The Logic Off Topic list

The man Kool wrote:
> 
>> ... I have to say that I don't (yet - may be a function of
>> who taught me, how they taught me or my attitude and understanding when I
>> was taught maths) see the patterns at all.
> I have to say that IMO a lot of this is probably due to the way you were
> taught.

Good teaching would have assessed where I was in the first place - but might
not have been resourced or trained to address it.
> 
>> I did a degree in Psychology an awfully long time ago,
> My sincere commiserations to you. !!!!

I would probably enjoy it more now if I could be bothered to go into it
again, as it has moved on from the behaviourist nonsense it was only just
starting to scrape itself out of at the time.

>>am interested in the outlook of Neuro-Linguistic Programming,
> Aaaaah!! Good old Bandler and Grindler. A nice little 'we've got something
> for everyone' theory that one.
> 
> Premise: We were given brains.
> Additional Premise: Unfortunately ... the powers-that-be (whoever they are)
> forgot the user manual.
> 
> But ... don't worry good people because ....
> Brave New World Conclusion: "Neuro-linguistic programming offers you a
> user-manual to your brain".
> I forget who first said that. I think I've got the quote right, haven't I?

Don't know. 'Human Interaction For Dummies' might be a better reference
point, on the grounds that the manual is out-of-date or impenetrable (like
an MS-DOS manual ;))
 
> Another one I remember is:
> "We can teach people to change by teaching them to reprogramme their brains".

I think the worst thing to do with this is to buy the whole shop as an
academic theory. It's a collection of techniques of construing and
reconstruing 'problems' amongst other things, and dealing with them quickly
so people can move on.

'Our beliefs act as filters, causing us to act in certain ways and to notice
certain things at the expense of others. NLP offers one way of looking at
ourselves and the world; it is in itself a filter. To use NLP you do not
have to change any of your beliefs or values, but simply be curious and
prepared to experiment. All generalizations about people are lies to
somebody, because everyone is unique. So NLP does not claim to be
objectively true. It is a model, and models are meant to be useful.'

(O'Connor & Seymour, 1989)

This is particularly germane in situations where people feel obliged to go
into analysis for years on end when there is only some specific issue at
hand.  Because NLP's playful people feel safe with it. It also says that
individuals are in charge of how they perceive their own lives and suggests
how they can control that, rather than handing power over to a therapist. My
son has Asperger's Syndrome, which is a form of high-functioning autism. He
does have problems in dealing with social relationships and I have been
meaning for some time to investigate NLP as a way in to helping him change
his rigid perceptions of social situations.
 
> All that's needed is for neuro-linguistically programme to teach us some
> effective communication skills ... and maybe add a touch of self-hypnosis,
> some motivational seminars ... and anyone can be taught how to change
> themselves. You can become anything you want.
> 
> If you do not do well at school then probably you are just being badly
> taught. Your teachers have not communicated with you in the right kind of
> language. Tell them to come see us NLP experts and we will teach them how
> to communicate with you better. Anyway, you were'nt really wrong as such
> when you said 2+2-5. It's all just feedback.

Well, i never said it was the whole answer to anything. I believe that it is
inherent in the nature of NLP that you can cherry-pick the stuff that feels
right for you. It has become an industry in and of itself (NLP discussions
can seem ridiculously self-referential to an outsider like me), but this
doesn't detract from the basic ideas. The problem with academic Psych for me
was that there was all this building of camps & schools in competition with
each other in the pursuit of career and reputation. You'd find the same
basic concept labelled 5 different ways in 5 different theorists' work
because they had to put their own stamp on it.

>> which is quite jokey and playful
> True. I must confess that I personally did find it hard to take, although I
> tried very hard to accept its ideas. Maybe I should just have reprogrammed
> my neurons to be more mirthful about it all. Which is pretty much what one
> of the articles I read once actually said -- that if anyone finished
> reading the article a sceptic then it was because the reader had not
> properly reprogrammed themselves and not because there was something in the
> article that entitled the person to feel that way about the information
> being presented. One of the best conclusions to an article I ever read, to
> be honest!!

Grinder in the preface to 'An Introduction to NLP' by O'Connor & Seymour:

'Tom Malloy (in his brilliant novel The Curtain of Dawn) corrects the speech
impediment of Charles Darwin who said 'survival of the fittest' when he
would have spoken less falsely to have said 'the survival of the fitters'.

These two men, O'Connor & Seymour, have set out to make a coherent story out
of an outrageous adventure. The jungles through which Richard and I wandered
in our explanations are bizarre and wondrous. These fine and
well-intentioned men will show you glimpses of an English rose garden,
trimmed and proper. Both the jungle and the rose garden carry their own
special attractions.

What you are about to read never happened, but it seems reasonable, even to
me'

That says a lot about NLP to me in terms of the power of the way people
construe events and relationships. Even an NLP practitioner's informed
exposition of NLP and its development is not 'objective' but a model; this
does not detract from its usability.
> 
>> and which also seems to have some powerful ideas one
>> can tinker with immediately.
> I never did understand their power, I must confess. Or -- just to repeat
> myself -- maybe I should instead say that I never succeeded in
> reprogramming my brain so that it made a great deal of to me. My fault
> probably!! I obviously never gained the requisite degree of control over
> the 'autonomic functions of our own neurology' so therefore I had
> insufficient ''self-esteem', insufficient 'self-realization', and so was
> unable to 'achieve my highest potential' ... which would probably have
> shown itself best if I had become a true disciple of NLP.

