"They find that one important factor is the perspective people take when they revisit the scene whether in the first person, or in the third person, as if they were watching themselves in a movie."
My take on the above snip from the article is that the third person perspective is not that the person telling the story and says "he did this and that" when refering to their actions. Rather the perspective is of seeing "another" do the action (outside the skin of-- though privy to "that" persons (older version of the personality)thoughts and feelings. This is in contrast to a first person's perpective of reliving the experience "inside the skin" of one's former self. Do others have a different take on the article's meaning of "third person perspective"? I see most events and my role in my stories in the same way that I view older cars that I have owned. They are "mine", or were "mine", but are "out there". I traded the old model in on a new one. And I will trade this one in on a newer one. This view may contrasts a bit with a popular theme in pyschology, or at least pop psychology, of "owning" ones responses, behavior, actions etc. Or maybe not. I can "own up" to having owned that older car, as I can own-up to having once been that older version of this limited personality. But that ownership does not preclude seeing that older car or personality as an object "out there." (Dr. Pete writing furiously, "hmmm, strong disassociation AND multiple personality disorder, hmm very interesting") And the article can be seen from a deeper level, IT being distinct from all limited personalities, past and present. --- In [email protected], new.morning <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > The below article is very interesting (to me) given that many of us > came here, or have used FFL at times, to rethink, reconcile, place in > a broader context, retell (sometime over and over from different > angles), our experiences in the TMO and with TM. Our TMO stories.
