************* The following message is relayed to you by [email protected] ************ Hi Robin Quite true.
NO Keeping TROM Working Rule. Each of us "OWNs" his TROM knowledge and therapy and is free to do whatever he or she wants with it. Keep on TROMing Pete McLaughlin Sent from my iPad > On Mar 25, 2016, at 7:19 AM, The Resolution of Mind list > <[email protected]> wrote: > > ************* > The following message is relayed to you by [email protected] > ************ > Hi Pete, > > thanks for your comment. Perfectly agreeable. > > Another great thing about TROM is, that Dennis > never wrote a SCOB (Stevens Communication Office > Bulletin) with the title "KTW" ("Keeping TROM Working") > ;-) [Sorry that this joke is for (ex)scios only] > > "If it ain't broke, don't fix it" as the saying goes, > has some validity. > > A nice weekend to you all > > Robin > > ---- > >> On Fri, 25 Mar 2016 13:00:03 +0100, <[email protected]> wrote: >> >> Send TROM mailing list submissions to >> [email protected] >> >> To subscribe or unsubscribe via the World Wide Web, visit >> http://lists.newciv.org/mailman/listinfo/trom >> or, via email, send a message with subject or body 'help' to >> [email protected] >> >> You can reach the person managing the list at >> [email protected] >> >> When replying, please edit your Subject line so it is more specific >> than "Re: Contents of TROM digest..." >> >> >> Today's Topics: >> >> 1. Re: TROM L2 & L3 - An Experiemental Session Report >> (The Resolution of Mind list) >> >> >> ---------------------------------------------------------------------- >> >> Message: 1 >> Date: Thu, 24 Mar 2016 10:18:02 -0700 >> From: The Resolution of Mind list <[email protected]> >> To: [email protected] >> Subject: Re: [TROM1] TROM L2 & L3 - An Experiemental Session Report >> Message-ID: <[email protected]> >> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii >> >> Hi Robin >> The great thing about TROM is you can do whatever you want with it. >> >> Here are some observations about what you propose. >> The beauty of TROM is its simplicity. It only consists of RI and >> Timerbreaking to handle whatever shows up in life or the levels. >> >> So what you propose adds complication. >> >> In your step a) comparing a past scene with another past scene is risky as >> you can wander off into unreal scenes. The advantage of timebreaking is >> that it is anchored by the physical reality around you that you can lay your >> hands on. Comparing past to past is not timebreaking, is of unknown >> therapeutic value and risks the patient wandering around in delusion. >> >> Your step b) comparing a past scene to a mocked up future scene. Anything >> you mock up is mocked up in the now. It is present time. So you are just >> comparing a past scene to a present time mock up without the anchor of being >> able to put your hands on the item. To me this is a weaker version of >> timebreaking. >> >> You should keep experimenting and thinking about ways to improve TROM. All >> creation of new techniques, therapies etc is a creative process and >> therefore RI and tone lifting. >> >> Thanks for letting us know what you are doing. >> >> Sincerely >> Pete McLaughlin >> >> Sent from my iPad >> >>> On Mar 23, 2016, at 9:08 PM, The Resolution of Mind list >>> <[email protected]> wrote: >>> >>> ************* >>> The following message is relayed to you by [email protected] >>> ************ >>> Hi TROMmers, >>> >>> I had pondered for some time if time-breaking, as proposed >>> by Dennis, could be expanded somehow. >>> >>> Dennis already had provided - at least for L2 more than >>> two gradients. >>> >>> He suggested to start with light scenes first. >>> And take objects before going on with persons for the purpose >>> of gradients. >>> >>> I figured that placing a past scene simultaneously to >>> present time (PT), in order to time-break it by comparing >>> them to each other, is only a special case of manipulating >>> consciously time and the time-track. >>> >>> Further I had reason to believe that the time track is only >>> an apparency and in actuality all "time-lines" happen to >>> be "simultaneously", so to speak. >>> (I only mention that for the record. It was just part >>> of my realization process, but may seem out of context for >>> some readers.) >>> >>> I was wondering if it could be beneficial, in terms of >>> therapeutical value, to do the following time-break >>> variants: >>> >>> a) Between a _past_ scene and another _past_ scene. >>> Preferable scenes containing the same object/person a PC >>> might be interested in. One of the scenes should be characterized >>> by having a