MOL

CSGnet Archive CSG2005
141

[From Fred Nickols (2004.12.10.0605 EST)] --

Bjorn Simonsen's response to Kenny Kitzke has a snippet from Kenny's post
that prompts a couple of comments/questions on my part...

> From Kenny Kitzke (2004.12.08)

> Knowing how to go up a level and change those perceptions is a
> major part of what PCTers might call "reorganization." I prefer
> calling it "learning" for practical if not theoretical reasons.

I think I'm missing a couple of things in relation to Kenny's comment above.

I've always thought that one of the PCT "ponies" would be methods and
techniques for consciously, deliberately and directionally changing
reference signals. I've also thought that no such methods or techniques
exist. I've understood MOL to be a facilitative process that can lead to or
result in reorganization but Kenny's comment makes it sound a lot like MOL
can be used to change reference signals at will. Is that the case?

I'm a little confused about the part of Kenny's statement above that says
"change those perceptions." I thought reorganization (and thus MOL) had to
do with changing reference signals. Assuming Kenny is correct, does that
mean that every signal, no matter its referent, is a perception?

From Bjorn Simonsen (2004.12.10,11:00 EST)]

Regarding MOL I would like two things to happen.
1. I would appreciate if you Kenny (or anybody else) could write an
article about MOL and present it on CSG. I am most interested in what
may happen if we move up a level. Why do the conflicts on lower levels
disappear? Is MOL really a kind of reorganization? Or is the structure
of ECUs given when we control other perceptions?
2. I would like to see how you, Kenny (or anybody else) word yourself when
you shall help your client to a higher level without using the HPCT
nomenclature. Generally with examples.

I'll echo Bjorn's request and also ask if perhaps this has already been
written up?

Regards,

Fred Nickols
nickols@att.net

142

[From Kenny Kitzke (2004.12.10,11:00 EST)]

<Bjorn Simonsen (2004.12.10,11:00 EST)>

<Regarding MOL I would like two things to happen.

  1. I would appreciate if you Kenny (or anybody else) could write an article
    about MOL and present it on CSG. I am most interested in what may happen if
    we move up a level. Why do the conflicts on lower levels disappear? Is MOL
    really a kind of reorganization? Or is the structure of ECUs given when we
    control other perceptions?>

Bjorn, I sense that others are more qualified than me to do this. Mark Lazare would probably be way ahead of me. Also, possibly, Bob Summers.

I have used MOL to solve a difficult, long-standing, hurtful conflict in my own life. That made me a believer because nothing else I had in my relational arsenol seemed to work. It does seem similar to a “reorganization” in this respect.

I have used MOL with only one other person, including video taping the sessions. It was interrupted by a medical trajedy so did not reach a positive conclusion. Then, I retired as a consultant/counselor. So I have not done an MOL in years.

The conflict disappears (almost instantly) when your higher level control loop changes one of the lower level reference signals that created the conflict.

Rich Thurman was working on a new CSG journal. If no one else would want to write an article on MOL for it, I would be amenable to trying it. Where do you stand Rich, if you are lurking?

<2. I would like to see how you, Kenny (or anybody else) word yourself when
you shall help your client to a higher level without using the HPCT
nomenclature. Generally with examples.>

I did do some work on this. Perhaps I have some notes if not a write-up. I certainly tried to explain the MOL process to someone who had no HPCT understanding. The subject was a woman, a former secretary of mine. I used brushing her teeth as an example for higher level perceptual construction.

But, I think I mostly followed what Bill Powers and Tim Carey showed in the first Conference Tutorial. I don’t recall adding anything much of value. In fact, I recollect feeling quite inadequate and recognized I needed a lot of practice to be comfortable and proficient.

My video tape sessions were an attempt to have me see myself being a facilitator and to use this as feedback to improve my technique. This was as much my goal as to show others how MOL works. I regret this never was continued to a finish or multiplied. Illness got in the way.

