Targeting in ARV

RV Protocol

GO VIEW! @TKR's dojo

Project Home Page

RV webForum (here!)

Email: @Yahoo|@Google

Help make it possible for everyone!

TKR is Funded by:
PJ of Dojo Psi

Simple Session

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

P.I.A.

Greg K's ARV Trials

RV Roast (alt)

RV Library

[Liam]

 

Hi All,

I am trying out the whole ARV thing at the moment and got some great info in Stephan Scwartz' book 'Opening to the Infinite.'

What I want to know is can I choose my own ARV targets ?

    Liam

[PJ]

Sorry nobody ever answered this. It kinda got buried down here I think.

In theory you can do anything you want. However, what results you get are what speak to what you "should" do.

If you're going to have to do it all yourself, you'll want to work out a tasking protocol where you're doing the viewing prior to randomly generating potential targets from somewhere (try www.dojopsi.com/tkr/ practice studios, or rvtargets.com, or remote-viewed.com targets) and assigning those (prior to seeing them) to the possible binary outcome of your ARV.  For example, pick your two event-options; then do your session based on the feedback you'll be reviewing after the event occurs and you know what the target was. Then generate two tasks and get the task #s; THEN reveal both task feedbacks, and evaluate your session and see which you think it matches best. IF it matches clearly enough with one you may take action. When the event occurs, get the task feedback associated with that outcome and sit down with it and really explore it for awhile telling yourself THIS is the feedback for your session and what you should have described.

In the science model, ARV is a binary option (so only two possible choice; if neither are clear, no action is taken).

Best,
PJ

[Daz]

We got great results using two different taste as the targets/feedback.
 This keeps the session really short - 'describe the taste you will taste at xxx time as feedback'.

i.e: sugar for outcome 1

vinegar for outcome 2

it also keeps it fun and interesting
especially if you have tastes like chocolate, strawberry's...and more 

daz

[njbr]

We got great results using two different taste as the targets/feedback.
 This keeps the session really short - 'describe the taste you will taste at xxx time as feedback'.

i.e: sugar for outcome 1

vinegar for outcome 2

it also keeps it fun and interesting
especially if you have tastes like chocolate, strawberry's...and more 

daz

This could be interesting, have you ever tried anything like the following ?

The tasker/viewer(s) agree on 5? attributes (taste, color, touch, sound, )
The tasker then choses one of the attributes for deciding outcome, and assigns the attribute to two outcomes (ie choses tastes, outcome 1 chocolate, outcome 2 saltwater)
The view is then given the TRN, and simply writes down the impressions they get for each of the 5 attributes for example (taste:salty color:uncertain touch:whatevr, etc...)
The tasker then rates/bases the accuracy of the ARV session solely on the attribute chosen in part 1.

This would be an ultra simplistic way to RV ....

I'd like to give this a try, see if it works out ....

[Daz]

Interesting but sounds a little too complicated to me.
I like the 1 attribute to an outcome way of doing it - ARV isn't the most fun to do and if it can be done in a 2 minute session then all the better.

Why used 5 attributes when 1 will do it?

No need to complicate anything just assign different tastes to feedback/outcomes, view, feedback.

But hey its all fun try any of it - but be warned the effects wear off after a while

Shimples!

All the best...

daz

Username:
Password: