Daz said:Daz wrote:PJ wrote:
Maybe, but I don't understand why people seem to have zero delineation about the VIEWER'S intent. If the viewer is defining the tasker's mental intent as the driver/context/framework/directive for the target, then that is what we are forced to assume IS so; there is no reason to assume that what some guy down the street is thinking when he sees my session three years from now is "just as impactive" as the specific thoughts of the specific person that I was attempting to base a session on.
I don't see things like this.
I see it as - if a tasker can influence and directly communicate with seven or more remote viewers on a target then there is NO reason on not believe that anyone reviewing the project cannot also communicate mind wise with the takser and remote viewers as who's to say where the participation starts or stops, and we all know form science that the people watching experiments become part of the experiments. If one or more minds can interact - then all the minds can intract - surely?
I just don't think this is even logical--the point you are leaving out is THE VIEWER. The Viewer is the person who truly defines things; it is that the viewer chooses to "ride" the "tasker's intent" as their definition, an allowing/accepting, that makes the tasker the driver. The viewer can choose to ride something else as definition -- the feedback, or their own opinion after the fact of what constituted the target, or whatever is 'most needed', or several other variants -- a viewer can deliberately exclude most of the tasker from the task if they so choose, or just specific things; the viewer's intent is paramount.
Of course this requires that the viewer (a) have a decently strong will, and (b) that they KNOW it is THEIR intent which is the driver. If you convince a viewer that they are totally helpless, that they are at the whim of the tasker, the analyst, and every person who ever looks at their session, then you're breeding fundamental insecurity/weakness into the viewer.
Hell this isn't just a viewer thing although I think it's way, way more profound and dangerous an effect for viewers simply because it is so subtle and even ineffable. But this goes for nearly any performance art and skill and sport that a human being does. Teach people that they are strong and they have the power and they do; teach them that they are helpless in the face of everybody else and they will be.