Best wishes,

Kenny

143

[From Bjorn Simonsen (2004.12.10,20:00EST)]

From Kenny Kitzke (2004.12.10,11:00 EST)
But, I think I mostly followed what Bill Powers and Tim Carey showed in the

first

Conference Tutorial. I don't recall adding anything much of value. In

fact, I recollect

feeling quite inadequate and recognized I needed a lot of practice to be

comfortable and proficient.

Maybe Dag Forssell who has the video can talk with Rick about some money to
translate the video to a video file; a video file for downloading. Of course
we could pay for downloading.

Bjorn

144

[From Kenny Kitzke (2004.12.10.1300 EST)]

<Fred Nickols (2004.12.10.0605 EST)>

Knowing how to go up a level and change those perceptions is a
major part of what PCTers might call “reorganization.” I prefer
calling it “learning” for practical if not theoretical reasons.

<I think I’m missing a couple of things in relation to Kenny’s comment above.

I’ve always thought that one of the PCT “ponies” would be methods and
techniques for consciously, deliberately and directionally changing
reference signals. I’ve also thought that no such methods or techniques
exist. I’ve understood MOL to be a facilitative process that can lead to or
result in reorganization but Kenny’s comment makes it sound a lot like MOL
can be used to change reference signals at will. Is that the case?>

I certainly see MOL as a possible means to change or eliminate reference signals at the lower level where a conflict exists. I do not claim that MOL will always be successful. So, I guess it would be more accurate to say that one can consciously desire to resolve conflict by trying MOL. This is slightly different than claiming MOL can change reference signals at will.

<I’m a little confused about the part of Kenny’s statement above that says
“change those perceptions.” I thought reorganization (and thus MOL) had to
do with changing reference signals. Assuming Kenny is correct, does that
mean that every signal, no matter its referent, is a perception?>

I do not consider myself much of an expert on “reorganization” as proffered by Power’s “Reorganization System.” I do think our reference levels are built up through experience. I see it as learning. If there is a process called reorganization, and a part of humans that enables it, I see it as a subset of learning. I think Powers would see it that way as well?

I also see reorganization as something broader than just changing reference signals. I would see it as creating whole new higher levels. Even changing the perceptual input or even output functions that generate signals. I am not sure MOL is viewed as having that kind of outcome?

Hey, what the heck do I know anyway? I am trying to learn about me and my behavior. Once I figure that out, I’ll be thrilled to explain yours!

145

Phil Runkel to Bjorn Simonsen, his of 10 Dec about MOL:

Timothy A. Carey has written clearly and persuasively about the MOL.
For example:

                Psychotherapy: A story about what's wrong and how to make it better. 87
pp., unpublished.

                Clinical psychology: What is and what might be. (A chapter in the second
edition of Robertson and Powers's "Introduction to Modern
Psychology").

And my recent "People As Living Things" has Chapter 30 on the MOL.

That last is available from www.livingcontrolsystems.com (Dag Forssell's
site). And Forssell might know the easiest way to get copies of Carey's
writings, too.

I enjoy your persistence in coaxing people to answer questions about
PCT. Thanks.

--Phil R.

146

Bjorn S: Sorry, I forgot to put in Carey's address: timothy63@aol.com.

147

[From Tim Carey (981202.0515)]

Bill, Bill, Bill …

For the first time I actually felt like and MOLer after a session!!! I’ll elaborate, but I had to get that off my chest first.

On Monday (I would have written sooner but I’m still having trouble with my computer) I had my third session with the man who moves things and has flashbacks to his time in the war. I had watched the video from the second session and I had thought that I needed to: 1) focus more on process rather than content; and 2) work with what was currently going on for the man rather than what things used to be like or what things would be like in the future.

