<[Bill Leach 950212.21:29 EST(EDT)]
Message: 25603 on Sat, 11 Feb 1995 00:16:58 -0700 (PDT)
Author : msa@PANIX.COM
Marc; It looks like you are using some sort of "wordprocessor" for you
postings to the net and the result is that you are getting a blank line
between each text line (double spaced). This makes reading your postings
extremely difficult (especially when you are quoting someone).
I find it difficult to understand how most people in this group espouse
one theory (set of values) and there perception and reference levels
dictate another causing contrary behavior, and I bet the people are not
even aware of it.
Please interpret this sentence, I honestly can not determine what you are
saying.
...we shore as hell *influence* how other people think. Certain people
here think thats a crime.
This is your perception but mine is that no one that I have encountered
on CSG-L believes that there is anything inherently wrong with trying to
influence other people. Indeed, you will probably find that most would
even agree with use of force to influence another if you set up the
"right" circumstances.
Closing yourself down to INQUIRY by others is the crime.
I would hardly think that this group closes itself down to inquiry by
others. In just the little over a year that I have been watching, the
same questions appear again and again, yet the questions are answered as
though they were original (most of the time).
If you are not influenceable, why have the conversation. Right, to
manipulate and influence someone else. *Thats Irritating* If we are
unwilling to expose our own assumptions to others why should they do so
for us.
It is rather easy for someone that is "new" to PCT to forget that the
"old hands" have been dealing with "PCT issues" for many years. They
have been questioning their own thinking concerning PCT for many years.
PCT has a great deal to say about the nature of belief itself.
When someone "comes on strong" with an assertion about PCT several things
are likely to be going on. The first (and indeed most likely) is that
the subject has been dealt with before and probably far more deeply than
any one person could possibly go by themselves. The second is that the
subject matter is often not relevent to PCT itself (for example a value
issue where PCT is value neutral). A third is that the subject is
presented in such a fashion that those reading the point are missing what
the posting individual is driving at.
Again, in my own experience here on the net, I have seen many assert that
PCTers are failing to "expose their assumptions." So far, without fail,
it has never been the PCTers that were unwilling to discuss their
assumptions and the possible implications. The people that "get in a
huff", leave a "nasty" message and then dissappear have always been the
ones that are unwilling to face their own assumptions.
We need to respect other peoples right for the way they have constructed
there world, and like Ed Ford, we need to try an align and integrate PCT
into the real world rather then the other way around.
I don't think that anyone disagrees with the idea that each of us
"constructs" our own view of the world. Whether we have a "right" to do
so or not is a mute point as far as PCT is concerned... we do it period.
You are missing the point as far as what Ed Ford is doing (my perception
of course). Ed is not "aligning PCT" with the real world. Ed is
attempting to "align" the real world. That is he is controlling his
perception for how the real world _should be_ by using his knowledge of
PCT. Ed is fully aware that he has set quite specific value standards in
place (also quite independently of PCT).
There is a significant difference between "aligning" PCT to the real
world as verifiable through independent experiment and "aligning"
something to someone's opinion of the real world.
We all ambassadors for PCT. Everytime we speak to someone and close them
off and call them idiots, WE ALL LOSE.
Everyone here is also human. It can be expected that when a person has
seen their career destroyed because of someone else's "blind faith" and
then encounters the same degree of "closed mindedness" that such a person
might just get a little "short" in the encounter. Again, even for the
comparitively short time that I have been watching I now consider Rick to
have the patience of Job (try and figure out where that puts Bill Powers).
-bill
···
Subject: PCT Priorities
) that our perceptions and values help create our