[From Bjorn
Simonsen (2003.05.31,23:20 EST)]

From Bruce
Gregory 92003.0531.1521)

I cannot
tell if our perceptions are organized differently or we simply

different models. I never perceive the world as composed

primarily of
relationships. I perceive relationships, but never to the

exclusion of
objects and configurations. This may be why we seem to talk

past each
other. We may truly live in different worlds.

Pardon me for interrupting.

You said it
yourself. Of course we live in different worlds and periodically in life we particularly
control at a certain level. Of course we often contemporary also control on
other levels.

Often when I
read your letters which I (also often) appreciate very high, I think that BG controls
the level of configurations (last time your “HPCT model redux” indicated that?.

I have a collegue
who is very vain with clothes, he talks about clothes and cars all the day. I
have earlier thought that he controls the configuration level most of
the day.

I think
sportsmen and champions control at the relationships level most of their time.

Daily I work
with people who need different kinds of rehabilitation. They have and have had an illness for many years. My job
is to help them with occupational
rehabilitation. These people often have a problem, they control most of
their days at the reference level, and their illness affects of course what
they control. I ask them what suitable profession they wish in the future, they
struggle often in vain to start controlling at the program level. This is a
problem for many.

I also often
have, when I have recruited people for my workplace, tested them to find out what they
control under the interview. Different candidates control on a different level
most time under the interview.

If I was going
to recruit a leader for a business under evolution I would have recruited a person
who most time under the interviews controlled at a program level. And if I was going
to recruit a leader
for a bureaucracy I would have recruited a person who most of the time controlled at the reference level.

Periodically in
life we particularly control at a certain level, but this can

Different people
truly live in different worlds.



[From Bjorn Simonsen (2003.06.03,21:05EST)]

[From Bruce Gregory (2003.0602.1332)]

I know I was impolite a week ago and interfered your discussion with Bill about perceiving at the reference and the configuration level without presenting myself. Let me do it now. I am bjorn (simonsen), I live in Norway ( on the edge of Europe, north) and I am interested in PCT. I should have joined the discussions in the group more, but I have a job and a wife. I join a bible group to find the resemblance between the Soul and the Observer (once a month). I don’t know what anyone of them is. And the day and night has just 24 hours.

Back to business. I look forward to your comment.

I would welcome a model of awareness. I haven’t come across anything but hand waving so far.

May I?

I think our use of words like awareness and consciousness are the hindrance to understand consciousness. (I know this sentence sounds funny, but try to understand how I think).

Two years ago I once asked Rick if he could understand how an unchangeable world would look like. He answered no. But I knew he knew something about it. It is just to put d and qi like zero and calculate what happens.

With our Brain in an Environmental world we now and again experience different disturbances. This result in different actions and we experience changing p. Take a look out your window and look at the plane crossing the sky. The background of your field of view is the hilly ground. What do you concentrate on. I guess concentrate on the moving plane. When I sit here writing I don’t concentrate on the counter pressure from the chair I am sitting on. I concentrate on the keyboard and my moving fingertips.

Let me make a long history short. I think that we are conscious changing variables and let me simplify and say: When we control anything on the transmission level we are conscious.

This is my contribution to a model of awareness and Bill made it. I know you can and will come with counter-arguments. I can do it myself. But this is my first step.


[From Bjorn Simonsen (2003.06.05. 18:30 EST)]

[From David Goldstein

So, “activated” means a perceptual signal shifts from an unaware to an aware state. The >perceptual signal is always there, as you say. I think this may be a primary role of
the >Observer.

I am glad I was so wrong. I see now I misunderstood you.