MOL

What does despising someone accomplish for u what does get u

···

Sent from my Verizon Wireless BlackBerry


From: Bill Powers powers_w@FRONTIER.NET

Sender: “Control Systems Group Network (CSGnet)” CSGNET@LISTSERV.ILLINOIS.EDU

Date: Thu, 09 Jun 2011 08:35:15 -0600

To: CSGNET@LISTSERV.ILLINOIS.EDU

ReplyTo: “Control Systems Group Network (CSGnet)”
CSGNET@LISTSERV.ILLINOIS.EDU

Subject: Re: MOL

[From Bill Powers (2001.06.09.0810 MDT)]

Rick Marken (2011.06.08.2100) –

BP earlier: If you don’t want to despise people, what keeps you from
stopping?

RM: The fact that I keep
experiencing the people as despicable.

BP: Can you describe what you think and feel that tells you someone is
being despicable?

BP earlier: I don’t mean theoretically or hypothetically, I mean
actually, when you ask yourself that question. When you think of
not despising anyone any more, ever again, do you experience some
reluctance to do that?

RM: Not at all.

If you’re not at all reluctant to stop despising people who are being
despicable, what prevents you from stopping? Is it their quality of
despicableness that prevents it? Is there some reason not to stop? Have
you changed your mind about wanting not to despise them?

Over,

Bill P

[From Rick Marken (2011.06.09.0810)]

Bill Powers (2001.06.09.0810 MDT)–

BP: Can you describe what you think and feel that tells you someone is
being despicable?

It almost always involves seeing someone hurting another person in some way that I consider unjustified, and for what I perceive to be selfish reasons.

BP: If you’re not at all reluctant to stop despising people who are being
despicable, what prevents you from stopping?

I don’t feel like the despising is voluntary. It feels like a reflex reaction. When I see what I consider to be evil being done I just despise people. The despising feels independent of me. So asking me what prevents me from stopping despising is like asking me what prevents me from stopping my patellar reflex when someone taps me on the patellar tendon.

Is it their quality of
despicableness that prevents it?

In a sense, yes, inasmuch as it’s the “stimulus” for my “response”

Is there some reason not to stop?

Not really.

Have
you changed your mind about wanting not to despise them?

No, I would like to be like Jesus and love ass wipes as much as he did. I think Jesus was a very admirable fellow. But I also would like to be like Superman and wipe out these creeps. I think Superman is quite admirable as well.

Best

Rick

···


Richard S. Marken PhD
rsmarken@gmail.com
www.mindreadings.com

[From Rick Marken (2011.06.09.0830)]

What does despising someone accomplish for u what does get u

Great question Carter.

As I just said to Bill, the despising feels reflexive so I don’t really experience it as accomplishing anything. Though since I know that what seems like reflexive responses are actions aimed at preventing disturbances from “pushing” controlled perceptions from their reference, I imagine that the despising is aimed at keeping some controlled variable in it’s reference state. I’m not sure I know what perception I’m trying to keep under control by despising people – perhaps my perception of something like justice? – and I’m not sure whether the despising accomplishes this control. But I suspect it does; I feel good when I despise someone like Rep. Paul Ryan in the same way as I feel good when the bullied 98 lb weakling comes back as Charles Atlas and beats the crap out of the bully. So, yes, the despising does seem to accomplish something for me.

But it also doesn’t, since I also have values I control for that make my own despising unattractive to me (and, I’m sure, to others; and I do want others to like me; so to the extent that my despising makes me unattractive to those whose approbation I desire, it is not accomplishing what I want).

I’m clearly in a conflict with “despising” being at the lowest level of that conflict. Part of me – the comic book hero side – despises the bad guys; another part of me – the Jesus side – wants to love and help everyone, even the bullies.

I think I’ve been in this conflict since I was a kid. I think I’ll just have to live with it; I see no solution. And it’s really not that bad.

Best

Rick

···

On Thu, Jun 9, 2011 at 7:42 AM, Carter J. Cloyd cartercloyd@verizon.net wrote:

Richard S. Marken PhD

rsmarken@gmail.com
www.mindreadings.com

[From Bill Powers (2011.06.09.0930 MDT)]

Rick Marken (2011.06.09.0810) --

BP earlier: Can you describe what you think and feel that tells you someone is being despicable?