less positive or even a negative tone attached to >>> it, while the other scene has a positive emanation. >>> >>> b) Between a past scene and a mocked-up future scene. >>> Again with the same object(s)/person(s) involved. >>> The usefulness of this variant could be in case someone >>> has difficulties to come up with enough positive scenes in >>> the past. >>> >>> Of course several combinations with even more than just two >>> scenes of 'past - PT - future' compared simultaneously >>> would be conceivable. However, I do not see much use for this >>> because more than two can always be broken down into pairs. >>> Pairs are usually easier to handle. The difference is only in >>> processing time (like in a computer CPU where tasks can worked >>> off parallel (more than one at a time) or in serial mode (one >>> at a time). I did not test this. >>> >>> Before the report thereof follows below, I want to make the >>> following disclaimer: >>> >>> What worked for me to some extent might not work for you. >>> Nothing I wrote does in any way replace or render void what >>> Dennis wrote in the TROM materials. At best this might be >>> a variant or additional gradient that might be worth testing. >>> I have only tested it on me and only for two different kind >>> of incidents up to now. That is of course not sufficient to >>> make any claims regarding workability. I provide this as is. >>> Feel free to apply it at your own risk. >>> (Anyhow, feedback and criticism of all kind is welcome.) >>> >>> Here is the report: >>> >>> The first incident was a slight annoyance manifesting itself >>> in a wandering off of some of my attention units involuntarily >>> to that incident which had occurred the other day. >>> The incident was a communication from an otherwise likable >>> entity which had an unusual high entheta content in terms of >>> offensive language in it. Being no stranger to this mode of >>> speech I did not care about the lingo itself, but the >>> contrast of it to the hitherto known profile of that person >>> made me curious (A mystery draws attention to it). >>> >>> I used method a) here. It was easy to place that incident >>> near an incident with the same entity where the communication >>> was benevolent and on a high tone. >>> >>> {At first I was not sure if the PT scene would introduce interference >>> (the room I was in, was very bright from the sunny daylight coming in >>> through the windows; that made PT even more prominent). So I closed >>> my eyes a little later to shut that influence out.} >>> >>> It took some minutes to visualize the other entity in two or three >>> "good" scenes and comparing simultaneously to the "ugly" scene. >>> >>> I finally mocked-up a scene in the future with the other being and >>> me, being in good comm.. >>> >>> I felt moving up from weak interest to strong interest and the other >>> entity appeared in a brighter (more positive) light. I felt the >>> attention releasing. >>> The realization was, that this person (and that is true >>> for any person) is infinitely many-fold. This being probably was in a >>> bad mood at that particular instant and from his viewpoint there had >>> been reasons to be that way. >>> >>> Being content with this result so far, I stopped in order to look for >>> something else. >>> >>> I came up with a close relative. >>> >>> It surprised me a bit that I found it appeared difficult at first, >>> to find positive events with that person. Finally I found one, only >>> to abandon it because I thought the happiness which she emanated >>> therein was not genuine. >>> >>> Another - really good one - came to mind (an incident where she was >>> talking to me about her childhood and how life was there at her home). >>> This was a rather lively and interesting account because it provided me a >>> first-hand insight into a situation not known to me. And it was not the >>> kind of subject that gave rise to controversy). >>> >>> I used it to time-break it with one other past incident with her, that >>> contained much gloating. >>> >>> Then another one which had to do with "to live a lie". I ran them for a >>> minute or so. Felt not enthusiastic but fine. >>> >>> I was looking for other positive things which I could use for comparison >>> purposes. Most of the stuff was more or less medium or low tone. A relative >>> comparison would have been possible of course, but I was looking for >>> something >>> at least in the range of 3.0 to 3.5 on the scale. >>> >>> So I resorted to method b) (mock-up of future potential events with that >>> person >>> or thing). I wanted a scenario with high probability. Well, that person >>> could easily still live ten years or more, but will she ever change? >>> (I could have invented some kind of enlightment-event in her near future. >>> But that did not appeal much to me for lack of likelihood.) >>> >>> Instead I opted for a scenario where she was reincarnated in a >>> future lifetime. >>> >>> I visualized her as a toddler happily crawling on a fluffy carpet (a fur it >>> actually was) in front of an open fireplace. She emanated a strong radiance >>> of positive emotions; very likable. I dwelt with that scene for some time >>> being so immersed into it, that I almost forgot to put up the >>> "negative" scene beside it. I did that eventually and the scenes >>> "leveled-out" >>> against each other. A sense of relativity and realism came over me. Quite >>> pleasant. I kept the images for some seconds longer before I ended the >>> session. >>> >>> I was happy with the result so far despite the awareness that >>> no serious manifestations of discharges had occurred. (It had not actually >>> been >>> the purpose for that little run anyway.) >>> I felt calm and was content with that, already busy with creating the text >>> of >>> this report in my mind - which I'm writing down now, as long as the memories >>> are fresh. >>> >>> ----- >>> >>> Update: >>> >>> This I write at the day after the account above: >>> >>> I feel really enthusiastic today. Do not know if I should attribute it >>> to the yesterday small session (it was only meant to be a test and an >>> attempt >>> to repair the rudiments for that particular day - and that it did quite >>> well.) >>> >>> So it might be, that my state today is not related, or related solely, >>> to the activity described above. >>> >>> However that may be, I realized the following: (I guess the realization had >>> been >>> already in its "birth canal" for quite some time.) >>> >>> Without going too much into its details; it has to do with humor and >>> seriousness. >>> >>> Ron once said, that communication is the universal solvent. >>> >>> May be right or wrong. If he was right then the sense for humor sure is the >>> second best solvent :-) >>> >>> There was, and still is, much talk and writing about the "trap" and being >>> "trapped". Well, that is ok, but consider that whenever you entertain the >>> idea >>> of: "being in a trap" - wherever else could you be then, but in a trap? >>> >>> On a gradient: >>> I stop calling it a trap now as a first step. I call it an "experimental >>> ground" >>> (play ground if you like that better) which is designed for that purpose: >>> to collect experiences. >>> >>> This corollary attributes therapeutic value to life itself, doesn't it? >>> >>> By inference, anything ever made in the context of life (aside from MEST, >>> objects, >>> a.s.o. this would include tech, religions, philosophies, ... is part of the >>> over-all experience (or learning about self). Thus makes >>> everything else _IN_ life junior to that life at hand :-) >>> >>> Robin >>> >>> P.S.: >>> You ever heard of king Midas - the guy who turned into gold everything he >>> touched. In the story it does not work out too well for him. Guess, because >>> it's in the physical realm. Never the less it works pretty good in the >>> non-physical. >>> Touch whatever sh.. is on your mind, and it can turn into something a lot >>> better than gold :-) >>> >>> >>> Update 2: >>> >>> On further testing I've seen that it is beneficial to give attention >>> to the differences and similarities of one's own attitudes, intentions, >>> emotions, strategies, methods, ... deployed in the "positive" and "negative" >>> incidents. That analysis is interesting in regard of the learning value of >>> the >>> "negative" experiences (which is thereby converted into something >>> beneficial). >>> Secondly, this provides insight in usability of certain strategies, >>> intentions, >>> ... in relation to particular situations, action and reaction thereof. >>> >>> Robin >>> _______________________________________________ >>> TROM mailing list >>> [email protected] >>> http://lists.newciv.org/mailman/listinfo/trom >> >> >> ------------------------------ >> >> _______________________________________________ >> TROM mailing list >> [email protected] >> http://lists.newciv.org/mailman/listinfo/trom >> >> >> End of TROM Digest, Vol 137, Issue 38 >> ************************************* > _______________________________________________ > TROM mailing list > [email protected] > http://lists.newciv.org/mailman/listinfo/trom _______________________________________________ TROM mailing list [email protected] http://lists.newciv.org/mailman/listinfo/trom