When he came in he said he wanted to talk about the flashbacks from the army. I asked him if he was having a flashback at the moment and he said he wasn’t but he was all churned up because the bus had been 20 minutes late. So we started chatting about being churned up. I tried to be as aware as I could about not focussing on his words but trying to get some idea of what was actually going on for him. I asked lots of questions like: “Are you telling yourself …”; “Is this connected with that …”. I know this is probably all basic MOL but it finally clicked for me when I watched the video of the session that what I had been doing was trying to do MOL on the content of what the clients had been telling me. Now I try to think about where the words are coming from. I can’t believe it’s taken me so long to catch on to this.

The session seemed to go much more quickly and smoothly, we actually finished earlier than I normally do. Throughout the session the client made the following obesrvations:

  1. He feels really defeated when these kinds of things happen (like the bus being late).

  2. He feels that what happens is all out side his control and he can’t do anything about this.

  3. He didn’t ever feel this way before he retired. He would just either deal with things or brush them aside.

  4. He has lost all his confidence.

  5. He worries about whether or not he’s going around the bend.

  6. After he retired he wondered whether he was going to be of any use to anyone anymore.

We finished the session when he said “I think we’ve come to the end of this conversation. My head seems really clear.”. This is the first time in all my sessions with clients that we’ve got to this point. I nearly fell of the chair when he said it. He actually said that he had brushed the incident aside which was an interesting thing to say since this is how he described dealing with problems when he was working.

He also told me that he had moved two things since he last saw me. That means that since I started seeing him (I first saw him on a Tuesday and this session was the following Monday) he had moved things on two separate occasions. Prior to seeing me he described moving things up to 12 times a day, every day for many years.

I see him again today.

I’m still having a few problems working out how to wrap up the session. I’ve been asking my clients what they learned or realised through the session but they really seem to get stuck on that. Even after this session my client didn’t feel he’d learned anything. When I mentioned some of the things he’d noticed he said “Oh yes, I hadn’t thought about that before” but it hadn’t occurrred to him until I mentioned it. Maybe it’s not necessary to ask anything, or perhaps I just need to ask it in a different way. Perhaps something like “How does your problem seem to you now” would be more appropriate.

Cheers,

Tim

148

[From Bill Powers (981201.1410 MST)]

Tim Carey (981202.0515)--

For the first time I actually felt like an MOLer after a session!!!

A great report. What you've seen in this session will happen more often now
that you know what it's like. As to how you do it, you're inventing it as
you go, since you now have more experience than I have had. The right way
is the way that works.

Ending a session:

Remember that the client is not responsible for validating your skill as a
therapist. You have to do that yourself. It might be helpful to the client
to ask if he or she feels any differently about any subject at the end of
the session versus the beginning. Also, I think it's interesting to all
parties to review how the person got to the ending state from the starting
state.

I think it would be OK to say to the client, "Is this a good place to end
the session? Anything you want to tell me about it? See you next week?"
Some sort of official transition back to a normal relationship might be in
order, as well as announcing a transition into the MOL at the start.

Best,

Bill P.

I'll elaborate, but

···

I had to get that off my chest first. On Monday (I would have written
sooner but I'm still having trouble with my computer) I had my third
session with the man who moves things and has flashbacks to his time in
the war. I had watched the video from the second session and I had thought
that I needed to: 1) focus more on process rather than content; and 2)
work with what was currently going on for the man rather than what things
used to be like or what things would be like in the future. """". I know
this is probably all basic MOL but it finally clicked for me when I
watched the video of the session that what I had been doing was trying to
do MOL on the _content_ of what the clients had been telling me. Now I try
to think about where the words are coming from. I can't believe it's taken
me so long to catch on to this. The session seemed to go much more
quickly and smoothly, we actually finished earlier than I normally do.
Throughout the session the client made the following obesrvations: 1. He
feels really defeated when these kinds of things happen (like the bus
being late). 2. He feels that what happens is all out side his control and
he can't do anything about this. 3. He didn't ever feel this way before he
retired. He would just either deal with things or brush them aside. 4. He
has lost all his confidence. 5. He worries about whether or not he's going
around the bend. 6. After he retired he wondered whether he was going to
be of any use to anyone anymore. "". This is the first time in all my
sessions with clients that we've got to this point. I nearly fell of the
chair when he said it. He actually said that he had brushed the incident
aside which was an interesting thing to say since this is how he described
dealing with problems when he was working. He also told me that he had
moved two things since he last saw me. That means that since I started
seeing him (I first saw him on a Tuesday and this session was the
following Monday) he had moved things on two separate occasions. Prior to
seeing me he described moving things up to 12 times a day, every day for
many years. I see him again today. """" would be more appropriate.
Cheers, Tim

149

Tim,

I think he's got it!

