next story?

-2: cosmological boundary of civilisation and hunter-gatherer, and before ...
defence or territory warfare must predate settlement
did cultivation start by someone just weeding out the undesired plants in order to give more growth to the plants they wanted?
ultimately it is a trade of effort versus returns. the most efficient effort will win
trade must have followed: farmed food for gathered/hunted food, shelter for service ...
what do we really know of non-civilised worlds? the mayans and others returned to the jungle or left deserts behind ... this is one stark choice
the falls of civilisation we know of - Rome - decaying city centres, moves into the country then hoarding then darkness .. ring any bells? The great flood rings another. We see the same signs of decay now that asimov referred to in his foundation series, progressive losses of basic knowledge, maintenance without innovation - the whole cycle has to be healthy. the chinese empire also decayed under the weight of its bureaucracy ... all empires and businesses fall when the managers take over the place of the leaders ... we need a more graceful decline ...

[Corrie van Wijk]

And when

the [story before ... holds no interest for you], how did you tell the present story before you told it now?

[Steve Saunders]

and i still do not want to go to the 'before', but instead to the next ...

-3: "now is the winter of my discontent" Billie-boy Shakespeare.

[Corrie van Wijk]

And when [you still do not want to go to the 'before', but instead to the next ...], how would you like to tell the previous story next?

[Steve Saunders]

Corrie, this has to be the dirtiest 'clean' facilitation on record, deliberately asking in the direction the client has no interest in. ;-)

-4: now is the spring of my mirth.

David would have enjoyed this!

[Corrie van Wijk]

And when [you have no interest in this direction] how would you have liked to tell the next story previously?

[Steve Saunders]

LOL.

-5. now is the summer of my laughter.

Oh dear, is life just a great game or billie's stage?
In which case do I prefer comedy tragedy thriller love or what?

The best films have a flow where one does not know what happens next. not knowing the story is a richer experience.

[Corrie van Wijk]

And when [now is the summer of your laughter] how would you like to tell the previous story now?

[Steve Saunders]

aha, see one does not pay attention to the question ... "how do I want to tell the previous story, now?" Still not at all.

-6: autumn - closing down sale.

[Corrie van Wijk]

And when [you don't pay attention to the question ... still not at all] how would you still like to tell the story?

[Steve Saunders]

There is no "liking to tell the story" ... still not not.
I think the story all got told, and all the prior stories in my first reply.
Is this helping you?

[Corrie van Wijk]

And when [there is no "liking to tell the story" ... still not not] and [you think the story all got told, and all the prior stories] what kind of you was telling these stories before and what kind of you would you like to be when you will tell them next?

[Steve Saunders]

so, analysing the questioning ...

and WHEN ... WKO 'you' was ..., & WKO 'you' would like to be ...

expressing time before ... WKO was, .... then time future oriented on the like preference, compared with a cleaner "would you be" - ... delete the "like to" - just as useful is not like to and could be, might be, wish to be, choose to be, want to be, will be ... and neither working with a 'nowing' 'you' which might have been the result of scaling the history of story.

wko me before is also no longer present, it has ceased to be, it is an ex parrot, it has popped its cloggs, it is no longer.

wko of me would me like to me? why, the me that I am when i tell a story next; no 'like to' very happy with the present me, me, me.

I understand that I did 'invite' "would like to" as a future q, but with the pre-requisite that the person has a future-scape.

instead, how about:

"do I have a sense of a future me?" [purses lip] no.
do I have a sense of me when I next tell a story? no

and, <deleted new-form clean question>? big smile.

aha ... a decent clean question at last. Welcome to the future of clean language ... to learn more ask 'me', and join the constructionist emergence experience ;-))))

[Corrie van Wijk]

And when [you before is no longer present, it has ceased to be, it is an ex parrot, it has popped its cloggs, it is no longer] and [very happy with the present me, me, me] and [purses lip], how does present you relate to you before and future you?

[Steve Saunders]

;-)
aha, a relating question ...

as there is no longer 'you' before/future ...
all i can say about is the 'you before/future' when they were separate; when they existed as not the me here now all time space me

before nowing ... fragmented, thought I knew what I saw, did not, back-to-front world from the truth as I now experience it.
after nowing; there is no after. the wonderful thing about re-measuring the complex (real and imaginary) is that it is undone - as if it never were ...

how relate to? the before/after is no longer, its memory with no attachment a past imagined future with no attachment ... so no relating really.

[Corrie van Wijk]

And when [before nowing ... fragmented, thought I knew what I saw, did not, back-to-front world from the truth as I now experience it] this is the story about your life you are telling now, how did you tell this story when you were [fragmented, thought I knew what I saw, ... back-to-front world]?

