Results 1 to 14 of 14

Thread: Mind your metaphors!

  1. #1
    Join Date
    Dec 2003
    Location
    Holland
    Posts
    838

    Default Mind your metaphors!

    Steve Saunders: "The metaphor approach turns the objectified outer/inner child information into metaphor that can then move e.g. curtains that can then flap like a bird and fly to the client's body. The key point is touching the body."

    What happens if the client's metaphor doesn't have a possibility to move and touch the body?

  2. #2
    Join Date
    Dec 2003
    Location
    Forest of Dean, Gloucestershire, UK
    Posts
    387

    Default

    Steve, where does the assertion: 'the key point is touching the body' come from?

  3. #3
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Location
    Glastonbury, England
    Posts
    512

    Default The Roof of the Sistine Chapel

    David referred several times to me and to groups in my presence about arranging for the body to be in a place that touches the disembodied aspects of self - downloading.

    He would perhaps after days of "scaling" get a real-scaled world drawn by the client and then get the client to stand on steps or at the perfect angle of viewpoint in the psycho-active space where the information is held. This is the key to the whirlygig's success.

    He referred several times to the divine spark of God touching Adam on the roof of Sistine.

    He also would refer to Michelangelo and the David in the marble block in a similar vein.


    Steven

  4. #4
    Join Date
    Dec 2003
    Location
    Holland
    Posts
    838

    Default

    Steve: "get the client to stand on steps or at the perfect angle of viewpoint in the psycho-active space where the information is held."

    This sounds to me as a clean space approach, not a metaphor one.

  5. #5
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Location
    Glastonbury, England
    Posts
    512

    Default Moving the Metaphor

    That equates to moving B in EK.

    To get the metaphor to move: this is SyM, no?

    Steven

  6. #6
    Join Date
    Dec 2003
    Location
    Forest of Dean, Gloucestershire, UK
    Posts
    387

    Default

    Getting the metaphor to move is like NLP, not SyM. Cheap jibe, Steve, beneath you really.

  7. #7
    Join Date
    Dec 2003
    Location
    Holland
    Posts
    838

    Default

    Corrie: "What happens if the client's metaphor doesn't have a possibility to move and touch the body?"

    All of the above really doesn't answer my question.

    Whether a metaphor has a possibility to move (parts of) it, depends on the metaphor, nothing you can do about it.

    I think what David meant by 'touching the body' is some kind of reintegration: if a lost feeling, as expressed through a metaphor can be reunited in a healthy way with the here-and-now, you get a rightly scaled world.

    So not only a metaphor better have possibilities for change, also it must be able to reconnect with the person at A now. If it doesn't, it tells you something about A and you should perhaps develop that first. Because, if B is about 'WWYLTHH?' and the metaphor doesn't have any cue or clue how to get there, what does A to stop it, and who or what is served by that?

  8. #8
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Location
    Glastonbury, England
    Posts
    512

    Default No jibes, just not explained

    SyM moves the metaphor (a like of B); fact; like it or lump it.

    Not pejorative, not intended other than simple perception of the core of how I believe, nay know, this all fits together.

    Steven

  9. #9
    Join Date
    Dec 2003
    Location
    Forest of Dean, Gloucestershire, UK
    Posts
    387

    Default

    Okay, explain please what you mean that SyM 'moves' the metaphor.

  10. #10
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Location
    Glastonbury, England
    Posts
    512

    Default B - the Goal, A the perceiving self (client)

    Steve asserts: "Sym moves B".

    A client statement is migrated into an outcome (B the goal) and this is migrated into metaphor, journeyed and shifted in form and the client experiences betterness in relation to the starting B. B has moved; A's perception of B has changed. If the GMT has done its job the curtains have flapped and the bird has flown to the client and re-touched the divine body - B the dissociated self has moved to A, the body and re-associated - when SyM is used to perform the GMT; it is a model thereof, no?

    Hence GMT/SyM move B. Whereas CS was a design to fix B and move A. Whereas EK was designed to do either or both. IMO. IMO. IMO!

    Steven (I could be wrong!)

  11. #11
    Join Date
    Dec 2003
    Location
    Forest of Dean, Gloucestershire, UK
    Posts
    387

    Default move and change

    Okay I think I get that you use metaphors of movement to represent change in a system -- small wonder considering your current line of development! I took you literally: to move a metaphor like an NLP technique where e.g. a sound is jostled willy-nilly into a different location in perceptual space.

    Re GMT and SyM moving B: I wonder if David doing GMT and pulling someone back towards the pristine was working with A rather than B? In one sense, B is a Perceived of A anyway so a change in B is really a change in A.

    I am puzzled trying to correlate your statement 'how I believe, nay know, this all fits together' with 'IMO IMO IMO' and 'Steven (I could be wrong)'.

  12. #12
    Join Date
    Dec 2003
    Location
    Holland
    Posts
    838

    Smile

    None of the above answers my question!

    Also, is it possible to make a distinction between GM and SyM?

  13. #13
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Location
    Glastonbury, England
    Posts
    512

    Default A renewed attempt to answer

    Quote Originally Posted by Corrie van Wijk View Post
    What happens if the client's metaphor doesn't have a possibility to move and touch the body?
    See my answer in the "It depends" post under the Inner Child Q4 thread - maybe finally it gives an answer Corrie?


    Phil - all these constructs of ABCDe are aspects of: as all communication comes from the "not here and now" (in my world) so working with A: of course one must say that F works with what A perceives and adjacently to A is the next focus of attention ... A changes of course in response. The question is whether "A moves" or "B moves" or both or a metaphor shifts representing ABCDe. (move = changing location which changes perspective ...)

    In space A moves or B moves. In a landscape, the representations move more in the imaginary world. In moving the motion moves ...

    more anon maybe ...

  14. #14
    Join Date
    Dec 2003
    Location
    Holland
    Posts
    838

    Default

    Corrie: "So not only a metaphor better have possibilities for change, also it must be able to reconnect with the person at A now. If it doesn't, it tells you something about A and you should perhaps develop that first. Because, if B is about 'WWYLTHH?' and the metaphor doesn't have any cue or clue how to get there, what does A to stop it, and who or what is served by that?"

    Steve: "What has to be true that a person has become that way?"

    Thank you Steve, for your answer in Inner Child section in the Q4-thread. Isn't it interesting that since Phil gave us all these options, we somehow create an inner loop and become self-organizing?

    I'll answer you there as well, but for now the above question:

    What has to be true is that a person needs a fix metaphor, it is not allowed to change or it is even in a bind. So the person can't handle change; it is served by staying put. But since staying is an -ing, it is also a move. Let's stick to the metaphor approach (CL and EK have other possibilities): what inevitably changes is time, so you could perhaps ask about what the metaphor is being there time after time.

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •