Symbolic and nonsymbolic analysis

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

[Gecko]

Looking at other people sessions, I've noticed that some people prefer to only look at their session in a concrete fashion.  For instance, if they say 'car' in the session, then if the target has a sled, then it's totally wrong.  I have wondered how our judgement of our sessions influence future performance.  If we demand only exact answers, will we manage to get more exact answers in the future?  Or could avoidance of possible right brain differences of the subconscious mind possibly serve to diminish or limit communication between the conscious and subconscious?  Or perhaps both tactics have advantages and disadvantages and perhaps this issue is subservient to the more pressing need for repeated practice?  
-E  

[waterway]

Wow, great questions, cuz you bring up two very vital issues.  

1) What is valuable analysis?  I really should leave this to the experts.... but from what I have seen and experienced, the info you get is not often literal and a photographic copy of the target, the info is often symbolic or at least disjointed.  I think from a practical standpoint for folks doing this for money, the buyer wants to know pretty concretely what the info is, but from a learning and improving standpoint, exactness may be a tough roe to hoe every time.  Which brings me to:

2) Will recurrent "failures" discourage the flow of info?  I think so, and I think this is the most important part of your query.  It seems that the "subconscious" or whatever we are gonna call it, needs to be soothed, reassured and nurtured to progress in RV.  So demanding that it provide the make, model and color of the car in the target is perhaps too much.   Your subconscious gets punished, and you start avoiding practice for subconscious and conscious reasons.  Exactness is the conscious mind's job, the subconscious seems to have a different agenda.

[Gecko]

Wow, great questions, cuz you bring up two very vital issues.  

Waterway: 1) What is valuable analysis?  

Gecko--I think that depends on how difficult the question is.  What if the question is what area should I invest money in over the next year?   A general idea culled from a number of sessions and viewers might tell me if I should go with gold, biotech, etc.  In such a case, most of the picture is known.  You just need a pointer in the right direction.  How about is this guy Joe Black a good person to hire?  Again, if any viewers are decent and vring biologicals, this might not be too hard.  You don't need to have every detail, just the general gist of it.  But if you wanted to know the location of OSama Bin Laden, well that's a toughie.  All caves look about the same.  Even if you had a photo, it still might not be of that much use.  

Waterway: 2) ....Your subconscious gets punished, and you start avoiding practice for subconscious and conscious reasons.  Exactness is the conscious mind's job, the subconscious seems to have a different agenda.

Gecko--Yeah, but what if you force yourself to practice anyway?  Will you eventually get over it and move on?  Can the mental block really stay there forever?  I don't know.  That's why I think maybe all roads eventually lead to Rome if only you can keep walking at a steady enough rate.  Or I could be wrong.  ;-)
-E  

[Fire]

I have wondered how our judgement of our sessions influence future performance.

I think a whole lot.  The whole point of having feedback is the "Learning Theory" that says if you do something, then see whether you are right or wrong, your mind will learn from both.  Well "what" our mind learns is the question in this case.  

If the mind learns, "That was a very good perception of the fundamental gestalt (vehicle in rapid motion)", then the mind might learn something from that.  

If the mind learns, "That was an incorrect translation of the perception of vehicle in rapid motion; though the principle was right, you jumped to conclusion about the form-label", then the mind might learn something from that.  

If the real response is, "Sled!  I thought it was a freakin car!  Well that's wrong."  I don't think a whole lot is going to be learned frankly.

I think sometimes in practice people forget they are teaching themselves; some project the 'teaching' onto a 'methods trainer' and forget that all education is self-education, there are just sometimes sources that are people instead of books or experiences.  

Any teacher would want to nurture what a student does well and gently correct what a student doesn't, but in a way that the student felt informed instead of curbed.  I think it's important viewers play that role for themselves.  RV has a lot of psychological issues and this is one of them.

If we demand only exact answers, will we manage to get more exact answers in the future?

Hard to say and sometimes hard to measure without a full time employee to database your sessions lol.

I think every session, to some degree, is its own experience.  Although I think we learn from experience over time, I still think every session stands alone in a way.  

I find if I demand something specific inside a session and I really INTEND it and I have decent target contact, I generally get it. Both those qualities are necessary though.  

