How much do rv methods program our minds?

Project Home Page

RVwebForum

TKR @the Dojo Psi

Help make it possible for everyone.

RV CHAT

Monday Nights
9:30-11:30pm Eastern
6:30-8:30pm Pacific
dojopsi.com/chat/

Weekly RV Chat

CS Labs
Ingo Swann
Joe McMoneagle

Baylands Nature Preserve
Pete's Harbor Restaurant
Lucid Dream Example
Radio Listening Post
Test-Bed Trials
Video ABC Put to the Test

The Home Made Viewer

P.I.A.

TKR Blog

Noetic Vision

Serious Kilowatt

Red Cairo

Cosmic Spoon

Psychic Journey

Psyforce

Remote Review

MindBlogging

BadMoJoe

Dojo Blog

Firedocs RV Blog

the McMoneagles

LFR/CSL

RV Roast (alt)

RV Library

[wizopeva]

I've been thinking a bit about how these diff rv techniques that have been mentioned might work.  For instance, in the 'TO name or to Describe' thread, Wee Wizard said:

"One of the "techniques" often used by a friend of mine is to write down the AOL information as descriptively as possible and then mentally let the image "release" or flow away. If it continues to return over and over, sometimes it is actually the target, other times there seem to be descriptors that have been left out. So apparently the technique is to continue writing down all descriptors until the AOL ish image fades away and is replaced by more and different data."

From my own training Lyn often tells us that by writing down stuff, you get it out of your system so to speak and will no longer fixate on it.  That's why we write down all aols and other misc thoughts that might come to the for.  Once we write it down, then we can stop thinking about it and move on.  And of course we are also encouraged to describe.

But does that method work because that is how rv works?  Or is it because LYn tells us that a lot of times and we believe and internalize it thus making it true by our own beliefs.  If he keeps saying it and then I keep saying it to myself, will that not then in some way program my subconscious mind to make it so?  And in the same way, someone else will internalize their own trainer's methods and so those may well work too, at least as long as that viewer has internalized them.

How much of this is really mechanics and how much is just plain old psychology?    

-E

[River]

Hi Eva,

Now this is so interesting to me.

Being a newbie is a huge advantage in this area. (probably the only area so I'll dive on it   ) We come in fresh but it doesn't take long to get indocrinated I can tell you!

When I first got into RV there was a guy who started at the same time and we got to be friends. We talked a lot about how ingrained certain ideas were in people who had been in RV for a length of time.

I started off doing targets on the net without having any training and no idea how to go about it. So I just did what I had always done to 'get information'. I focused on what I wanted to know and waited for the information to come.

It worked fairly well, considering, but I floundered around because I had no .......um.....direction.....  No structure.

Then I learn't CRV basics.

For the life of me I still can't figure out why people insist on doing ideograms when all you need to do is concentrate just like in the rest of the session. But ideograms are so ingrained into people. It is one of those MUST DO's

As far as I can tell ALL the methods are just simple tools to help promt the mind to do certain things. And this is just what I needed.  The methods set up a path of questions that need to be answered.

The path starts off with simple, general questions then gets more and more specific.

Now most teachers tell us that some points along that path MUST be followed or we will stray off the path.

Sounds a lot like school teacher and parents doesn't it. Well I guess it's the same in a way.

It helps to read the manual but it's not necessary for programing the video. But if all else fails read the instructions.  

But if you want to be a techno geek you had probably read up on every manual you can find until you know it all inside and out then throw them all in the bin and teach yourself.

PSI was in long before RV so IMHO there is nothing in RV methods that is necessary, let alone vital to viewing.  But certain aspects do help.  

Some people cling to rules and some find their own. Special people know the rules and how to break them.


River RVer Liz

[River]

OOps looks like I jumped tracks in the last post.

The question was.....

How much do rv methods program our minds?

My answer is 'lots' if you aren't careful.

Take AOL's for example.

Before I started RV someone could ask me to describe something I had never seen before.......say......the building they used to work in.