How much time did you actually spend on the session you described?

If possible, I like to summarize by reviewing the experiences we went
through: We started with the experience of churning when you were waiting
for the bus. That lead us to ... I think Bill mentioned this. The review
should show the upward motion of the experiences.

Your decision to start with the experience which was the strongest at the
moment, was a good one, I think.

Sounds like your questions helped him to tune into his experience more. I
think that we have to be careful here not to drift too far from experience
with our questions. This stops the flow.

If you are experiencing something he has not mentioned in words yet, what
do you do about this? For example, from your words, the sense that
retirement is a very negative experience for this man came through. Would
you say something like: I am getting the idea that retirement is something
negative for you?

David

···

From: David Goldstein
Subject: Re: MOL [From Tim Carey (981202.0515)]
Date: 12/02/98

150

[From Tim Carey (981203.0500)]

[From Bill Powers (981201.1410 MST)]

A great report. What you've seen in this session will happen more often now
that you know what it's like.

Yep, I think you're right. I had another session with this man yesterday.
Again I was focussed on the process and what was going on for him right now.
My impressions were that the session went pretty well but there was nothing
really on his mind so the "progress" up the levels wasn't as well defined as
it was the other day. He was a little concerned about his son moving on
Friday so we spoke about that and he did comment by the end that the problem
seemed different to him now, there wasn't the urgency in his thoughts that
there used to be. I've only now just realised that I also could have asked
him about what "having nothing on his mind was like" .... I really am very
slow sometimes.

Since I saw him last he has moved only one thing. So in the space of 8 days
he's moved things on three separate occasions.

This guy also told me in the last session that when he left the previous
session the bus was 20 minutes late again. It was the bus being late that he
had got all churned up about before the session. During the session he had
said that if he left here and the bus was late he knew he'd get all churned
up again even though he was feeling calm in the session. At this later
session though he reported that when the bus was late he just got angry but
didn't get all churned up. The getting angry is what he described he used to
do before he retired.

Ending a session:

Remember that the client is not responsible for validating your skill as a
therapist. You have to do that yourself.

This is fantastic Bill, thanks (I think I've learned more from you as a
"supervisor" by email than all the contact I've had this semester with my
proper supervisors)

It might be helpful to the client

to ask if he or she feels any differently about any subject at the end of
the session versus the beginning.

Yep, I think this is a good idea. Thanks. On both occasions so far the
client has mentioned that there was a difference in the way he thought about
the problem.

Also, I think it's interesting to all

parties to review how the person got to the ending state from the starting
state.

This is a very good point. I'll play around with this and let you know what
happens. I think this might be a good way of helping the client see what
they're doing to themselves.

Interestingly, my client mentioned that he thinks he's getting better by
coming to our sessions but he can't explain _why_ he's getting better. He
told me that he thought he needed "therapy" but all we seem to do is chat
about things!!!

I think it would be OK to say to the client, "Is this a good place to end
the session? Anything you want to tell me about it? See you next week?"
Some sort of official transition back to a normal relationship might be in
order, as well as announcing a transition into the MOL at the start.

Yep, these are good points as well. The transition into MOL is not so
difficult because that's all we do in the session. Generally we start by me
just asking him what he's got on his mind at the moment, or what he's
concerned about or something general like that.