However the 'overall' intent to "get lots of specific data" doesn't seem to be anywhere near as effective--that is always the goal but we can see how often it works and to what degree, lol.

Or could avoidance of possible right brain differences of the subconscious mind possibly serve to diminish or limit communication between the conscious and subconscious?

 

I find that, although I-am-all-me, when I treat myself as if I am 'working with myself'--separate yet one--kindly, and in a way that suggests I am making a real effort to learn the language and ways of my mind, I have better results.

I think it is rather rude to myself to expect the subconscious, which has a rich depth of its own experience and existence, to only communicate with me in the shallow, objective terms my conscious mind likes. It's invalidating, and it ignores that there is a large realm of "experiential" that such parts of me have to offer, that I may be missing out on, and missing out on learning a lot about myself, but insisting everything happen as I consciously demand.

I figure, I will consciously request, and I will accept what I get as an honest response, and I will use that to try and learn about myself and how I think and communicate and perceive etc.  Sometimes when impatient I will demand something specific and feel a right to it.  But generally, my conscious mind is so clueless comparatively, that I don't think it should be more than 'equal' in the process.

...perhaps this issue is subservient to the more pressing need for repeated practice?

Well maybe.  I do think that the more practice one has with certain elements in a target, the more likely they are to correctly and even 'directly/objectively' perceive those elements in future targets.

However I find this tends to be more conceptual than literal.  For example, to use a very common training target in nearly all methods, I think people are more likely to quickly develop, with some practice, a recognition of sense of "bridging" and "spanning" than they are to develop a sense of 'bridge'. The 'bridging' sense can be had for a lot of different things with that fundamental in them, not just bridges.

Fire

[Fire]

1) What is valuable analysis?  I really should leave this to the experts.... but from what I have seen and experienced, the info you get is not often literal and a photographic copy of the target, the info is often symbolic or at least disjointed.  I think from a practical standpoint for folks doing this for money, the buyer wants to know pretty concretely what the info is, but from a learning and improving standpoint, exactness may be a tough roe to hoe every time.

Good question.  Hmmmn.

I think sometimes, the focus on 'literals' so to speak, which in RV development initially is usually physicals, is rather incomplete.  There is a whole lot of information about anything.  Say the target is a practice target (the sort I used in examples), it's an old farmhouse.  Well, being able to describe all the physicals is cool.  But there are a lot of conceptuals involved as well.  

You can measure the pattern in different ways.  You can look at the energy of that farmhouse.  Is it being used. How are the animals treated. Is it abandoned. What's its history. Was somebody hung there.  Born there. Is it built on the spot of an old church that burned down. Is it the only farmhouse left in a region turned over to suburban development.  It is currently in the middle of a property debate over the whole farm.  Is there currently someone IN the farmhouse not even spec'd by the tasking as it's unknown.  A convict, a runaway, a small child afraid to go home; a body; a cache of terrorist's weapons.  And this is a temporal example; landscapes and really old sites have more not only in their past but in their future as well.  

None of those things is visible in a photo.  All of them can be remote viewing information.  Many of these data might come through in ways other than literal, particularly when they first come up in the session.  I think accurate data is relevant but whether it is relevant to your relationship with the target--which it is--or relevant to the client is another story.  And of course, even with simple training targets, there is always plenty not in the feedback.

I guess I think of targets as more like parts of me; friends.  If I am curious about what my neighbor went through when she yelled HIT THE ROAD, JACK! and that man drove away , I don't just stomp up to her door and demand to know.  I go see how she's doing, I talk with her, I let her tell me about herself, and about her day, and I am genuinely interested in her and what she is like and how she is doing.  She can feel this genuine interest and eventually, if I gradually lead the talk that way, she just might get around to volunteering that personal info that I, being a gossipy nosy sort in this example lol, want to know.

WHAT IF targets 'display themselves to us'?

WHAT IF everything is conscious on some level, and a target contains the consciousness of everything involved in it, and we are not merely collecting intell on it but rather, having a relationship with it?

Does genuine curiosity for a target matter?  

Does genuine appreciation of what we experience and find during session matter?

Is treating psychic targets like mere facts in an intell ops situation really the right way to go about RV?  Is that just something bred into the modern RV field by the emphasis on the military/science background?  