I could focus on the question and then an image would appear, clear as being there. I could 'walk' around the building discribing everything, even going inside and telling them what was in each room, what was on the shelves. I mean the detail was picture perfect. The only thing I ever had trouble with were time aspects. I might be seeing the building as it was prior to renovations for example.

The guy who I was talking about in the last post had similar experiences, all in living colour.

Now we both started reading on RV sites.
    We read in RV posts that you can't name anything because it's bound to be symbolic. You MUST describe what you see and state it as being an analytical overwhatsit. (AOL)

At first we both thought this was hysterically funny.

But then we both started Pru's CRV basics. Pru doesn't agree with the AOL idea and says all info is relevant, but she does agree on the idea that most of it is just symbolic.

So......first session..........we can't see a damn thing but symbols. Next session was the same. After a few more of not being able to see anything but symbols we both panick because we've lost our picture perfect, see the real thing, vision.

Pru was away at the time so we had no one to tell us what was going on. It was traumatic for both of us.

Then it dawns on us that we've been programed to beleive that what we see will be symbolic rather than the real deal.

I still haven't gotten over this programing and I KNOW it's programing. What chance would anyone have of overcoming it if they had no prior experience?

I'm willing to believe that proir to RV I just hadn't run into symbology yet, but I didn't seem to need it then so I'd much rather go back to not having it at all.

Liz

[energycritter]

River, please allow yourself to jump tracks. it is in the track jumping that you mentioned that you have manifested your best and most affective RV or moments of knowingness or whatever anyone wants to call it.  

Poeple always need to put everything into a box (belief system) and then present the contents to others as if that is waht exists and from the box they can sell anyone what is needed.  :-/

In the act of, so called, jumping the tracks, you succesfully jump out of boxes and whatnot.    

Jump around, it can be the best way as well as a form of the "no-mind".  

If we structure our thoughts as mentioned from within the box, we then have a mind set, the un-no-mind. This mind set or program can be amazingly limiting to poeple that already express and manifest outside of the box where the real power is. It is often more subtle outside of the box, in a way, because, when outside of the box that everyone likes to be in, those that are in the box are not really sure how to stamp approval on what is done outside of the box, therefore the successes out there are subtle and almost seem incorrect and latent to those that claim to be the teachers of something they realy do not have a gift to teach or do. RV does have its own religious belief system, so to speak. It would be nice if that system can not be developed so fervently by those that feel at ease in the box or in the program. Granted, some, may always need the box or they can not function as an RV practicer.  

RV seems to be taking on a more and more rigid and linear dynamics. That can be detrimental to the developement of all who play. The RV moment itself is a function of the non-linear dynamics of the chaos theory, in a way, not meant to trigger controversy. Oh sure, some poeple will still have results while following the linear, predictable, over simplified programming that is claimed to be the "way, the truth and the life" of the given RV moment, but, as known by some, it is not always the way, etc.  

Humans tend to enjoy the binding and securing feeling the programming gives them. It can be comforting to the person's lower self. The higher self often enjoys jumping out of the box and playing where the real power is. That of course does require a few internal structures or spiritually manifest mechanisms that for many reasons, all do not have at their disposal or access.  

So, in closing...River, keep on keeping on with the moments of the higher self, jump out of the box as often as you can, avoid following the track, it is walked on by too many. Follow the spirit of your moment and avoid the croud. High populations in a particuler area of thought, has never constituted or defined truth.  

Be free, be good willed while jumping and go go go  

Get the information the way you know "you" are able to get it. "Know one knows the heart of a man, save the spirit that is in the man", sorry, that was a quote from an existing believe system, not implying absolute truth at all. I just thought I would toss that in there.  

I babbled River, but, you reached inside of yourself when you jumped tracks and then you actually spoke from a greater location of truth for the moment that you were in. I guess I just wanted to water that a little for you so that it didn't dry up too much due to programs and methods. Try as hard as you can to get back to the way that you claimed you have somewhat negativly affected by allowing yourself to be programmed and told the way to go in order to get to the place that you have been many times before.    

