From Bob Clark (931129.1740 EST)
ED FORD (931126.1000)
First, thanks for Appendix Two. The copy of your book, "Freedom from
Stress," that I got last summer is not the revised version.
Nevertheless, I can pretty well see where you're coming from.
I've been a bit puzzled because you have listed the "Official" list of
the higher orders, but made little of no direct use of them.
The modifications presented in your current post answers that
question. Your "conversions" of these three orders seem to me much
better -- especially for your purposes.
I've never quite seen how to apply "systems concepts," "principles,"
and "programs" to the needs of a User. They appear to me to consist
of a logical grouping of related activities, with little direct
relation either to current perceptions or to anticipated needs.
Those groupings were worked out after Bill and I separated, so I am
unfamiliar with the underlying analysis.
I think you might find my suggested sequence of levels to be useful
-- as presented in the "Demo Series": Mechanical Skills, Learning
Skills, People Skills, Individual Performance, and Personality. This
Series is not complete, it was about all I could squeeze out of the
Portable Demonstrator. Intrinsic Systems are missing here, as well
as some higher levels. Indeed, the levels presented could certainly
use elaboration and other improvements.
A consistent addition of higher levels might include: "Character," "
Self Image," and "Decision Making Entity (DME)." Careful analysis,
yet to be presented, may show that these additions would complete the
upper levels of the hierarchy. The relation to Intrinsic Systems
would still need attention.
The importance you attach to "responsibility" is consistent with my
experience both with adult stutterers and mental patients in group
therapy. This and other properties of "Character" are surely very
I am a bit puzzled at your use of "energy" in the following:
The beauty of HPCT is that in spite of all that happens to us,
including what is done to us, it is all perceived as energy and it
only takes on meaning or becomes understandable according to how we
create that meaning inside our own perceptual system.
If you omit the reference to "energy," I agree. A nice summary. But
what's this about "energy?"
Regards, Bob Clark