[Steve Saunders]

how can a story be told before it happened?
until the change there was a different life experience, the consequence of conditionings, adaptings, learnings etc
after the de-conditioning, there is not that which was before

what story can be told then? the life story of the before?

The ancients had ceremonies to celebrate the life of the recently deceased as a way of overcoming bereavement, of gaining the understanding required to let go and realise that that part of the cosmic all had completed its purpose and thus was ceasing to be.

I could therefore, "post-ego-death", as it were, celebrate the life of that ego, only for me there would be no purpose as the death could only happen once its task was complete. for others who miss(ed) that person, they may well still be attached to the old one, and grieving by review is as good a way as any for that person to get over the change.

how does the blind man explain touch to the sighted man? The sighted person is blind to the life not dependent on sight, they might have some appreciation (it gets dark at night), but to them it is a disability. So how to explain the death that is no death to the living ego? No chance.

[Corrie van Wijk]

Hi Steve,

Let me try to explain: if you do the story buster, the story changes (a bit) every time you tell it, perhaps also depending on who you tell it to or the context in which it is told.

So if you reverse this process, and start with the latest story, I mean the way it was told most recently, and then pull back to the previous versions, you are likely to meet a former you.

Anyone can relate to listening to a person that suffered from some major event and doesn't quite manage to come to terms with it and will tell the same story over and over again any time you meet them. It is interesting to pay attention to how the story changes over time.

What I am looking for is how the story affects the pronoun over time: initially something may cause confusion, and then realizing what happened may cause a shock, followed by fear, etc.

The initial perception of an event holds the then "I", pulling back to that one reveals the evolution of the story and, more importantly, the evolution of the pronoun.

Thank you for volunteering!

Love,

Corrie

[Steve Saunders]

unsure if i have any such defining moments or pronouns left, Corrie, so wondering if i am the right volunteer.

I am willing to play the cultural cosmological boundary-story game though, as there might be some cultural pronouns I have not fully addressed.

So how do you want to do this? Do I tell the story of something, and then you ask me to tell the story that was before it?

1.
The story of the english language ... modern english, as spoken crystallised over the last 200 years thanks to Pepys and other standardising factors, before which spelling did not matter as long as the phonetics could be transferred. We see a boundary shift in the written word form over-writing the spoken word form, as illustrated in the poetry of of Walter Scott who was on the transition boundary; some of his poem lines were in the old spoken form and others in our newspeak.
Before this time english was primarily aural, with a more poetic phrasing, taking for example the play-work of Shakespeare in contrast to, for example, the dickensian literature. some of this is definitely the germanic influence of the hannoverian court.
Before Shakespeare we have Chaucer as one of the very few exemplars of medieval english and the streams of formal latin, written and the spoken emerging english. We have the normal-influencing french-meeting-saxon and before then the saxon meeting romano-british-welsh, and before then do we have proto indo-european pre-romano ...

many texts on etymology of english cite middle-french/german/norse/latin/greek, with very little,almost non-existent welsh/gaelic influence on english as written and spoken today.

and what is the story before this story?

can i do a story-before, or can I only do 'the next story'? I ask, because a story is a momentum form, and the historical aspect is forcing an object-oriented/relational view of story as an object rather than a momentum. I conclude the thinking is false/deluded/wrong to ask this of story - it can only ever go forward except in the constrained logic of a left-brained object-oriented world perceiver IMO.

Corrie, I think you are mixing fluids that curdle rather than blend; at least in my reality. There are plenty of ways of addressing pronouns OO-style without forcing story into that form. the whole point of story-busting is to stay in momentum and to not have to worry about the pronouns - the momentum of the story forms naturally takes care of the trapped pronouns. IMO, after years of trials on retreats it is more elegant to flow the story than to try to cleverly navigate the myriads of pronouns.

Steven

[Corrie van Wijk]

Hi Steve,

"wondering if i am the right volunteer": there is no such one as a wrong volunteer!

"Do I tell the story of something, and then you ask me to tell the story that was before it?": it's not about a different story, it's about the same story the way you told it before, e.g.:

Before:
"Story -13: school room, english literature, about 14-15 years old
and what is the story there?
tedium
Story before that story?
boredom
before that story?
staring out of windows, "will it ever end?" rather be outside ... humans are outdoor creatures at heart"

Now:
"The story of the english language [...] influence on english as written and spoken today."

So suppose you had started with the last one, and I asked you how you told the story before; you could have come up with the one you told earlier, and so on.

"a story is a momentum form, and the historical aspect is forcing an object-oriented/relational view of story as an object rather than a momentum.": this doesn't prevent a storyteller from associating in a previous story; may-be you should first find a space that knows about thow you told the story previously.