What if psi itself is a way to 'communicate'--of a sort--with anything in existence if done right, and we are ignoring this incredible chance to touch the world and feel it touch us back, by following a path and writing it down just so and only being concerned with what gets on paper and how specific it is?

At what point do viewers stop and smell the roses?  There is information--sometimes ineffable I admit--that the *experience* of something and a *relationship* with something brings about, that no amount of 'factual consideration' would bring into perception.

2) Will recurrent "failures" discourage the flow of info?  I think so, and I think this is the most important part of your query.  It seems that the "subconscious" or whatever we are gonna call it, needs to be soothed, reassured and nurtured to progress in RV.  So demanding that it provide the make, model and color of the car in the target is perhaps too much.   Your subconscious gets punished, and you start avoiding practice for subconscious and conscious reasons.  Exactness is the conscious mind's job, the subconscious seems to have a different agenda.

Although I don't technically believe in a SUBconscious, I use the term all the time as it's real convenient as a model for whatever isn't sitting in our attention.

I think it is possible that the subconscious actually does communicate with us in perfect fashion--after its kind.  It was not designed to hold ego and verbal patterns.  That's not its job.  It has another job (quite a few) that it does beautifully.  But we are the project manager, and if we want its experience to be translated into another language, the linear logical sort, it's our job to facilitate that happening.  The SC provides the info and experience.  How far we go to encode it or screw it up past that point is up to us.  

I don't expect my cat to use English if it wants to talk to me--that is not its natural form.  But I understand quite a bit based on its face, the way it moves, the way it meows.  That doesn't make its communications inferior, just different.

I agree that the 'self', whatever we want to call it, needs support, confirmation and encouragement in RV.  The psychology has enough to deal with, without our ego beating up on us.

Fire

[waterway]

Whoooooo Fire, you are ON FIRE!  (Hehe... I made a funny... )

You ask some very pertinent questions about the wider perspective and qualities of RV data.  I have long suspected, as have others, that RV material we get ahold of has everything to do with its "meaning" to the RVer.  Of course Warcollier, Swann, all those folks have mentioned this, but there is such a present desire to make Remote Viewing a regular physical science that we discard all that "human meaning" stuff cuz its too.....squishy.

Fire said:

I think it is possible that the subconscious actually does communicate with us in perfect fashion--after its kind.  It was not designed to hold ego and verbal patterns.  That's not its job.  It has another job (quite a few) that it does beautifully.

So, from your experience, what are some of the things the SC does, in more detail.  Any insight you provide will be greatly appreciated.  

[Fire]

The subconscious--for lack of a better term, I don't really believe in "it" as an "it"--does lots of stuff, I believe it holds us together, I believe it is the majority of what we are.  

One of my focii for a couple years was archetype meditations.  These begin as structured visualizations but as you develop skill, become fully free-form 'conscious dreaming' shamanic experiences.  They are amazing and done in the right state regularly can literally cause massive change in your reality.  Once you realize this they are difficult though as change=death and then youre psychology can't "get around to" doing them lol.  This is similar to what Jung did and was actually blown away yet frightened by--but I use the 'Inner Guide' format (see book by Edwin Steinbrecher), though I seldom use anything like astrological archetypes.

An archetype in these meditations can be anything, such as 'lack of money' or 'my relationship with Jane' or 'the party scheduled for tomorrow night'.  It doesn't have to be a thing or what our culture considers archetypal. It doesn't even have to directly involve us.  Anyway, in the right state and with practice, these become *fully autonomous*.  I mean it is mind blowing.  It is surprising, it is powerful, and it is therapeutic to a degree that one's whole world is affected, not just the mind and heart.

I consider this just one of the nearly infinite 'things the subconscious does' that we can work with to our benefit.

Fire

[energycritter]

Fire, is the above what you have previously refered to as "active meditation?" BC

[Fire]

Yes, it is one form of 'active' meditation.  A passive meditation would be those which either focus on allowing experience or info to come to you, with no effort, or which actually attempt to clear the mind entirely, such as in TM.  

Fire

[waterway]

Why do concepts in RV get presented "symbolically"?  When is a cigar just a cigar?