Thanks for your help,

Cheers,

Tim

151

[From Tim Carey (981203.0530)]

Hi David,

From: David Goldstein

How much time did you actually spend on the session you described?

That session lasted about 40 minutes.

think that we have to be careful here not to drift too far from experience
with our questions. This stops the flow.

Yep absolutely. I think it's the difference between asking someone to
describe what's currently going on for them and asking someone to remember
something.

If you are experiencing something he has not mentioned in words yet, what
do you do about this? For example, from your words, the sense that
retirement is a very negative experience for this man came through. Would
you say something like: I am getting the idea that retirement is something
negative for you?

Yep, something like that would come out. I might mention that he seems to be
comparing how things are now with how things used to be before he retired
and ask him for his ideas on that.

Cheers,

Tim

152

[From Bill Powers (981202.1939 MST)]

Tim Carey (981203.0500)--

Interestingly, my client mentioned that he thinks he's getting better by
coming to our sessions but he can't explain _why_ he's getting better. He
told me that he thought he needed "therapy" but all we seem to do is chat
about things!!!

This is what I hope for. It's like when I explain PCT in non-technical
terms to someone who has never heard of SR theory or anything else about
psychology, and the person looks innocently at me and asks "But doesn't
everyone know that?" What could tell us better that we're on the right track?

I think that the method of levels is "just chatting about things" -- in a
particular focused way, but without tricks or trying to control the other
person's life. I think this method is teachable to anyone who wants to
learn it. What do you think? I'm beginning to get a vision of people
learning the MOL and using it to help others, in expanding numbers, without
any official sanctions or organization -- just more and more people
learning how to help each other by chatting about things in a particular
way. When you get your degree, perhaps you will be the one to start this
process going. Or perhaps we all will be learning from you how to do it
better. Nobody needs a license to chat about things with other people.

In an expanding universe, every point in it is the center of expansion. So
maybe your future clients who come to you for help will, as part of the
price, learn how to do it themselves, and themselves become centers.

Early days for such big ideas.

Best,

Bill P.

153

Bill said to Tim: I think this method is teachable to anyone who wants to
learn it. What do you think?

Me: It is not so easy to teach. It seems that Tim got the idea which he
refers to as "focusing on process" by watching his own tape.

It did not come from all the comments about MOL on CSGnet even though some
of these comments were similar in nature to what he discovered himself. In
fact, using the tape, can be thought of as a way of doing the MOL on
oneself. It helps one to step back and look at things from a different
perspective. Video taping is used by some doing family therapy and found to
be very effective. When a person makes his/her own observations about
himself/herself, it eliminates a good deal of defensiveness.

Maybe this is the best test of whether a person has really learned MOL. Can
they take on the role of guide?

This reminds me of the medical model of education I was exposed to during a
Postdoctoral Fellowship: See one, do one, teach one.

If they can teach one, then they have really learned it.

I think that learning the MOL makes one a better listener. It is taking the
view of the other person to the nth degree. This could contribute to
kinder, gentler relationships among people. If one really takes the trouble
to understand the other person through MOL, the other person feels better,
and as they, say " this couldn't hurt."

···

From: David Goldstein
Subject: Re: MOL [From Bill Powers (981202.1939 MST)]
Date: 12/03/98

154

[From Tim Carey (981205.1620)]

[From Bill Powers (981202.1939 MST)]

Hi Bill,

Sorry I've taken a while to reply ... my computer was still sick. Everything
seems to be OK at the moment.

everyone know that?" What could tell us better that we're on the right

track?

Precisely.

I think that the method of levels is "just chatting about things" -- in a
particular focused way, but without tricks or trying to control the other
person's life. I think this method is teachable to anyone who wants to
learn it. What do you think?

I agree completely. The hardest thing for people to come to terms with (I
know it's something I still have to guard against) may be the idea that they
don't have to advise or suggest or judge or dispute or challenge or anything
else.

I'm beginning to get a vision of people

learning the MOL and using it to help others, in expanding numbers, without
any official sanctions or organization -- just more and more people
learning how to help each other by chatting about things in a particular
way.