RM:It almost always involves seeing someone hurting another person in some way that I consider unjustified, and for what I perceive to be selfish reasons.

BP earlier: If you're not at all reluctant to stop despising people who are being despicable, what prevents you from stopping?

RM: I don't feel like the despising is voluntary. It feels like a reflex reaction. When I see what I consider to be evil being done I just despise people. The despising feels independent of me. So asking me what prevents me from stopping despising is like asking me what prevents me from stopping my patellar reflex when someone taps me on the patellar tendon.

OK, I didn't want to just assume that. What do you experience when this involuntary despising occurs? Is there anything you think, feel, or want to do?

BP earlier: Have you changed your mind about wanting not to despise them?

No, I would like to be like Jesus and love ass wipes as much as he did. I think Jesus was a very admirable fellow. But I also would like to be like Superman and wipe out these creeps. I think Superman is quite admirable as well.

So you would like to love them and you'd like to wipe them out. Are there good reasons for both possibilities? Why love them? Why wipe them out?

Best,

Bill P.

Many ways to get to the same result, in MOL. Yes, good question, Carter.
You ask the next one.

Best,

Bill P.

···

At 08:32 AM 6/9/2011 -0700, you wrote:

[From Rick Marken
(2011.06.09.0830)]

On Thu, Jun 9, 2011 at 7:42 AM, Carter J. Cloyd > <cartercloyd@verizon.net > > wrote:
What does despising someone accomplish for u what does get u

Great question Carter.

[From Rick Marken (2011.06.09.1440)]

Bill Powers (2011.06.09.0930 MDT)–

RM: I don’t feel like the despising is voluntary. It feels like a reflex reaction. When I see what I consider to be evil being done I just despise people. The despising feels independent of me. So asking me what prevents me from stopping despising is like asking me what prevents me from stopping my patellar reflex when someone taps me on the patellar tendon.

OK, I didn’t want to just assume that. What do you experience when this involuntary despising occurs? Is there anything you think, feel, or want to do?

It depends on the reason for the despising. If it’s economic despising then I think that it would be nice if such people didn’t exist, I feel angry and I would like to be rid of them. If it’s personal despising – like someone who has done something to serious hurt one of my children – then I think and feel the same but what I want to do is not only illegal and immoral but just plain ugly.

RM: No, I would like to be like Jesus and love ass wipes as much as he did. I think Jesus was a very admirable fellow. But I also would like to be like Superman and wipe out these creeps. I think Superman is quite admirable as well.

BP: So you would like to love them and you’d like to wipe them out.

Yes.

BP: Are there good reasons for both possibilities? Why love them? Why wipe them out?

I don’t know if they are “good” reasons but they seem to be my own reasons: I want to love them because I think that is the best way to deal with all human beings, no matter how awful. And I’d like to wipe them out because I believe they make the world a worse place by being in it.

By the way, this is really useful to me now because I just had a workshop approved that I will be giving this Fall at Antioch LA. The students will be counselors in training and the workshop will be on PCT and MOL. So getting a better grasp of MOL will help;-)

Best

Rick

···


Richard S. Marken PhD
rsmarken@gmail.com
www.mindreadings.com

[From Bill Powers (2011.06.09.1945 MDT)]

Rick Marken (2011.06.09.1440) –

BP: Are there good reasons for both possibilities? Why love them? Why
wipe them out?

RM: I don’t know if they are “good” reasons but they seem to be
my own reasons: I want to love them because I think that is the best way
to deal with all human beings, no matter how awful. And I’d like to
wipe them out because I believe they make the world a worse place by
being in it.

BP:OK, as you noted elsewhere, this looks like a conflict. But then you
said this:

RM:I think I’ve been in this
conflict since I was a kid. I think I’ll just have to live with it; I see
no solution. And it’s really not that bad.

BP: I read this as a new level of conflict: “I want to resolve this
conflict and I don’t want to resolve it.” Does this new one have to
be settled first? If you resolve the “despising” conflict, does
that create a problem either way it goes? I’m just guessing – look and
see. What happens if you decide to resolve the “despising”
conflict? What happens if you decide not to?