Try to avoid being dumbed down while trying to bring yourself up, if it is at all possible.  

River has made some excellent points in his track jumping feets of bravery, courage and expression.  

The "Jungian Stew" (BW) is full of goodies. None of those goods are limited to a specific box or program, if they were, then why would the author have called it "Jungian Stew?"    

Just trying to help....

BC the EC

[River]

Hi Energycritter.

LOL I just ment that I had forgotten to answer the question. But your post was very inspiring.  Thanks:D

River

[energycritter]

Well, I understand what you meant, I just did a bad job of correctly connecting my intended inspiration then.

Be inspired....that is what I wanted....

BC

[Fire]

From my own training Lyn often tells us that by writing down stuff, you get it out of your system so to speak and will no longer fixate on it.

That's part of the Swann methods logic, part of the learning-theory incorporated into CRV I think (not sure). It's been awhile lol.  In my experience writing stuff down has value because "If it's real, it'll probaby come back" (or something that relates to it will) and it easier allows trying to 'forget about it and move on' instead of getting hung up on something in the head.

But does that method work because that is how rv works?  Or is it because {snip} we believe and internalize it thus making it true by our own beliefs.

It's a good question.  

I'm pretty sure for example that Joe doesn't write down every tiny impression that flits through his head.  His head is capable of doing a lot of combining, holding, integrating until something makes a decent amount of sense and then it's 'data' for him.  That's why he's always talked about understanding your own mind.

For example in the old Mars targets that Skip Atwater has on his website[1], Joe is doing a verbal session and says "Just a minute, I've got to iron this out. It's a little weird." and then he comes up with, "I'm looking at an aftereffect from a major geologic problem."  Anybody who does RV has an idea of the kind of mental facility required to 'process out to this' (he was putting together data to find some context).

If he keeps saying it and then I keep saying it to myself, will that not then in some way program my subconscious mind to make it so?  And in the same way, someone else will internalize their own trainer's methods and so those may well work too, at least as long as that viewer has internalized them.

I've asked that of people who are trained in methods that really emphasize doing everything exactly by the book and never deviating.  Some people say when they deviate their results suck, so they learned how it was correct that one had to stay so rigidly in structure. Yet if they believed that deviation would cause that result, then that seems like a self fulfilling prophecy.  On the other hand maybe it's just so.

Back when Swann had that bright idea about using geographical coordinates as 'addressing' a psi target, I recall reading something that inferred that it took him a little practice before he started nailing them.  That always made me think that either it took his mind a bit to get the hang of some invisible process, or that it just took a little practice in that mental model for his mind to accept it better and lock on more reliably.

How much of this is really mechanics and how much is just plain old psychology?

I don't know the answer to that.  It's a good door to open thinking for oneself as a developing viewer, I suspect, I am always wondering about this kind of thing myself!  A ref that comes to mind (since I mentioned him already) is from McMoneagle's RV Oasis interview series[2], where he was asked:

Q: How much of psi talent do you think is really a matter of psychology accepting/allowing psi?
and he said:
A: All of it.  That comes from "knowing" it's real, not believing it to be so.

[1] http://satwater.www9.50megs.com/RVMars.html
[2] http://www.firedocs.com/remoteviewing/pjrv_interviews.cfm

[Fire]

Being a newbie is a huge advantage in this area.

I can't count the things I've succeeded at in my life because I was too stupid to know better.  Ignorance certainly has its downfalls but it has the great upside of not having the restrictions of existing beliefs, either!

I started off doing targets on the net without having any training and no idea how to go about it.

Back in 1996 there was a website called The View From Here that had a couple viewers and the rest mostly interested public just playing around.  The funny thing is I recall them doing pretty well, regardless of not having had training.  And although nearly all the people I remember from there ended up getting formal training after that, I think it was probably good for them to see that psi was real for them because of them, first--rather than feeling totally dependent on methods.  Then the methods become a great tool ("how did we survive before microwaves and cordless drills?") instead of a you-can't-get-there-from-here-without-them concept.

