New ways

from [ Marc Abrams (990703.1546) ]

In a short conversation I had with Bill a few minutes ago ( about a post I
never got ). I asked him what he thought about the last couple of posts of
mine ( with regard to Rick ). Although I don't think his views represent
those of others on the list, ( i.e. he spoke to, and got a consensus from )
but they very well might be, so I decided to address some of the points he
brought up to the list as whole.

1) Bill thought I was/am trying to "reform" Rick. He didn't think it would
"work".

My initial reaction to Bill was, "No I'm not". But if you see "suggesting
ways of possibly seeing things differently, and possibly changing _how_ and
what you perceive the "problem" to be as "reforming" then I guess he's
right. Only, I don't believe _I_ can do anything of the sort to any one
else. If any "reforming" is going to take place it will be because any one
of us _individually_ attempts to, and works on, the change effort.

A second point with regard to the first. It takes a minimum of two for this
to work. If one refuses ( for any reason ) then learning is severely
limited. It's not a crime, life and this list have endured for a long time
without a whole lot of learning going on.

2) Bill thought that the focus was on a bunch of people telling others
_what_ was wrong.

This is only _partly_ accurate. Yes others must point out errors that they
see between what someone _says_ they are doing and what is actually being
produced by that person. But the ability to provide the hard data ( i.e.
what was actually said, rather then imagined ) to show _why_ you feel there
is an error, and for the other person to reflect on this and "learn", is
what it's all about. It takes at least two people willing to inquire as well
as advocate.

3) Bill liked Bruce G's suggestion of staying quiet.

I like it to. Except silence does not help learning. When I post to the net
and get no responses, I'm not learning anything. When someone points out a
perceived error and provides the hard data for me to reflect on, I have the
_chance_ to learn ( it's always up to me to take, or not take advantage of
learning opportunities ) . If this list is, as Marken and Powers believe and
espouse, a vehicle for helping people "learn" PCT, then staying quiet, in my
view, is no better then telling someone that their views and ideas are
horseshit and aren't worth the bother. I for one can live _without_ that
kind of "help" :slight_smile:

What do you folks out in CSG land think? I can't believe someone doesn't
have an opinion or two about this stuff? Can we better help each other to
traverse the path to see the PCT light :-).
Does anyone care?

Marc

from [Bruce Gregory (990704.1825 EDT)]

Marc Abrams (990703.1546)

1) Bill thought I was/am trying to "reform" Rick. He didn't think it would
"work".

My view is that you are trying to coach Rick. Rick has demonstrated very
little willingness to be coached by anyone other than Bill. Trying to coach
someone who is unwilling to be coached is invariably frustrating. Coaching,
in my view, is about empowering. You cannot empower someone who is unwilling
to be empowered by you.

Bruce Gregory

from [ Marc Abrams (990704.2350) ]

From [Bruce Gregory (990704.1825 EDT)]

My view is that you are trying to coach Rick. ...

Bruce, I was trying to reach out to the list. Rick happened to be the person
I was addressing. But I was really talking about myself with everything that
I said to Rick. I think all of us on this list might benefit by taking a
different approach to dealing with each other and the "data" we use in our
arguments. But it doesn't seem to be an issue that people on this list want
to talk about, ( except for you and Bjoern ) so I'm folding my tent with
regard to this effort.

Btw, I tried to present an alternative to the bickering and BS that often
fills this list, I can't ( no one can ) empower anyone else.

Marc

[From Rick Marken (990704.2050)]

Bruce Gregory (990704.1825 EDT) to Marc Abrams (990703.1546)

Trying to coach someone who is unwilling to be coached is
invariably frustrating. Coaching, in my view, is about
empowering. You cannot empower someone who is unwilling to be
empowered by you.

Right on the mark again.

If only you understood what _you_ were talking about. I've
tried to empower you with this understanding but, as you so
wisely note, you cannot empower someone who is unwilling to
be empowerd.

Best

Rick

···

---
Richard S. Marken Phone or Fax: 310 474-0313
Life Learning Associates e-mail: rmarken@earthlink.net
http://home.earthlink.net/~rmarken/

from [Bruce Gregory (990705.0655)]

Marc Abrams (990704.2350)

Btw, I tried to present an alternative to the bickering and BS that often
fills this list, I can't ( no one can ) empower anyone else.

If you want to improve your backhand and I demonstrate a backhand grip that
you then adopt and your backhand improves, I consider that I acted to
empower you--you have extended the domain in which you can exercise control
as a result of my coaching and your efforts. If you persisted with the grip
that caused your backhand to pop-up, you were unwilling to be coached.

Bruce Gregory

[From Rick Marken (990705.1810)]

Bruce Gregory (990705.0655)--

If you want to improve your backhand and I demonstrate a
backhand grip that you then adopt and your backhand improves,
I consider that I acted to empower you

I hope you would also take credit for disempowering me when I
adopt your demonstrated grip and my backhand deteriorates.

Best

Rick

···

--
Richard S. Marken Phone or Fax: 310 474-0313
Life Learning Associates e-mail: rmarken@earthlink.net
http://home.earthlink.net/~rmarken/