Topic:Origins: CastanedaPosted by:lager <mailto:email@example.com>Date/Time:09/08/2002 00:09:27
Dr. Grinder, You have often referred to the work of Carlos Castaneda as a source of inspiration. Did you ever meet him in person or have you yourself been in contact with the lineage or tradition to which Carlos and don Juan belonged? Have you got any views you would care to share regarding the academic controversy surrounding Castanedas legitimacy as a social antropologist or the more recent claims that he was a cult leader? Thank you Lager
Topic:Re:Origins: CastanedaPosted by:John Grinder <mailto:firstname.lastname@example.org>Date/Time:09/08/2002 00:37:46
Hello Lager I did meet Carlos once many years ago (in a large group of people) – I had the impression of a well-intentioned, mild mannered and quite serious person. I have had no connection with those purporting to represent his legacy. I will decline to comment on the controversy you ask about for the simple reason that I am unfamiliar with the nature of the discussion taking place. I will say that there has from the first of his writing (if memory serves “The Teaching of Don Juan”) been a controversy at to whether the experiences described by him in his interactions with Don Juan and Don Genero occurred in the sense that the twin towers were destroyed on 11 September last year or occurred as part of any altered state in which portions of the descriptions correspond to 3rd party verifiable events and portions were the artful creation of a imaginative man. I have found great value in his writings – especially as a guide for apprenticeships, reasonably outrageous behavior (most often when acting in concert with a partner) and most of all(after all, I already knew about outrageous behavior) to point to ways of engaging the unconscious processes we all carry within us and rarely tap to their full potential. These writings, then, serve as an interesting counterweight to the left brained babblings of people cursed by self-importance. The ambiguity left by the lack of a definitive answer to the question mentioned earlier about the veracity of the representations offered by him is a perfectly acceptable ambiguity for me and in no way reduces the effectiveness of his work. John Topic:How do I become a sociopath?Posted by:Lager <mailto:email@example.com>Date/Time:09/08/2002 23:54:19
Dr Grinder, Ms Bostic St Clair Thank you John, for your reply to my previous post. One of the things I always like when reading Castaneda is the promise of the possibility of an unusual kind of freedom. In the book the two of you wrote you wrote on page 358: ‘Note, however, any person who develops full choice about her own kinesthetic representations – essentially, a person who chooses what shee feels – is awarded a very different title – namely, sociapath. We take it that this negative labeling – sociopath – by the culture is an unconscious recognition at the level of the social system that much of what holds our cultures together is the involuntary nature of the kinesthetic emotional bonds which tie us together in couples, families and larger social units. This involuntary binding is the glue that keeps much of the social system intact. Imagine the differences that would emerge in your marriage, primary emotional relationships, familiy, business or local community if suddenly the people involved could choose to experience guilt or not to experience guilt or shame or fear or… Yeah, imagine that!’ As a non-native speaker of english I have a question which may be real obvious, but are you suggesting that this is a very real possibility? That it is possible for a person at any given point in time to choose to have or not have a particular set of feelings? Secondly, I admit that I find a certain allure when following your suggestion to ‘imagine that’ however I also imagine that this might not exactly be an unbounded change, nor an easy one to accomplish. Lager Topic:Re:How do I become a sociopath?Posted by:The Programmed <mailto:firstname.lastname@example.org>Date/Time:10/08/2002 02:06:33
I can’t tell if Dr. Grinder is actually suggesting that some sociopaths have FULL choice about their own kinestheic representations, but if so, I would be very interested in reading specific descriptions of such abilities. Every sociopath I’ve either come into contact with, studied or learned about has exemplified amazing capacties of choice in certain specific contexts, but is also marked by intense ‘stuckness’ in many other areas of functioning. It is fairly clear, to me, that to have total control of one’s feelings would be, paradoxically, to abdicate the possibility of one’s freedom. (Yes, freedom, that darned nominalization, thank God- or at least Jesus…Perhaps Buddha) Perhaps certain Sociopaths come close enough to this condition of total choice to the extent that they can not reconcile the condition’s inherent ecological unsoundness with it’s allure. Perhaps if one approaches such a capacity, one can almost not help but lose control (as if the Law of Requisit Variety moved into your house and kicked your butt daily). It seemssoundsfeels to me that it is the extent to which our feelings are given that we can be inspired to exercise our freedom towards them; this is where NLP can be of such immense service, I think. I understand that this question was not addressed to me, yet I am working on the assumption that a list based on the presuppostions which this one explicitly states leaves open doors on each ‘conversation’ into which the wider NLP community may feel free to walk or not. If I be way off….ooooops….ignore me, you must!
Topic:Re:Re:How do I become a sociopath?Posted by:J Rose <mailto:email@example.com>Date/Time:12/08/2002 04:21:03
I think I understand your point, Constance. At least, I share a similar observation as to the nature of internal kinesthetics and their participation in exercising of ‘choice’. But, as I see it, as long as we view kinesthetics through a mechanized (or hidden mechanization through ‘systemized’) set of filters, we will have to assume that any old feeling is open to change as long as a useful installation is performed. In reality, I’ve only experienced the limitations of such an extreme view, but I am curious to know of counterexamples as well.
Topic:ReReReRe:Re:Origins: CastanedaPosted by:kc <mailto:firstname.lastname@example.org>Date/Time:10/08/2002 04:26:12
To John Grinder John in your post here you type “Carlos writings then serve as an interesting counter-weight to the left brain babbling of people cursed by self importance. >>>>>Question for you John how does Carlos Cstenanda in his teachings demonstrate how one is to “”exit ones self importance and left brained conditioned training”” all the very best John and also Carmen Bostic kc
Topic:Re:ReReReRe:Re:Origins: CastanedaPosted by:John Grinder <mailto:email@example.com>Date/Time:15/08/2002 17:06:10
kc In the initial set of books, Carlos doesn’t demonstrate much besides a certain amusing repetitive inability to escape the tyranny of his left hemisphere – Don Juan and Don Genaro do the demonstration that leads finally to the objectives you ask about – read it! Especially Journey to Ixtlan, Tales of Power and A Seperate Reality. John Top of Form 1
Topic:ReRe:Re:ReReReRe:Re:Origins: CastanedaPosted by:kc <mailto:firstname.lastname@example.org>Date/Time:16/08/2002 02:07:07
Thank you John Grinder for your quick reply. You are a good sport and a gentlemen sir! Yes, I will begin to read and check out closely Carlo’s Castenada’s works that you advised to me to read in your last posting. I am sure from my memory of reading Carlo’s main works ten years or so ago John there are many more pearls and treasures of wisdom hidden in Carlo’s works for all of us just like in your new creation Whispering in the Wind! real regards and thanks again John as you are very supportive, kc