For the life of me I still can't figure out why people insist on doing ideograms when all you need to do is concentrate just like in the rest of the session. But ideograms are so ingrained into people. It is one of those MUST DO's

LOL.  I love ideograms but know plenty who don't use them. Unfortunately my ideograms don't always love me and I spend plenty of time in session where they are either useless to me or only confusing.  But I use them as "anchoring", not just going into the session but throughout the session whenever data isn't flowing.  Mainly I find that if I practice regularly, their value goes up considerably, and if I don't, they are much more difficult.  That goes for all parts of a session though, not just the Ids.

As far as I can tell ALL the methods are just simple tools to help promt the mind to do certain things.

Seems like it.

And this is just what I needed.  The methods set up a path of questions that need to be answered.

I have noticed that viewers appear to be capable of getting decent data with any method ever seen as well as with no method, their own method, etc.  This does suggest that it might be more about 'structure, attention and practice' than the specifics.  However, I do think that there may be certain ways, or certain sequences, that "in general" work better than other options.  This is the case in most other aspects of life and skills, so it would make sense it might be in psi as well.

Now most teachers tell us that some points along that path MUST be followed or we will stray off the path.

I've heard that from a couple, but I don't recall Lyn or Paul suggesting that deviation was data-doom, only that the process had been developed for a reason and if you wanted its helpful effects, to stay in it as much as possible.

But if you want to be a techno geek you had probably read up on every manual you can find until you know it all inside and out then throw them all in the bin and teach yourself.

If I knew then... and had it to do all over again, I'd teach myself first, and then much later, pursue methods.

Some people cling to rules and some find their own. Special people know the rules and how to break them.

Yeah... I think in some cases though, it depends on what rules we're talking about (e.g., are we talking about ditching double-blind, which I'd never agree with if it were possible in context, or are we talking about writing it on the OTHER side of the paper, lol?!), and whether someone is so proficient that they can then violate them, or whether it's just an excuse for not bothering.  

Pro ice skaters, the best in the world, still have to do the bleepin' requirements, with points assigned, to ever make it into the finals that we end up seeing on TV.  We don't see skaters that become fabulous ice dancers but can't do all the figures to save their lives, because if they can't do those, they don't get to dance.  Maybe that's a belief system in THAT world.  Or maybe it suggests that the best impromptu and creative performance is usually based on a foundation of excellent technical skill.

Fire

[waterway]

This is a great thread that is really digging around a rich vein.  It seems that RV works because it is part of our reality  After you look over all the "schools" and structures and protocols, you start to notice that they all have to crack your world view that says RV cannot exist, and replace it with a reality where RV works.  That is perhaps the first and most important step.  Like the Buddhist teacher asks you if you enter study with your cup full or empty, you have to empty your cup first before you proceed.   Some people are lucky to enter the fray more open to such things.  

I think so many "schools" have their educational process and structures because 1) that is what science does, and they really want/need RV to be real science to get the research $, 2) It was originally being taught/utilized by the military and universities.  3) You want it accessible to the public, and much of the public is used to being educated by a structured curriculum and process.

But I think RV will work while standing in jello while wearing an aluminum foil hat if you believe that is how RV works.  Are the laws of physics immutable?  Uh... apparently not if you can see without eyes, and see the future and past.  Okay, maybe there is some "laws" we just haven't figured out yet that supercede our present understanding, but I think we will find that the "way RV works" and the way "reality works" has everything to do with how YOU know it works.  

-ww

[energycritter]

Bottom line, as you mentioned, the empty state or No-mind is a good place to start, unless of course you can do the jello thing. The jello is the quintessential way of all things. Like yin and yang, the Supreme Ultimate is Jello....ha ha ha  

OK, seriously though, emptiness....then the Stew can come inside of you and add flavor to the moment.

waterway, have you read the book of five rings and Musashi's chapter on emptiness? Just curious.

Emptiness, not only a strategy of the warrior, but, a strategy of life.

BC the EC