From: Devon White (devon@thegreatwork.com)
Date: Sun Apr 13 2003 - 20:44:02 MDT
> On Sun, 13 Apr 2003, Devon White wrote:
>
> > I suggest Brainwashing, Mental Programming and How to use their brain.
>
> Devon -- I'm not sure whether you are speaking about an actual
> reference here or "methods" -- could you please qualify?
Here's a little more in-depth description of what i mean. I apologize for
being so vague in my first message. I can provide further "methods" and
examples if you're interested Robert.
excerpt taken with permission from LIARmag.com
Every child, in every culture is the inheritor of all the customs
and culture of its ancestors.
We raise our children to be more of less like us. If we use toilet
paper, so do they. If we use our left hand to wipe, so do they. If we speak
English, so d do they. Italian, German Chinese, so do they.
We chose our title to remind people of the simple truth: We, every
single one of us, brainwash, train, hypnotize, mold our children to be part
of our local and preferred reality tunnels. This cultural hypnosis is so
ubiquitous, so pervasive, that for most people it is outside of their
awareness.
Our title is intended to stimulate awareness that when it comes to
your children, you are the master who makes the grass green . . . or
whatever color you choose. You are the brainwashing, kid training,
reality-artist responsible for establishing the foundation for your child's
reality. The fact is - every one of us and our children have been
brainwashed. The question is - how many of your programs are there with your
intention.
Until now people have feared and scoffed at brain technology and
programming. Our own most natural behaviors have been demonized and
condemned. Words like brainwashing and brain programming have been wholly
abused and misrepresented to the point where knowing how to use your brain
is considered odd by many people. But the brain is just misunderstood. It's
time to reclaim our language and our natural tendency to shape minds both
young and old. It's time to brainwash out in the open.
"I am brainwashing my child to use toilet paper."
"I am programming my daughter to be a Christian."
"I am hypnotizing my son to speak English."
This kind of frankness does wonders for our understanding and
ability with our own brains. It keeps us aware of our responsibility in the
formation of our children and their worlds. It enables us to direct our
behavior with more honesty and intention. And it keeps us aware of the many
realities that exist.
>
> > i think that one of the most important things any child can learn
> > is how to operate themselves. How to use their neurology.
>
> I think Devon is right on the mark here. One can't drive a car
> until one learns what the steering wheel, brake pedal and accelerator
> pedal do. So too one would presume with the brain.
>
> So introducing them to a working theory of the brain as early
> as possible seems like a good idea. I would cite William Calvin's
> work (http://www.williamcalvin.com/) as a really good place to
> start unless something better comes along to displace his ideas.
> Dawkins and E.O. Wilson might also be good uplifting foundation
> materials.
That's a really interesting site.
I also think that Jeff Leiken at www.mentorcounselor.com has some wonderful
ideas regarding children and mentoring the young.
>
> > As well, it would do well for
> > parents to be well-versed (or have someone someone else who is
well-versed)
> > in applied behavioral technologies; NLP, Somatics, bio-electricity, etc
. .
>
> I might be a little more careful here.
>
> I've read the books on NLP and view it as quite interesting but I
> would like to see some scientific studies that "prove" it.
With regard to "proving" NLP it gets very tricky. This is for many reasons.
First of all you have to decide what "it" is that you are proving in the
first place.
For example, is it that Language has an influence on the functioning of the
neurology as the name imples (Neuro Linguistic Programming). This seems
easily enough provable with some personal experimentation.
Or, is it to prove that there are definite semantic forms within each
language both at deep and surface structural levels? In this case there are
entire fields dedicated to the study. Such as semantics.
If the proof that your seeking is that people have internal images, if you
don't want to rely on your own internal experience than it will take a while
before science has the capability to measure the visual modality - although
there is significant study to demonstrate how visual cognition functions.
Also, for the more scholarly structure of NLP you can see Robert Dilts
extensive work.
But in general the concept of "proof" really begins to break down when you
are studying the implicit tool with which we interact and "create" the world
every day.
I have had very good results with the NLP technology both personally and
with clients and business.
So, let me say that i wholeheartedly agree with you and i think that we need
to begin to use the tools we have and organize them. Pragmatically.
What does each system of consciousness offer us in terms of tools and
technology. How do they work in-time not as thoughts about thought but as
practical applied behavioral technologies.
In this way i think that NLP is one of the more profound and informative
models of human functionality of any i've seen.
In the realm of consiousness it seems that experience is the best teacher
because reality it may be, as Robert Anton Wilson says, "not only weirder
than we think but weirder than can think." So the best tactic seems to me to
just get right in there and do it.
What all of this brings us back to is the concept of learning how to learn;
of learning how the human system functions, and beginning to use it and
explore/exploit its potential - not in theory but in reality.
The disciplines i suggested are to my experience some of the most powerful,
functional and accessible of the behavioral technology that exists.
They are only a small tasting of whats out there. They are also a group that
lends itself to the integration of the many behavioral technologys. They
provide useful and understandable language that helps to build communication
to previously disparite theories and bodies of knowledge. As we begin to
more intentionally integrate and utilize the models of consciousness
available to us within a larger and more unified discipline we bring more
pragmatism, fallibility, and good scientific method to all of our study (and
use) of human consciousness.
With
> respect to somatics, I have little knowledge though I may have
> encountered it in some modified forms before, but it also seems
> to need some more verification. I'm not sure what is meant by
> "bio-electricity" but one has to be careful -- while neurons
> certainly work on electrical principles such terms can easily
> push undiscriminating people over into the realm of crystals,
> angels, hobbits and leprechauns.
in terms of somatics again i think the proof is in the experience. As for
"bio-elecricity," i mean that in many ways, but for now that's keep it to
the bio-electric field which is a proven portion of the world whether that
proof be taken from the ayurvedic, homeopathic or allopathic systems.
For me the interest in teaching children outside of traditional educational
systems is to teach them how their nervous system functions and how they can
use themselves best in everything they do.
Best,
Devon
>
> Robert
>
>
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.5 : Sun Apr 13 2003 - 20:52:50 MDT