pjrv : Messages : 786-786 of 4038
#786 From: "PJ Gaenir"
Date: Fri Oct 11, 2002 9:29 am
Subject: Symbolic Viewing/Judging in ARV dennanm
Send Email Send Email
Symbolic Viewing - Increasing effect by putting more of the psi on
the analyst than the viewing team. My thoughts for this morning.
I've become interested in symbology and personal archetypes over
time, and I'm wondering how psychic functioning ties into this.
Some psychics have done what amounts to Image Streaming (in the
Wenger sense) and then "interpreted" that symbology for themselves.
So instead of really trying to literally see the target for example,
they just see or perceive whatever the heck they do, and then wait to
find the correlate or allegory as an answer, once they get the
Can't remember who, but someone mentioned one of the ARV people
getting symbology (like a bird flying) to mean a stock went 'up' or
something, that is a little what I'm talking about I think, although
as I don't know the viewer I'm not sure.
Now, the 3 CSL research paper about Decision Augmentation Theory make
this sort of interesting to me, and here is why:
That research suggests that all decisions may rest on psi and in
particular that someone "judging" psi may themselves use psi. (I
have always assumed this was a given for analysts and ARV judges.)
The 'symbolic' viewing is interesting to me, because it goes back to
my Pot Of Beans Theory -- bear with me ;-) --
I suspect that the universe really is holographic, and that
consciousness organizes and correlates, and that intent 'makes the
I suspect if we look into a pot of boiling beans with a question,
that something about the pattern, the timing, the nature of what we
see, can provide us an answer -- because unconsciously we are sort
of "grafting" the answer onto our environment/perception for
I suspect this is at the heart of most every form of divination done
with a witness -- I mean with a physical intermediary between 'the
information' and the psychic. (Tea leaves, bones, whatever.)
So when we talk about symbolic viewing, we really had two different
things at work, whether the 'judging' is done by the viewer or by
The first is the psi experience itself;
The second is the 'correlation or allegories' drawn.
Finally I am getting to my point:
Say that you have one person judging ARV and they are relatively
Say you have a pool of 40 viewers and they range from pretty good to
dismal and most are somewhere in between.
If there was a way to use all those viewers and yet, to put more-% of
the psi on the judge, the end result might actually be better, than
averaging out all those viewers.
So, one way this might be done is by using symbolic viewing rather
than literal viewing. This would allow the judge to "read into" the
viewing results much more flexibly, allegorically, personally, than
trying to just logically match up factoids in the data.
So it wouldn't be so much that the viewer even HAD to be correct,
frankly. It would be that the viewer would be expected to get some
data and the difference in judging protocol would mean the judge
would be expected to 'intuitively associate' the data with one of the
targets. As they weren't meant to be too literal, this would
hopefully remove some of the judge's own AOL based on factoids.
Perhaps good targets to facilitate such symbolic viewing would be
archetypes or mythological characters/gods, which are all
highly 'conceptual' and so open to interpretation. On the other hand
this could potentially lead to some very unexpected experiences for
the viewers -- I am not sure. :-)
pjrv : Messages : 791-791 of 4038
#791 From: Weatherly-Hawaii...m
Date: Fri Oct 11, 2002 5:47 pm
Subject: Re: Symbolic Viewing/Judging in ARV maliolana
Send Email Send Email
Invite to Yahoo! 360° Invite to Yahoo! 360°
I was thinking about some of the other 'tools' I have used off and on in
my life...tarot...I Ching...numerology/astrology...I don't see why any
one of these wouldn't do as well as say... dowsing...
I still find them amazingly useful...in ordinary life...if for no other
reason than to tell me what I already know...Sort of a validation or
second opinion...or third...2 out of three...I am thinking on trying
this...in conjunction with arv...
On the self judging thing...At PIA...I found out ...one of my big
mistakes was letting hunch/intuition/gut instinct decide for me...replace
the analytical...two photos...similiar lines...shapes ...here and
there...but one of them has all the flash of an aol I had...so I pick
that one...after feedback...It feels so right... wrong!~
Feedback is when I find I should have paid more attention to the less
dramatic one...so now...I take much more time deciding which one is which
...using only analytical except in as much as I agree...all decision
making to some degree taps into psi at some level...at least good
decision making...conversely also bad...but it is still not easy to
figure out all my mistakes...
Not to mention the why of it...I am on my second set of 50 in my group
at PIA now...Luckily those in my group... are all much better at it than
So I will be trying a lot of stuff...I agree with Bill...the psche wants
to not be bored...most of all...and diversity of approach...helps keep it
interested in cooperating...Its a theory...haha...I want in the seven per
cent damnit...Its a goal...
Funny thing though...my percentage... is much higher at my single person
group... where I do all the judging...group as well as self...Of course
with a one person group...You judge all of it ...all of the time...Unless
you set it on automatic...then the machine decides what you were
intuiting...and I can't have that......I have been just doing an extra
session to decide on a tie...
in my single group...
I think outbounders are far more challenging..fun...and maybe easier in
some ways...haven't did enough of them to know yet...
Love & Light & Laughter