Why is posting replies a necessary task?

[Guest guest]

<director wrote:

 

> I am on the other end of the spectrum from those who require stats

>and rigorous double-blind testing to prove their experience " real " .

>And here I'm talking about the hard science researcher and no one in

>specific. But what is " real " ? I'm sure we could go around the

>Philosopher's Stone on that one but such is not the purpose of this

>forum.

 

Hi Maryam,

 

Thank you for replying.

 

I 'sort of' agree with you here.

 

I'm not on either end, but in the middle somewhere.

 

If it's in a field which I'm attracted to because of my core values

and interests to learning and doing better every day...then I'm first

a " prove it " to me type of guy.

 

Once it's proven/validated I'm easy unless something really 'way out'

comes up.

 

> By no significance, I mean that I have no particular emotion about

>the number - there is neutral emotion on a SUD of 2 as one of 7 or

>10 or 100. The emotion is in the incident, not in the numbers. Where

>I've seen most people bog down in working on their issues is in

>placing significance on the number and getting into story around

>that.

 

Interesting.

 

Different ways of paying 'attention', I guess.

 

What I've noticed is something quite different (I do sort

by 'differences' first and then 'how else').

 

First is the teaching of what the SUDS means to them so they have a

specific method of calibration of their emotion of the incident. Then

letting them learn how-to-calibrate that SUDS of the incident so that

a verification with an energy test is valid as far as enhancing their

calibration of what is happening or not happening.

 

So for most it can become a means of motivation and of validation.

 

But then I've had a client or two that 'believed' subjectively that

their SUDS was still high, a 6 or 7, but on the Energy Test their

SUDS was only a two or less.

 

So their attachment to their 'problem' was still there because of a

belief, but subconsciously and energitically the 'problem' was gone,

or at least much less than they perceived it.

 

So then we worked on their 'attachment'.

 

> My point was that in the past when I felt urgency to reply to an

>incendiary or provocative comment right away,

 

Been there, done that. And it usually turned out to be my learning

experience but didn't mean much to them except to give them a focus

point to vent their anger, which can be fun for Wood Elements, but

ugly for Earth Elements.

 

My frame on answering a post is to do it with 'timelyness', just

because I feel it is more polite and respectful to reply within 24

hours if I feel a reply should be done.

 

That presupposes that I'm answering from the position of " being

polite, respectful and informative " .

 

There are exceptions of course.

 

> the attachment to speaking up entirely. Hence I tend to be mainly

>quiet on lists such as this as I've found you can learn far more

>with your mouth closed and eyes open, than the other way around.

> Your mileage may of course, vary.

 

It does.

 

And I do agree with the part about the 'reason why we have two eyes

and two ears and one mouth'.

 

According to some philosophies we are supposed to pay attention four

times as much as we spend speaking our own opinons.

 

And if one figures out the other has no clue to what they are

deleting, distorting and all that they don't know about, just

ignoring them might be very valuable on a personal private level.

 

To me that would be a dis-service to others on the list.

 

Here's why I think that way.

 

Many people are pursuaded by volume and not by correct or incorrect

information. So if someone states something as 'fact' but it is only

their opinion which facts and experiences do not support, you might

be doing other readers a dis-service by not replying.

 

And when you do reply in a respectful way with proper information on

your research and experiences you will then be doing something

important for the list, which is giving other readers more to read

and calibrate on their own what to do or to not do.

 

Here's another point which I feel is important.

 

For me to learn and to clarify my own thoughts I need to be able to

express what was said in a way I can understand, and writing a reply

is very benifical for me.

 

If I don't write it out (whether I send it or not) than I tend to

delete all my own internal " yes, but if XYZ is done, then...blab,

blab... "

 

So when I study anything, ie Fred's books, John Diepold's method,

Donna's Energy Medicine, etc, I need to underline, write in the

margins, and anything I disagree with, or can add to, I need to

actually write it out so I can clarify my own thoughts.

 

Then I need to grab some bodies and do drills with them.

 

But that's just me from a digital, kinesthetic viewpoint of my

learning preferences.

 

Nice talking with you Maryam.

 

John M. La Tourrette, PhD