************* The following message is relayed to you by [email protected] ************ The original writing by Dennis for the sake of accuracy and avoidance of alter-is should be kept in their original form. Any opinions, "improvements", or revisions should be made available in a different book, pamphlet or whatever. TROM should not go the way of other disciplines that after some time had elapsed , they became unworkable. It's my impression that many who have expressed opinions about TROM have one characteristic in common, no completion of Level 5. Some have not completed even Level 3. It's not my intention to invalidate anyone's think, but TROM is not done by discussing it, or trying to "improve" it; it is done by actually doing the Levels. When we get a sizable group of Level 5 completions, then changes may be considered. I was a Course Supervisor and an Auditor in an Org. for five years. In the comments I have read in this List, MU phenomena and just down right natter have been displayed. Then, before we go on changing TROM, make sure the tech has been totally word cleared. On something as important as TROM is, caution should prevail.
Eli G. -----Original Message----- From: [email protected] [mailto:[email protected]] On Behalf Of [email protected] Sent: Wednesday, August 20, 2014 5:24 AM To: The Resolution of Mind list Cc: [email protected] Subject: Re: [TROM1] Should I print the books ************* The following message is relayed to you by [email protected] ************ Hi Pete, I agree with those who have suggested that a discussion on whether the basic package should be called 'to be known' or 'to know' could be placed in an editor's note or commentary. Opinion on which (if either) is more basic can change with a person's progress, and also according to the leg of the basic game they are currently in. I've been a 'must know' all this lifetime, so my first rash impulse might be to assert that knowing is all-important and creating things to be known is just a means to that end. But that would be a partisan opinion. Each game package is a four-celled matrix formed from two dichotomies: active/passive and positive/negative. Since all the other games packages are lebelled by the active positive leg (to see, to reason etc) it appears logical to label the basic package in the same way. To know is grammatically an active verb, even though it's an inflow. To be known is a passive verb, even though it's an outflow. Not that it matters, as long as a reader can follow the decisions an editor has made. I think the original division into Know and Be Known must be prior to any time stream, as time and individuation only began when games got going. Cheers, David http://adarsajnana.wordpress.com/ On 18/08/2014 5:49 am, Pete Mclaughlin wrote: > ************* > The following message is relayed to you by [email protected] > ************ > Hi all > Ok we have had the debate. I need a vote. > > Would you buy the books in paperback if I changed the references to > the basic goals package in the books from "to know" to "to be known"? > > Please respond with an email so I can total up the answers. > > Thanks > Pete > > > > Sent from my iPad > _______________________________________________ > Trom mailing list > [email protected] > http://lists.newciv.org/mailman/listinfo/trom _______________________________________________ Trom mailing list [email protected] http://lists.newciv.org/mailman/listinfo/trom _______________________________________________ Trom mailing list [email protected] http://lists.newciv.org/mailman/listinfo/trom
