--- In [email protected], "authfriend" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > --- In [email protected], akasha_108 <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > <snip> > > This exchange is actually prettty funny. There is a lot that > > appears to bubble up in Peter's mind reagerding my positions, > > assumptions, and mood, for which no hint exists on paper. Where > > does these things come from inside Peter? > > FWIW, I've been following the exchange pretty closely, > and it appears to me that akasha's recap of what was > involved is 100 percent dead-on accurate.
Thanks Judy. I usually dislike getting involved in or reading exchanges of the form: "you said, i said, I didn't say". But in this case, I was struck by Peter allegedly being "enlightened", and if so, not conditioned by the kleshas and all that most are. Less or no extraneous stuff to bubble up and cloud the vision. Or so "traditon would say". On top of that he is a practicing, licensed psychotherapist with an abundance of degrees. (And by his own account, "outstanding in his field". Corn I think it is, we established before) Thus he is trained to see through and distinguish between what is really "there" in a situation, conversation or "post", and what is projected, imagined, or somehow created out of thin air -- trained to filter out the psychodynamics which can disort cognitive abilities. So if if in the course of a 10 line post, Peter can fall prey to five or more major distortions in his pschyo, cognitive and/or klesheic apparatus, then what hope is there for us mere mortals? This thought prompted me to chronicle the distortions in the exchange. I think at least part of the dynamic, (in general, this may not appply to Peter) is "pre-judgement" -- having a formation in ones head prior to or during an exchange, of where the other person is coming from, what their assumptions, moods, understanding, knowledge, biases, SoC, are, etc. Instead of just listening/reading the words as they ARE, without preconceptions as to what the person means to say. It means dropping past "ques" and clues one has built up about the person and their behavior, motives, desires, etc. Who knows, maybe they had a transformation last night and are a new person. It means no "profiling" - which is another form of pre-judgement. That is, no quickly sizing a person up as a certain type, and then reading them from the standard characteristics of that type. It means dropping all these things and simply listening/ reading what IS. And drawing NEW conclusions, AFTER the exchange. Or simple drawing no conclusions. That is, not making judgements when such do not pertain to personal decisions one must make. All of this could be characterized under a broadened umbrella of "no expectations" -- of things which you have no or little control, such as others actions, motives, states, etc. To subscribe, send a message to: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Or go to: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/FairfieldLife/ and click 'Join This Group!' Yahoo! Groups Links <*> To visit your group on the web, go to: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/FairfieldLife/ <*> To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to: [EMAIL PROTECTED] <*> Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to: http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