Mmmmm ... hold that thought.

When you get your degree, perhaps you will be the one to start this

process going.

Do I have to wait until I get my degree?? :wink: If I become practiced enough
to be effective at MOL and well versed enough in PCT to talk about it
sensibly, I would consider it an extremely special experience to have a hand
in helping to spread this stuff (sort of like Johnny Appleseed)

In an expanding universe, every point in it is the center of expansion. So
maybe your future clients who come to you for help will, as part of the
price, learn how to do it themselves, and themselves become centers.

That would certainly be an ideal situation.

Early days for such big ideas.

Sounds like good references to me.

I saw my client again today and we really didn't have much to chat about. He
told me that things were "excellent" at the moment. He said his head felt
clear and he felt "normal". He also said that he hadn't moved anything
since I last saw him (so that is now three "moves" in 10 days) and he also
hasn't been churned up. He had one flashback that he had this morning.

Actually, the main part of the session was taken up with me explaining PCT
to him. He wanted to know why the other specialist he had been to hadn't
chatted to him like this and had only given him pills. I had a diplomatic
conversation about how different people believe different things about
behaviour and the treatments they offer reflect this. We did the rubber band
activity and he said this idea made a lot of sense.

This session was going to be a review so I outlined what I had noticed over
the last four sessions and asked him what he thought had happened since he
started coming here. He said that he just felt a lot calmer about things
generally. When I asked him where he wanted to go from here, he said that
even though he was happy with the progress to date he really couldn't see
any change occurring to these flashbacks he'd had for many years. He asked
me what I thought. I said that to be perfectly honest I had no idea what his
head would do itself if we started to chat about these flashbacks in the
same way we had chatted about his other concerns. I then asked him whether
he thought his "moving things behaviour" would have reduced from up to 12
things a day to 3 things in 10 days within the space of 2 weeks. He said
that "No", he wouldn't have thought that was possible. He then decided that
he would come for a few more sessions to see what would happen to the
flashbacks.

I can tell you, he's not the only one that's curious to see what will happen
:wink:

Cheers,

Tim

155

[From Tim Carey (981213.1235)]

I saw the client again on Friday who had obsessive compulsive type behaviours and traumatic flashbacks.

He said that things were going really well at the moment. Friday was the 17th day since I had started seeing him. I last saw him on Saturday the 5th and between Saturday and Friday he had not moved anything. Interestingly, he said that he had got the idea to move things a few times during the week but this time there was no sense of impending disaster accompanying the thought to move something so he just ignored it. He said that he had never before had the “courage” to ignore the thoughts.

He also spoke for the first time about the flashbacks he gets. He described how they happen in detail and as he did he began to experience one. We spoke about what was going on for him and he became upset and started to cry as he experienced the flashback. He spoke of the mental and physical battle he experiences when he has a flashback as he feels completely overwhelmed and sense a great loss of control. This loss of control essentially is to do with the crying that occurs. He said that if he could have the flashbacks without the crying then they wouldn’t bother him at all. He said that he has a deep sense of shame when he cries.

We spent 30-40 minutes discussing the experience of his flashbacks and then all of a sudden, after I had finished asking him a question, he said “You know, I didn’t hear anything you said just then. It’s like I’m standing over there watching this happen.” I started to chat about what it was like standing over there but he interrupted and said “I can’t concentrate on what you’re saying. It’s like my heads full and I just want to pull down the blinds.” We decided then, to leave the session there for the day.

This seemed to be a really significant moment for my client and I’m looking forward to seeing him next week to see where he is at then. Of course, it also may have been nothing … time will tell.

Cheers,

Tim

156

[From Bill Powers (981214.0205 MST)]

Tim Carey (981213.1235)] I saw the client again on Friday who

had obsessive compulsive type behaviours and traumatic flashbacks.

...

