Topic [3] Symbolic and nonsymbolic analysis TKR Remote Viewing Forum July 2003

It is the intent of the Dojo Psi that the living-history of remote viewing's development in the public sector not be erased, revised, or otherwise lost to the vagaries of time. In this spirit, the dojo encourages, promotes, hosts and develops archives of online Remote Viewing activity. [Caveats] For current discussion on remote viewing, click the logo at the top of the page to visit TKR's big Remote Viewing Discussion Forum directly.

Gecko, somewhere around July 7, 2003

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, somewhere around July 8, 2003

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, somewhere around July 8, 2003

[quote]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.[/quote]

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, somewhere around July 9, 2003

[quote]I have wondered how our judgement of our sessions influence future performance.[/quote]

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.

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

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.

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

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.

[quote]...perhaps this issue is subservient to the more pressing need for repeated practice? [/quote]

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, somewhere around July 9, 2003

[quote]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.[/quote]

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.

[quote]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.[/quote]

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, somewhere around July 10, 2003

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:
[quote][color=Yellow]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. [/color][/quote]

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, somewhere around July 10, 2003

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, somewhere around July 10, 2003

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

Fire, somewhere around July 10, 2003

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, somewhere around August 13, 2003

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

polkadotpuhjommies, somewhere around August 13, 2003

[quote]Why do concepts in RV get presented "symbolically"?  When is a cigar just a cigar? [/quote]

Here is a guess....my great stab in the dark  :P

YOU know what a cigar is. I know what a cigar is. I would think MOST  USA & European citizens know what a cigar is, so sure, getting a cigar for cigar would be perfect!  ;-)

Why I think we wouldn't get a cigar is because the SC gives us more of what a cigar is about than just feeding us a pic of a cigar.  What about the person who has been blind since birth and has never seen a cigar.? What about someone from a 3rd world country who has never heard of a cigar?

Would a person who has always been blind see a picture of a cigar...don't think so  (could be very wrong about this tho)...and if they did, what would it mean to them?  Same for someone who never heard of or saw a cigar before.  However....

what the SC does is give us more ~~ such as impressions of, plants, growing, smells, shape,color etc ...whatever it is we know that relates to the cigar.  Maybe a Malasian would get a pic of a brown leaf rolled up and smoldering...who knows... ??  .  This way, all mankind can know the unknown.  The SC speaks the language of all?  It's we humans who have developed words (labels) and have invented things....such as cigars.  Cigars don't grow naturally .....

This isn't presenting a clearly as I'd hoped. It is so much more clear in my mind...just can't express it as I want.  (heh heh... getting this said is like RVing  ;) )

I dunno....what do you think about what I've said...make any sense???  ....or can someone else say it better?????  

Nuff said from me....   :-[ :-[  I'm going to back out of this convo and read the rest of todays postings !!   ;-)

......and she skips off to the safer part of town.....

waterway, somewhere around August 14, 2003

;-)
Thanks pkPJs,

Does the SC speak the language of us all?  Or is it just speaking YOUR language?  Mr. McMoneagle states that what you RV is your universe, but not the universe we all share.   Is their some universal place we all share, and can then tap into to get our SC info?  Or is my SC just working with my info, my universe to me?

What do you think?

polkadotpuhjommies, somewhere around August 14, 2003

[quote]Does the SC speak the language of us all?  Or is it just speaking YOUR language?  [/quote]

My guess would be both. The part that would be for all of us would be at the more primal level ~~ and then it also has the ability to communicate with us using things known specifically by the self.

This makes sense to me. What do you think?  Anyone else have some thoughts about this?  

admin, somewhere around October 24, 2008

I've been doing some archiving of this forum, and it's funny but I notice that there was a lot more hands-on theory & practice discussion in the earlier days than there has been for a long while, with some exceptions. Of course, except for maybe a dozen if that, most the conversation is from people on tkr staff most of whom were more active then. It does seem that getting more focused discussion has historically been an issue in the field (at least since end of '95 when I joined it, but I was nearly alone then) (maybe that's where I learned to talk to myself with no shame at all LOL). This was the first topic I pulled up and I found it interesting (archives merely remind me how boring I am and how I wish I heard more from other people though!).

It does seem hard to nudge toward an interest in hands-on stuff, but I think it would be nice to rekindle some of that focus. I do realize that as some people are Born Experts™ they don't learn much new but lots of people really *want* to learn vicariously (and discuss something that isn't social politics) and would appreciate more talk of that sort.

Recently, the Aurora Group posted on the Dossey project, and it was mentioned that Marv you did the analysis for that project (blind to target right? so that'd make it 'analysis', rather than 'evaluation'). Given there are few enough doubleblind pre-target application things in this field, I think that's a very cool thing and just the sort of thing that ought to get more attention.