Best,

Bill P.

[From Rick Marken (2011.06.10.2110)]

Bill Powers (2011.06.09.1945 MDT)–

BP:OK, as you noted elsewhere, this looks like a conflict. But then you
said this:

RM:I think I’ve been in this
conflict since I was a kid. I think I’ll just have to live with it; I see
no solution. And it’s really not that bad.

BP: I read this as a new level of conflict: “I want to resolve this
conflict and I don’t want to resolve it.” Does this new one have to
be settled first? If you resolve the “despising” conflict, does
that create a problem either way it goes? I’m just guessing – look and
see. What happens if you decide to resolve the “despising”
conflict? What happens if you decide not to?

Hey, I thought you MOL guys weren’t supposed to be analyzing;-)

Actually, I think this is an excellent observation. I think I do have a conflict about wanting (and not wanting) to resolve the conflict. I want to resolve the conflict so that I can look at the whole problem (of inequitable economics) analytically without getting all emotional about it. I don’t want to solve the conflict so that I can remain emotionally committed to solving what I perceive as these totally unnecessary problems.

Best

Rick

···


Richard S. Marken PhD
rsmarken@gmail.com

www.mindreadings.com

[FromMike Acree (2011.06.11.1313 PDT)]

http://www.ted.com/talks/william_ury.html

This is a charming talk on conflict resolution, based on the method of “going to the balcony,” which is about as close as you can get to “going up a level” without going over the actual retail price.

Mike

[From Bill Powers (2011.06.11.2310 M<DT)]

Rick Marken (2011.06.10.2110) –

BP: I read this as a new level of conflict: “I want to resolve
this conflict and I don’t want to resolve it.” Does this new one
have to be settled first? If you resolve the “despising”
conflict, does that create a problem either way it goes? I’m just
guessing – look and see. What happens if you decide to resolve the
“despising” conflict? What happens if you decide not
to?

Hey, I thought you MOL guys weren’t supposed to be
analyzing;-)

You’re right, and I’m sure this would have come up anyway.

Actually, I think this is an
excellent observation.

I might better have asked about that comment of yours when you made it,
but I didn’t see the conflict in it on the first reading.

I think I do have a
conflict about wanting (and not wanting) to resolve the conflict. I want
to resolve the conflict so that I can look at the whole problem (of
inequitable economics) analytically without getting all emotional about
it. I don’t want to solve the conflict so that I can remain emotionally
committed to solving what I perceive as these totally unnecessary
problems.

Will you elaborate on those two ways of being? What is the actual
conflict about? Is this the same as the “despising” conflict,
or a different one?

Best,

Bill P.

[From Rick Marken (2011.06.12.0930)]

Mike Acree (2011.06.11.1313 PDT)]

http://www.ted.com/talks/william_ury.html

This is a charming talk on conflict resolution, based on the method of “going to the balcony,” which is about as close as you can get to “going up a level” without going over the actual retail price.

I liked this alot; the “third side” does seem to be the same as “going up a level”.

Best

Rick

···


Richard S. Marken PhD
rsmarken@gmail.com

www.mindreadings.com

[FromMike Acree (2011.06.12.1133 PDT)]

Rick Marken (2011.06.12.0930)–

I liked this alot; the “third side” does seem to be the same as “going up a level”.

Thanks, Rick. A number of theories have a similar concept. Personal Construct Theory (the other PCT, from George Kelly) has a concept of “slot-rattling,” flipping back and forth between alternatives at the same level, and techniques like “laddering” to help people move up a level. Jay Haley’s Strategies of Psychotherapy interprets various approaches to psychotherapy as having in common the use of metacommunication: Rather than answering a question or responding directly to a statement by the patient, the therapist comments on it, taking the communication up a level (“I wonder why you’re curious about my religious beliefs.”). Naturally I’m partial to the conceptualization behind MOL.

Mike

[From Rick Marken (2011.06.12.1250)]

Bill Powers (2011.06.11.2310 M<DT)–

Rick Marken (2011.06.10.2110) –

RM: I think I do have a
conflict about wanting (and not wanting) to resolve the conflict. I want
to resolve the conflict so that I can look at the whole problem (of
inequitable economics) analytically without getting all emotional about
it. I don’t want to solve the conflict so that I can remain emotionally
committed to solving what I perceive as these totally unnecessary
problems.

