At 10:39 PM 12/12/2012, mix...@bigpond.com wrote:
In reply to Abd ul-Rahman Lomax's message of Wed, 12 Dec 2012 17:50:54 -0500:
Hi,
[snip]
>Great minds think alike, could be the saying, but, of course, this is
>just the ordinary human mind! We can "think alike," in unexpected
>ways. My own theory is that the intense visual concentration that
>accompanies this exercise, people are sitting face-to-face, watching
>each other, leads to an "entrainment" of the two mental processes,
>through observation of much more than what is said. The movements of
>eyes, the fine-muscle movements of the face, lead to something that
>I'd call "presence." It's not "individual," it is collective.
...in the case of humans, I think telepathy is actually real (and the Schumann
resonance is the medium).
It may also be real for birds, but I don't think it's necessary to
explain flock
behaviour.
It's also not necessary to explain human behavior, AFAIK. Look, that
resonance is ELF. Possible data rate, a few Hz, maybe. No mechanism
known for even emitting signals. No signals observed.
However, there are obvious communication links between human beings.
Visual, very high bandwidth. Audio, relative low bandwidth, with most
information being contained in "tone." (and this would precede
language, per se, developmentally, i.e., as evolved. Language content
(as text), low bandwidth, it would mostly serve as confirmation of
information being transmitted and received at high bandwidth through
visual cues and tone.
What is not normally noticed is what I called "entrainment," where we
anticipate what the other person thinks, because we are thinking
using roughly the same information and response patterns. We do this
in understanding the spoken word, all the time, i.e., anticipate what
the other person is about to say. We often -- maybe even usually --
have it exactly right. We don't have to think about it, and there
would be no time to do so.
Where rapport is weak, i.e., *entrainment* is weak, these predictions
can be off.
If there is a physical communications medium, it would not ordinarily
be called "telepathy," but my point was that it can seem so. When the
mechanism I've described is operating, full-blown, it *seems* like
mindreading. The "colors exercise" blows people's minds.
Landmark doesn't emphasize that. It's used in training to show how
there is communication that isn't about text. It's about "presence,"
the presence of what Landmark calls the Self, which is not
individual, though, again, that is not emphasized. The Self is the
collective human intelligence, it appears to operate on an entirely
different level than the individual. The individual intelligence is
concerned with individual survival, mostly, or at least about
survival of a closely-defined group. The Self is not personally
attached. How to awaken this Self is the focus of much Landmark work,
beginning with the Advanced Course. It's transformative, it is not
merely some "improvement" (which would be judged within the "realm of
survival"). In the Advanced Course, the activity of Self is called
the "realm of enrollment," because of the effect as to expression and
the inspiration of others. The whole next course is called the Self
Expression and Leadership Program, and is about developing community
projects -- not about Landmark! -- using the technology developed.
Community projects are about how to inspire and lead people to some
activity that benefits the whole community, or some other community.
How to avoid the traps that small-self-survival will set up. How to
inspire others to support the project and even to lead it.
(The program encourages people to turn their projects over to someone
else.... and so people see their inspirations move out of the realm
of personal achievement into community achievement, where they
become. personally, still valuable, maybe, but no longer necessary.
John Rohner should take the Landmark Curriculum for Living, eh? Or,
for that matter, Steve Krivit. Either of them might have done this
work, very creative/very active people often have, but abandoned it
before getting to the critical understanding of moving beyond
personal survival into community expression. Except John Rohner is
*very* caught up in story, to the point of practical insanity. People
believe their own stories, it's routine and heavily habitual, but
it's very limiting, and when taken to extremes, crazy.)
