Received: by alpheratz.cpm.aca.mmu.ac.uk id PAA18773 (8.6.9/5.3[ref pg@gmsl.co.uk] for cpm.aca.mmu.ac.uk from fmb-majordomo@mmu.ac.uk); Wed, 21 Jun 2000 15:06:54 +0100 From: "Chris Lofting" <ddiamond@ozemail.com.au> To: <memetics@mmu.ac.uk> Subject: RE: Cons and Facades - more on truth Date: Thu, 22 Jun 2000 00:21:13 +1000 Message-ID: <LPBBICPHCJJBPJGHGMCIMENPCGAA.ddiamond@ozemail.com.au> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Priority: 3 (Normal) X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook IMO, Build 9.0.2416 (9.0.2910.0) Importance: Normal In-Reply-To: <000501bfdb85$4bcb2100$13281e8c@ultracom.net> X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V5.00.2314.1300 Sender: fmb-majordomo@mmu.ac.uk Precedence: bulk Reply-To: memetics@mmu.ac.uk
> -----Original Message-----
> From: fmb-majordomo@mmu.ac.uk [mailto:fmb-majordomo@mmu.ac.uk]On Behalf
> Of Joseph 1
> Sent: Wednesday, 21 June 2000 11:34
> To: memetics@mmu.ac.uk
> Subject: RE: Cons and Facades - more on truth
>
>
> -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
> Hash: SHA1
>
> Chris Lofting wrote on Wednesday, June 21, 2000 9:34 AM:
>
> > Most NLP organisations seem to have some ethics but there are many
> > who do not and do not see that this sort of mental training is the
> > same as giving someone a gun. The point is that you can kill minds
> > as well as bodies and if you are going to refine the methods of
> > doing this (as NLP can do) you do need some checks and balances.
>
> Which organizations would you consider ethical, and which not? Can
> you point to specific items in their programs that you equate with
> the desired checks and balances?
>
I have come across a few who do the training by rote (they get more
graduates that way!) such that the product are individuals who lack
discernment skills, they have memorised procedures without question (or
without detailed questioning) and so work stimulus/response where there is
no discernment in the response, as long as the stimulus is given, regardless
of intensity/context so the same response with the same intensity is given.
This is very 'reptilian' in manner.
When dealing with minds there is a very hidden element present, the other
mind! Thus the rote method assumes 'sameness' rather than 'difference' and
so if you are not careful in determining possible aspects of the other mind
you can set off a response that you did not plan for or else you can set an
anchor in that person that could be set-off some other time with disasterous
consequences.
Another problem with the rote method is in the trainer/practioners response
to a 'novel' client/student in that the rote method abhors difference and it
is difference that is VITAL when dealing with a group of individuals and
responding to them in a way that maintain rapport. The idea is to be
sensitive to the extremes rather than the norms since the norms fall within
the extremes.
In training by rote there is a lack of refinement, of granularity, it is the
difference between doctors and paramedics where the latter learn a procedure
by rote (bias to sameness) and the former, the doctor, learns timeslices
based on difference, thus the doctor can stop halfway through a procedure
and confidently change tac, the rote learner can find this VERY difficult to
do as well as slightly stressful, they are left with a feeling of
'incompleteness'. (Nurses HATE this, better for an intern/resident to let
them get on with the procedure that try and 'help'!)
Even though NLP is about the realisation/extention of choice, rote learning
acts to reduce choice, it tries to create the 'best' algorithm to use and
that may be fine in Sales or self-development but not in a training/therapy
context and that is one of the main areas of use for NLP at the moment.
> I can see this being on-topic in terms of competing memeplexes. Would
> the NLP memeplex that includes checks and balances be more effective
> in transmitting itself than the NLP memeplex that does not?
Depends on the intensity of the C & B. At best C & B act as GUIDES not
CONTROLS and so there is some degree of trust in those who are being
monitored but if things get out of hand then in come the controls and that
stops development of the system as well as the attraction of the system to
potentual users/trainers etc
The NLP that does not have controls leads to the 'many' emerging (as you
find now) with different schools having different programs and market forces
determine the 'best' from the 'worst' but this can allow for the 'random'
killings easier than the guided system. Eventually controls come in that are
heavier than the system that starts of with some c & b in the form of
guidance.
Would the
> "power must be shared with limits" meme do better than the "you can
> have power with no moral limits" meme?
>
see last paragraph.
> Which type of organization is more successful, I wonder?
>
over what timespan?
best,
Chris.
===============================================================
This was distributed via the memetics list associated with the
Journal of Memetics - Evolutionary Models of Information Transmission
For information about the journal and the list (e.g. unsubscribing)
see: http://www.cpm.mmu.ac.uk/jom-emit
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : Wed Jun 21 2000 - 15:07:38 BST