BP: Will you elaborate on those two ways of being? What is the actual
conflict about? Is this the same as the “despising” conflict,
or a different one?

It may be the same. What I was thinking is that I am sometimes torn between trying to approach what I see as economic insanity analytically, just showing the data and waiting for everyone to then get on board the sane train versus emotionally, trying to get everyone on board using the force of revolutionary screeds. This seems somewhat different to me than the “despising” conflict since I am still conflicted about whether I want to despise people when I am dealing with things analytically or emotionally. I suppose that the less I end up despising, the more I incline towards an analytical approach, so these conflicts are certainly related by I don’t think they are the same.

Best

Rick

···


Richard S. Marken PhD
rsmarken@gmail.com

www.mindreadings.com

[From Mike Acree (2011.06.15.1221 PDT)]

Since this thread seems to have paused, or to have been taken off-line, perhaps a third-party comment won’t be too disruptive.

There are three things which have not so far been distinguished: (a) despising, (b) making public the despising, © making public the despising repeatedly and emphatically. It is the last which gives the impression of a conflict, or of an unsuccessful attempt at control, like a cough that doesn’t reach the tickle. Making these distinctions raises the question of what would be unsatisfying about keeping the despising private, which some would say was the polite thing to do. Or disclosing it just once—or maybe just once every 5 or 10 years, for the benefit of newcomers. There have been no indications of doubt about the sincerity of the message among the ostensible audience, beyond what was prompted by the vigorous repetition itself—raising the question of who the intended audience really is, and why he is so resistant to being convinced. What evidence does he have that we don’t? Is he possibly mistaken? As is usually the case, other methods of dealing with this particular tickle are not hard to find; the challenge is to find one that doesn’t entail significant reorganization.

Mike

[From Bill Powers (2011.06.15.1430 MDT)]

Mike Acree (2011.06.15.1221 PDT) --

MA: Since this thread seems to have paused, or to have been taken off-line, perhaps a third-party comment won't be too disruptive.

There are three things which have not so far been distinguished: (a) despising, (b) making public the despising, (c) making public the despising repeatedly and emphatically. It is the last which gives the impression of a conflict, or of an unsuccessful attempt at control, like a cough that doesn't reach the tickle.

BP: MOL is an entirely "client-centered" type of process. The problem is defined by, and solved by, the client. Diagnosis is not used, nor does the therapist try to have insights into the causes of the client's problems, or make recommendations about needed changes. The therapist acts as a facilitator, not as a problem-solver. Any changes that occur are brought about by the client's own reorganizing system, and they are the changes that the client finds beneficial and possible to make in present time.

The chief tool of the MOL therapist is acquiring information by asking questions about what the client is experiencing, a process that necessarily involves bringing the client's attention to aspects of what has been discussed. In trying to get a clear understanding of the client's experiences, the therapist helps the client to see them more clearly, too, because the client must look inside to see what the answers are. The therapist also is alert for signs of conflict and tries to keep the conversation focused on any conflicts that come to light until they cease to be a limiting factor. And always, the therapist is especially tuned to detecting signs of background thoughts that indicate some higher level of organization becoming active. As soon as practicable, the questioning is shifted to the topics in the background.

Timothy Carey, probably the psychotherapist with the longest record of using MOL exclusively in his practice, has gone so far as to let clients decide when and for how long they are to have sessions. He reported that the waiting list on his national health service (while he was working in Scotland) dropped from many months to zero despite an unchanged rate of referral, apparently because of the greater efficiency of MOL over the methods previously used.

All this is by way of explaining why I have not pressed Rick to continue our exchanges. It is quite common in MOL therapy for most of the advances to take place between rather than during sessions. Often the changes are not explicitly noted; things just seem different, and others notice differences, but it seems so natural that the changes are taken for granted. That makes sense, because the processes of change that operate in MOL therapy are the same ones that are always going on. They're just focused more effectively by the MOL process.

I should think that libertarians like you, Mike, would be enthusiastic about MOL.

Best,

Bill P.

