RV Oasis / PJRV Discussion, Yahoo Groups.
Source Location: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/pjrv/
Filetype: Archive. Topic: Remote Viewing. Blocked: by topic detail.
Archive Storage: www.firedocs.com/pjrv/ and http://www.dojopsi.info/pjrv/
Archivist: Palyne PJ Gaenir (PJRV, Palyne, Firedocs RV, TKR and the Dojo Psi.? )

begin archive

pjrv : Messages : 493-493 of 4038 
(http://groups.yahoo.com/group/pjrv/messages/493?? ) ?


From: joan003....net Date: Sat Aug 17, ?00? 1?:04 pm Subject: Double Blind vs Single Blind vs Self Tasking Etc... joanie003 << I'm a woman, but I still have to stretch quite a bit to see a rejection of double-blind conditions as bringing in the feminine or balancing the gender polarities. ;-? )>> Hi PJ, Just to clarify, I also don't feel these are directly correlated and didn't intend that specifically, but that the paradigm shift itself as a whole, moving away from mechanistic ways of thinking and acting and towards more holistic involved these balancing of Archetypal polar energies. Also whether male or female it doesn't matter, the archetypal energies exist beyond gender. A lot of people think I'm talking about a gender issue :-? ) but I'm really not. :-? ) I hear you on double-blind practice. I've also heard from a very top rver that double-blind is not necessary, in fact the person self-tasks:-? ) (So it gets a bit confusing...but I suppose my own experience will all bear out on this.? ) Still I'm sure that those who are top notch rvers have had oodles of double blind experience, fer sure...and there's the foundational practice. Shamanic work is not done double-blind either...we know the "target" in advance, so that is self-tasking as well or in some cases, single-blind tasking. By the nature of that work being so personal and in sacred space obviously it is not shared publically as "rv" might be. But that work is done in a different "framework" anyway. My primary concern, I suppose, is that people may hold back from practice if they are not able to structure it double-blind, don't have their own organizational setup to do targets that way or don't have others to do it for them...OR they may be reluctant to self-task when there is an issue of concern for which they could use rv methodology to discover meaningful information. I suppose awareness of what one is doing would be important, so one is not fooling themselves. I feel that RV should strive to empower the viewer and the viewer's ability at any time to access meaningful information...for real world applications. I agree with you that practice should be kept pure, but I admit I've both given and received single blind taskings...one being as I mentioned before, Pru's remote healing for Christopher Reeve. Still it's good food for thought to contemplate about structuring tasking for the best learning, so I appreciate it. Can you please share your thoughts about the resultant tangible benefits of double-blind tasking? and the pitfalls of other methods? I probably really SHOULD know where to go for this information by now, but if I know it, it escapes me :-? ) And also the problems that you see that arise in single blind tasking..when the tasker knows the target in advance. I am truly interested in hearing about this. This also ties in for me another question...single OR double blind tasking of one target to multiple viewers at the same time, with what I've heard of telepathic overlay and such..although this is also, endlessly debated :-? ). I know that self-tasking in shamanic work, if the person is truly working in a "good" way yields results that are not clouded by pre-conceptions...and that is much to do with truly mastering "stopping the mind" and being open and uncensoring to whatever messages/perceptions come through. Thanks Muchos..in the Spirit, Joanie ----------------------- Moderator's note: Well, before quoting 'top RVr' you oughtta provide a name or it doesn't mean much to anybody. Secondly, that 'top RVr' may self-task now, and many viewers work only blind, not double blind, when forced, but that is a wholly separate issue from viewer DEVELOPMENT. I think we cannot have a decent conversation unless we are talking about the same thing. I have said elsewhere previously that I consider "experience" and "process" very important, and those can often be had in non-double-blind situations (and even just spontaneous, non-RV situations? ). It is for that reason I am open to anomalous targets, things without feedback, etc. But it doesn't take a learning theory expert to figure out that isolating psi AS psi (not as one of a dozen different ways to get info and who knows where/when/if psi was even involved? ) in a session, and getting specific feedback on what you perceived accurately, is critical to any degree of learning about how we operate during psi functioning. Now BEYOND that issue of actually developing PSI skill, viewers can do whatever they want. Have fun, why not. (As far as multiple viewers go and so on, that's a whole 'nuther subject and should be addressed separately.? ) As far as operational work goes, it's the result that matters, and some people can work totally frontloaded and still do well, and if so, let 'em go for it. As far as experiential work goes, it's the experience that matters, so that's an individual decision. But as far as truly psychic work goes -- where there is NO OTHER WAY of coming by information, nobody else even knows the answer -- I think we're unlikely to get good at anything we don't practice. If I want to play basketball I don't practice soccor and assume it's the same thing. So it's really just what you want to do now and do with it all later, I guess. Probably the thing of import on a discussion list is that discussion on developing viewing skills, vs. "what some other person who is already accomplished at RV might do now", are really separate topics, for fairly obvious reasons, just so we're clear. -- PJ pjrv : Messages : 500-500 of 4038
(http://groups.yahoo.com/group/pjrv/messages/500?? ) ?


From: joan003....net Date: Sun Aug 18, ?00? 10:?? pm Subject: Re: Double Blind vs Single Blind vs Self Tasking Etc... joanie003 Makes sense PJ!!! Points all well taken. Still would like to know if there's any external validation on double blind results vs results other forms of tasking..but don't know if there have been an RV studies that compare the two. :-0 anyone know if they are OUT THERE? on quoting the top RVer...that's the best I can do - :-? ) I vill nut and can nut deesclose me source. :-0 Joanie --------------- Moderator's note: There's been a lot of research done on variances in tasking, frontloading, feedback, and most every other common variable. But you cannot measure the actual PSI evidenced unless you put the viewer in a situation where only PSI can provide data (because other research makes it clear that in any contest of where-data-comes-from, psi tends to be at the bottom of the list in terms of priority given to incoming information? ). If there is a person there with the psychic who KNOWS the target, you have just provided them a whole spectrum of subtle physiological senses through which to obtain data which are not psi (yes, even if the person who knows the target sits there seemingly motionless and says not a word. See Ingo Swann's presentation paper to the U.N. on his http://www.biomindsuperpowers.com website which goes into this? ). So the concept of comparing double-blind with other situations is not applicable -- because the minute you pollute the clarity of the source of information, you are no longer measuring just psi. It's like how well a student does on a formal test, vs. how well the student does on a test when they can look in the book or ask their neighbor for help. You can't compare the two and expect you're still measuring what the student 'knows'. [P.S. And you use the term tasking, but tasking doesn't relate to the double-blind situation unless your tasker is also operating as a monitor and/or is giving the tasking out in person. Have your tasker email you the target directive, and you have solved the double-blind issue.] Regards, PJ

// end archive

Top of Page