"I conclude the thinking is false/deluded/wrong to ask this of story - it can only ever go forward except in the constrained logic of a left-brained object-oriented world perceiver IMO.": the mind has indeed trouble thinking backwards, but you can tell the story from beginning to end, just how you remember telling it before. E.g.: legends tend to take on a more herioc form every time they are told; the reverse is you originally just had some remarkable event happening to you. Should make a nice conversation game! It reminds me of the story of John in Tauranga having his wallet stolen (elsewhere on this forum).

"the whole point of story-busting is to stay in momentum and to not have to worry about the pronouns - the momentum of the story forms naturally takes care of the trapped pronouns.": pronouns are implied in every sentence: e.g.: "everything was fun, life was fun.", in some languages, e.g. Italian, pronouns are integrated in the conjugation of the verb

"it is more elegant to flow the story than to try to cleverly navigate the myriads of pronouns.": doesn't the flow of the story take you forwards?

Corrie

[Steve Saunders]

indeed, stories have direction, as momentum is a vector: no space or time, but it does have direction; in this case, 'flow direction'.

I get your point, but I see no therapeutic benefit in it: telling the story again and again releases it anyway back to the factual event. It seems harder work for me and for you to try it this ('wrong') way round. ;-)

so why do you want to explore the history of story? what is the story of this story?

[Corrie van Wijk]

Hi Steve,

"telling the story again and again releases it anyway back to the factual event.": I'm not after the factual event, but the storytellers.

"It seems harder work for me and for you to try it this ('wrong') way round. ;-)": the other way round doesn't yet mean the wrong way around. And it isn't really backwards, it's just asking about how the previous you has told the story.

"so why do you want to explore the history of story?": I don't, I want to trace the evolution of the story.

"what is the story of this story?": getting from A to A-s.

Corrie

[Steve Saunders]

so the storyteller is the location-locus-moving perceiving-projector in space-time-moving of that story ... is the narrator also the storyteller?

you want to trace the evolution of the story, to find the original story teller? what if its the same teller just telling it different each time? like david we cannot even ask a clean question twice the same way, so why would a story be any different. Its emergent, as its supposed to be!

;-))))

love S

[Corrie van Wijk]

Hi Steve,

"is the narrator also the storyteller?" :My dictionary gives a slightly different meaning for storyteller from narrator, not only (s)he is the one to tell the story, but (s)he can also lie a little about it, or make it look better. What do you mean by asking this?

"you want to trace the evolution of the story, to find the original story teller? what if it's the same teller just telling it different each time?: it is supposed to be the same storyteller, telling it different each time will inform you about the subsequent 'storytellers' in terms of previous identities.

"like david we cannot even ask a clean question twice the same way, so why would a story be any different. Its emergent, as its supposed to be!": of course it is, telling the previous versions of it will trace its evolution of emergence.

Corrie

[Steve Saunders]

if the previous version can or should be told ... howevering ... IF there are previous identities ...

another way to see the evolution is to measure the story going forward, time after time.

the narrator can be a distinct aspect of self in some 'individual' constellations.

[Corrie van Wijk]

previous identities (or aspects of it) may be identical, but we all do change over time

if you measure the story going forward, you don't get the previous storytellers

[Steve Saunders]

to get the story tellers use pronoun scaling, to eliminate the story use momentum.

wko story teller was the story teller before they became this story teller? ...
and so on ...

[Corrie van Wijk]

you'd be asking of the perspective of A (here and now)

if you trace the story you get the whole context, the relationship of the storyteller with the story, and you may get the perspective of the story itself. "What does the story know about you?"

[Steve Saunders]

okay, so measuring and destroying the moving-experiencying storying, and making it an object, one could do the AB storyteller/story game ... and but ...

do you get the whole context, or do you get the OO context? is there a context to get before the decision is made to measure a context?

A and B relating (Z)
A about B, B about A
C of AZB
D of C
new D
new C

... and ?

[Steve Saunders]

Okay Corrie,

Dorothy is going to Kansas next week, and will be back early March. A wizard will be in town. and that is a story yet to be written.
The story before that one, is of the widow, the mite, the camel and the needle.
The story before that one, is of a quest to relieve a dragon of its hoard.
The story before that one, is of wind and snow.
The story before that one, is so long ago it is almost forgotten, it is of a land before, far far away, of strife and war.
The story before that one, is of Eden before Adam. "When Adam delved and Eva span, who then was a gentleman?"
And the story before that one, is of man as god, of creating and experiencing.
And the story before that, is that there never was time, now is now.
does this bring you closer to the A's?

[Corrie van Wijk]

Hi Steve,

"so measuring and destroying the moving-experiencying storying, and making it an object": it doesn't have to be an object if you find a space that knows about you (A) associating in the previous you (A minus 1) telling the story.

"do you get the whole context, or do you get the OO context?": whatever context is stored in memory and is retrievable.

"is there a context to get before the decision is made to measure a context?": the context automatically emerges with the memory; once conscious it can be labelled by a name, symbol, model or metaphor.

"A and B relating (Z)": you'd get A minus 1 (etc.) relating to the previous B;
"A about B": A-1 knowing about B-1;
"B about A": B-1 about A-1;
"C of AZB": C of AZB-1 remains the same; only A and B can change, as can A's perception of C.
"D of C": id.
"new D": id.
"new C": id.
"... and ?": the event of the story and it's context remain the same; only the story-teller has changed over time and their perception of the story and the way they told it.

"does this bring you closer to the A's?: it may, but A produces previous stories here, and it is not a previous A that is telling the story the way it was perceived previously.

[Steve Saunders]

So-ing, Corrie,

You have CD not changing - interesting. And you notice that the story changes not the story-teller, for 'me:A:Steven'.

In my reality, once a person 'just is' then they are eternal in their beingness: so there is no longer an A-1 in respect of time.
In respect of sequence, I could identify that there were structures that I had, that are no more.
But, in my universe time goes backward and forward from now, nicely convenient I know, but eradicating the former fragmented A's. It is as if the other never existed.

If you think about it, the self is immutable, eternal; it is the mind and body that changes, the aspects within mind: voices, pictures, feelings, etc.

So does this mean your CD is constant and your AZB changes? Kind of the reverse of me. Interesting!

A' changes -the neighbourhood of A: perceptions change, but these do not change A, merely the behaviour - or is that too NLP a concept? ;-)

S-ing

[Corrie van Wijk]

Hi Steve,

"You have CD not changing - interesting.": You confused me with the ABCD ... Z concept; if you just tell a story you don't have a goal in mind, perhaps except for needing to tell someone. So consider it just as an event, supposedly in the past, that happened to A.

"And you notice that the story changes not the story-teller, for 'me: A: Steven'.":The story changes with the story-teller: that is, it is about the same event, but the perception of the younger storyteller may differ from that of A.

"In my reality, once a person 'just is'": If you just are, you are in A, which means Steven here and now; but sure you remember how you told the story before, e.g.: "How did 14-15 years old in english literature school room tell the story of your life?"

"then they are eternal in their beingness: so there is no longer an A-1 in respect of time.": no, indeed there isn't, but you have a memory of him.

"In respect of sequence, I could identify that there were structures that I had, that are no more.": probably there are also structures now, that weren't there before?

"But, in my universe time goes backward and forward from now, nicely convenient I know, but eradicating the former fragmented A's. It is as if the other never existed.": that's right, the present you (AE) has emerged from the previous you's.

"If you think about it, the self is immutable, eternal; it is the mind and body that changes, the aspects within mind: voices, pictures, feelings, etc.": the changing aspects of bodymind may alter the perception of A about itself.

"So does this mean your CD is constant and your AZB changes? Kind of the reverse of me. Interesting!": at the time of the event, the context (which is not C, nor D) stays the same, but the next version of the story the teller comes up with may reflect a different perception of the context.

"A' changes -the neighbourhood of A": hmm, from a systems point of view that's right: A can hardly be in any neighbourhood, especially a social one, without influencing it.

"perceptions change, but these do not change A, merely the behaviour": any perception changes A's brain wiring, strenghtening synapses. A may not be aware of that, but may notice it's behaviour changes as a result of that. E.g. if you make a decision, your body already has started to execute it, all you can do once you become aware of it, is try to stop it so you can think it over first: (Damasio) "Once we think that we are about to perform an action, the brain has already started that action."

"- or is that too NLP a concept? ;-)": what is 'NLP'?

C'ing

[Steve Saunders]

Okay, and the brain/field is seen to change before decisions become conscious or spoken.

There have been some study reports (New Scientist) on reaction times showing a person reacting to another is 20ms faster than the person taking the decision, but that it takes 200ms to react, making the first to draw the winner in a gunfight.

However, such studies do not work with the anticipatory e.g. the £10 note test used in NLP to get predictive reactions, which go faster than the initiatory. We feel/know before something happens - IF we are associated/tuned.

If the self is the body then it changes, if the self is something else, then it can be immutable; the story of the life and the body; that emerges through time.

As every second our perspective changes, so a story would change. This is life. The only reason to go back to the past would be to undo a structure no longer serving. Memories are no problem; emotionally loaded memories are nonetheless indicators of structures.

S-ing

[Corrie van Wijk]

"We feel/know before something happens": I guess an organism is able to pick up other's intentional actions by sublimal cues.

"If the self is the body then it changes, if the self is something else, then it can be immutable": I guess our perception of self can be rather constant over time.

"The only reason to go back to the past would be to undo a structure no longer serving. Memories are no problem; emotionally loaded memories are nonetheless indicators of structures.": I suppose that memories are only emotionally loaded when they are autobiographical/episodic. Hence my pursuit of the storyteller.