[From Mike Acree (2011.06.15.2121 PDT)]

Bill Powers (2011.06.15.1430 MDT)--

Yes, MOL is appealing in many ways. I especially liked the point about
how often more is accomplished between sessions than within, and that
was a very satisfying note about Tim Carey's practice.

I was aware that my comments as an observer were not ones that would
ever be made by an MOL facilitator, which I why I withheld them until
the exchange appeared to have ended. But perhaps they might more
usefully never have been uttered at all.

Mike

[From Bill Powers (2011.06.15.2355 MDT)]

Mike Acree (2011.06.15.2121 PDT) --

MA: I was aware that my comments as an observer were not ones that would
ever be made by an MOL facilitator, which I why I withheld them until
the exchange appeared to have ended. But perhaps they might more
usefully never have been uttered at all.

BP: Maybe. I was trying to leave things open for whatever comes next, if anything, and anyway I'm always a bit uncomfortable talking about someone as if he isn't there when he is there. Sort of like Grand Rounds used to be.

Best,

Bill P.

[From Rick Marken (2011.06.16.0820)]

Bill Powers (2011.06.15.1430 MDT)–

Mike Acree (2011.06.15.1221 PDT) –

MA: Since this thread seems to have paused, or to have been taken off-line, perhaps a third-party comment won’t be too disruptive.

BP: MOL is an entirely “client-centered” type of process. The problem is defined by, and solved by, the client…

All this is by way of explaining why I have not pressed Rick to continue our exchanges. It is quite common in MOL therapy for most of the advances to take place between rather than during sessions. Often the changes are not explicitly noted; things just seem different, and others notice differences, but it seems so natural that the changes are taken for granted. That makes sense, because the processes of change that operate in MOL therapy are the same ones that are always going on. They’re just focused more effectively by the MOL process.

I should think that libertarians like you, Mike, would be enthusiastic about MOL.

This is a great description of what seems to have happened. Whatever “conflict” I had – and it may have been a rather weak one – seems to have become unimportant to me. Something feels different but I can’t tell you what or why. All I know is that I now feel completely free to despise Republican – and libertarian – ideas, which, I suppose, makes me a self-hating libertarian. Maybe I’ve reorganized to not despise libertarians who despise themselves;-)

Best regards

Rick

···


Richard S. Marken PhD
rsmarken@gmail.com
www.mindreadings.com

[From Bill Powers 2011.06.16.1000 MDT)]

Rick Marken (2011.06.16.0820) –

This is a great description of
what seems to have happened. Whatever “conflict” I had – and
it may have been a rather weak one – seems to have become
unimportant to me. Something feels different but I can’t tell you
what or why. All I know is that I now feel completely free to despise
Republican – and libertarian – ideas, which, I suppose, makes me a
self-hating libertarian. Maybe I’ve reorganized to not despise
libertarians who despise themselves;-)

Or even those who don’t?
I notice that you’re saying you despise republican and libertarian
ideas. Is that something new? Anyhow, the therapist will be IN if
any side-effects are encountered. My statement is in the mail.

Best,

Bill

[From Rick Marken (2011.06.16.0920)]

[From Bill Powers 2011.06.16.1000 MDT)]

Rick Marken (2011.06.16.0820) –

This is a great description of
what seems to have happened. Whatever “conflict” I had – and
it may have been a rather weak one – seems to have become
unimportant to me. Something feels different but I can’t tell you
what or why. All I know is that I now feel completely free to despise
Republican – and libertarian – ideas, which, I suppose, makes me a
self-hating libertarian. Maybe I’ve reorganized to not despise
libertarians who despise themselves;-)

Or even those who don’t?

Nope;-)

I notice that you’re saying you despise republican and libertarian
ideas. Is that something new?

Yes, I’ve learned to keep quiet my disdain for the people who espouse those ideas. Oops :wink:

Anyhow, the therapist will be IN if
any side-effects are encountered. My statement is in the mail.

I’ll look for it but I probably won’t pay it since a side effect of the reorganization seems to be a complete lack of anxiety about not paying my MOL bills;-)

Love

Rick

···

Best,

Bill


Richard S. Marken PhD
rsmarken@gmail.com
www.mindreadings.com