This seemed to be a really significant moment for my client and I'm
looking forward to seeing him next week to see where he is at then. Of
course, it also may have been nothing ... time will tell.

One has the feeling, reading your reports, that all this is probably too
good to be true. When is the collapse going to happen? When will the other
shoe drop? I'm feeling the same way I did about our early tracking
experiments, in which the simple models fit the data FAR too well. They've
continued to do so for 20 years, but I still don't believe it.

Best,

Bill P.

157

[From Tim Carey (981215.0500)]

[From Bill Powers (981214.0205 MST)]

One has the feeling, reading your reports, that all this is probably too
good to be true. When is the collapse going to happen? When will the other
shoe drop? I'm feeling the same way I did about our early tracking
experiments, in which the simple models fit the data FAR too well. They've
continued to do so for 20 years, but I still don't believe it.

Believe it or not Bill it is _very_ reassuring to hear you say this. These
thoughts are exactly what has been running through my mind. Actually, at the
end of the last session we didn't make a firm appointment for the next
session. My client didn't know what plans he'd made with his wife so he said
he'd check and get back to me. At that stage I really wasn't sure whether he
would or not. He phoned yesterday, however, to make anappointment for one of
the times I had suggested.

I watched the video of the last session over the weekend and some parts of
it were really interesting. There was a big difference between the times I
was asking him to remember something and when I was asking him to just
describe what was currently going on for him. When he was describing as
opposed to remembering it, his answers were a lot more definite. He also
stopped a couple of times while I was asking him about what was going on for
him and said "You know I've never thought about it in this way before" at
one point he said "I feel as though I'm ordering my mind as you're asking me
the questions". The video was also really helpful to see the times I
launched into being a good "therapist" and tried to make interpretations and
connections etc. The simplicity and elegance of MOL (when it's done
properly) is breathtaking.

Cheers,

Tim

158

[From Bill Powers (981214.1510 MST)]

Tim Carey (981215.0500)--

I watched the video of the last session over the weekend and some parts of
it were really interesting. There was a big difference between the times I
was asking him to remember something and when I was asking him to just
describe what was currently going on for him. When he was describing as
opposed to remembering it, his answers were a lot more definite.

David Goldstein and I had the same experience while we were doing the MOL
via the internet (a very slow process that I don't strongly recommend).
David, maybe you would confirm that you had a kind of insight when you
realized I was asking for a description of what was actually going on in
your mind in present time, instead of analysis or remembering or imagining.

Best,

Bill P.

159

Bill said: David, maybe you would confirm that you had a kind of insight
when you realized I was asking for a description of what was actually going
on in your mind in present time, instead of analysis or remembering or
imagining.

Bill, I don't remember the insight. Sorry.

Sometimes a person has "an abreaction" and the memory is so real that it
seems as if he/she is reliving the experience. It does not feel like
remembering or imagining. The person talks about the experience in the
present tense, as if it is happening. If this was a scary experience, the
person may start to become scared. The person relives the experience.

Most of the time, we seem to be able to tell the difference between
perceiving, remembering, imagining. And we can tell when we go from one to
the other. The MOL seems to work better when a person is reporting on what
is being experienced at the moment. However,
remembering a specific experience can become a present time experience if a
person merges with it. The process of merging and separating from an
experience is something a person can learn to control. I am not sure that
all separating from an expereince involves going up a level. So the MOL may
be one kind of separating from an experience.

···

From: David Goldstein
Subject: Re: MOL
Date: 12/14/98

160

[From Bill Powers (981215.1259 MST)]

From: David Goldstein
Subject: Re: MOL
Date: 12/14/98

Bill said: David, maybe you would confirm that you had a kind of insight
when you realized I was asking for a description of what was actually going
on in your mind in present time, instead of analysis or remembering or
imagining.

Bill, I don't remember the insight. Sorry.

OK. Not worth digging up the correspondence. I was attempting to support
Tim's observation that present-time reports of what is happening in one's
mind are the most useful in the MOL.

Best,

Bill P.