I would really like to hear more about that. Some description of things you found easier, harder, challenging, confusing, pretty much just a walkthrough in whatever detail you have time for, on its own thread, of the process from someone who did it. Not everybody has the opportunity to work with a team, in protocol, so the perspective is sure to be educational. Will you post on that when you get time? Are you willing?

daz, somewhere around October 25, 2008

PJ,
as a member of the Aurora group I think we have a good wealth of mixed method projects using (natural, CRV, TRV, TDS) rv methods all in one project - generally with an analysis and feedback document at the end of each project. I could solicit form the team if it would be Ok to say add one here a month of some of the projects and have then up for discussion. I feel the group was unique in that I haven't seen so many diverse methods all work the same target and then be analysed by the tasker or client and in discussions themselves after all this with the actual viewers.

We have a varied range of projects we could look at if Aurora allows;
missing persons,
mysteries (with feedback)
real world applications
archaeology projects
I might also be able to get/have aurora and the following work with UKRV (Andrew usher) more recnet developmental work we are doing which is giving great results for us rving medical problems in real patients.

We already have the steve fosset project in public, and we also have another missing person case - which we did for nina reiser out in public which had very, very accurate results on how she died and location that we could use/discuss - this one actually went to and was looked at by the prosecutors and US news services.

All the best...

Daz

Joe_Black, somewhere around October 25, 2008

Better of saying 'like a sled'. info such as 'car' etc is usually to high level, should be left to the analysis stage later to decide that.

admin, somewhere around October 25, 2008

One of the things that has come up in the staff section is the idea of creating a new board at the top here which would specifically be only for posting a featured-session. That is to say, a pointer to a session-etc. (anywhere) with some discussion from the viewer or whomever involved, about that session, shared for an assumedly good reason. So when people were to visit, the first focus would be 'viewing' and not just talking.

Since we have two separate websites, one for viewing and one for discussion here, often it seems the focus in each place is fairly split as well. As a project we really want to keep emphasis on the three main points that drive TKR -- positive community, legitimate RV protocol, and hands-on viewing. But the low % rate of participants in just about any area of online RV makes it work.

The competitive politics in the field are ever-pushing to redefine TKR as some form of competition, but the whole point of this project is to be a NON-competitive "infrastructure" that supports anything and everything RV, including the many independents through the field -- through tools and utilities, social networking, group events, or whatever we can do. Or to put it another way, we don't want to be microsoft or mcdonald's, we want to be the electric company (and when needed, the food bank ;-)) -- allowing people to go forth and better invent or build or live whatever they want, with TKR as a centralized free support.  

We've been talking about what TKR can do now and in the future to continue focus on that theme, and ideas from members are welcome.

[quote author=daz link=topic=3.msg35334#msg35334 date=1224928502]I could solicit form the team if it would be Ok to say add one here a month of some of the projects and have then up for discussion.[/quote]

I think that would be both interesting and educational!

[quote]I feel the group was unique in that I haven't seen so many diverse methods all work the same target and then be analysed by the tasker or client and in discussions themselves after all this with the actual viewers.[/quote]

True (although CRV-TRV-TDS are mostly CRV-with-variants, so there is that powerful commonality). I agree that the mix of methods makes it even more interesting, and that the variety of different individuals with varying roles does as well.

[quote]We have a varied range of projects we could look at if Aurora allows;
missing persons,
mysteries (with feedback)
real world applications
archaeology projects
[...] rving medical problems in real patients.[/quote]

Sounds good to me. All are very interesting in their own right.

[quote]We already have the steve fosset project in public, and we also have another missing person case - which we did for nina reiser out in public which had very, very accurate results on how she died and location that we could use/discuss - this one actually went to and was looked at by the prosecutors and US news services.[/quote]

Very cool. Anything that promotes hands-on viewing (in protocol to degree possible) is a great thing, and something I'd like to see both supported and focused on to whatever degree possible. It's too easy for conversational areas to range from armchair theory (which has its place, but within limits) to social issues, and kinda lose traction on the whole reason we're all in this in the first place: it's always about the viewing.

I encourage you and your team to share info--including personal experience, as that's something invaluable (particularly in a field of people having to reinvent so many wheels).

I also encourage anybody to share ideas about how TKR can best support the small variety of real-viewing efforts around the field, to try and get them more encouragement to the individuals and more publicity to the overall efforts.

Best,
PJ

end of messages

[END Topic 3] Symbolic and nonsymbolic analysis TKR Remote Viewing Forum July 2003