I got through a whole book on NLP without finding a single reference to
''self-esteem' or indeed  'self-realization' - you may be confusing it with
other so-called  'human potential' approaches and indeed general
psychobabble. Nor does it have disciples! You need to do the theatre thing
and suspend disbelief to use it.

>> If I don't get the pattern in maths yet maybe it's
>> because I haven't encountered it in a sensory modality which is comfortable
>> for me.
> Well ... I hate to backtrack and actually look as if I'm actually agreeing
> with GA Moore and Hendrik Jan (Hi guys!!), but I think the basic idea here
> is that the patterns in mathematics are not in fact properly expressible in
> any given sensory modality. They kind of transcend them all so that the
> beauty and appreciation of the patterns in for example 'a good theorem' or
> is kind of due to a near-instinctive sensing of a 'pattern that stands
> behind all patterns'; and thus in a kind of sensory modality that
> transcends all sensory modalities... I think, actually, that anyone who can
say this: "Can I first thank other  people for giving me an insight into how
'vibed'they get by maths"; and who  can also say this "I wanted to make the
point that it is the discerning of  pattern/structure which gives the sense
of beauty and makes one want to go  deeper" ... is already actually pretty
much there.

Well, thanks for that - I'm looking for a transitional state/entry level
_for me_ -which may or may not exist...
> 
> To adopt the kind of language of NLP and PSM, just close your eyes, relax,
> and simply empower yourself to permit yourself to be taken deeper. Don't
> fight it, ...

Well.. mickey-taking apart, much of this sort of thing hangs on one's
experience of different states of consciousness and therefore one's
perception as to whether they (a) exist at all (b) can be used creatively by
people for themselves. If you've ever meditated successfully then this kind
of thing doesn't seem outre but practical - NLP, to its credit, discusses
these things without any unnecessary spiritual dressing or other fuss -
unlike conventionaL psychology, which can be terrrified of these concepts.
Performing musicians are often aware of different states of consciousness,
cf singer Anita Baker in an interview 'When I'm singing I'm in a different
place' (I approximate what she said as I don't have the video any more) She
certainly appeared to be when I saw her sing years ago.

> On a practical level, if you're actually serious about, interested in,
> those patterns, perhaps you might enjoy:
> Mathematics: The Science of Patterns, by Keith Devlin
> The problems of mathematics, Ian Stewart
I will have a look for these.

>> I remember talking to an Indian
>> woman once - a native Hindi speaker if I'm correct- who suggested that the
>> best way to see English was as a sort of super-Creole or patois, a vibrant
>> mixture of all sorts of linguistic elements which was very elastic and had
>> room for lots of ambiguity.
> Yes. Indian English is one of the more interesting of the Englishes around.

She was referring to Hindi and other Asian languages in terms of their
longterm linguistic purity (including a written form going back very far)
over many centuries and to _all_English as a Creole.

> Since you're a kind of closet sociologist, did you know that there was an
> International Association for World Englishes? Seems to be some kind of
> international group for everything these days!! The IAWE is due to have
> their 8th conference in South Africa in a couple of weeks. One of my
> friends is going along. I think this year's theme is about the implicit
> tension between the globalization of English which is what allows it to act
> the globalized patois or 'super-Creole' as you so nicely put it. Seems like
> that's the only way it can really be universal and useful. But against
> that, there's the inevitability of local contextualization. English is sure
> to be particularized otherwise it cannot be properly useful 'on the ground'
> and to separate and given groups of people.

Interesting. But we all function in different dialect contexts and cope to a
greater or lesser extent. People of Afro-Caribbean origin in the UK are
fascinating in the way they move from one form to another, in the same
sentence sometimes - often from patois to South London to 'standard'
English. We all do a little of that in our own way. English belongs to all
of us in that sense - including all those good people on this list who use
it as a second language.
> 
>> This is fascinating stuff.
> I'm with you, there!! I really love that stuff. I just adore anything to do
> with language. But it's probably real tedious to lots of others.

I taught the audio segment of a National Diploma in Media course for a while
(basically recording for radio/TV) and was intrigued by the preponderance of
people on the course whose family background was not UK native in the
broadest sense and indeed were often not native English speakers - anything
from Belgian and Spanish to Nigerian, Vietnamese and Thai. It made me wonder
about having an upbringing in a different language and cultural environment
and whether this gave more interest and awareness in methods of
communication that might otherwise be the case.

>>Having been around buddhism, meditation and other Eastern-influenced stuff a
>> bit I have shaken off enough of the hangovers of a Western Catholic
>> upbringing to see being able to bow to others when one feels like it as not
>> subservience but a way of respecting others and therefore a way of
>> respecting oneself.
> Wow. You really ARE a lost cause!! I think what you need is a crash course
> in WASP re-programming right smartish!!!! Tell you what ... I'll meet you
> in that pub on your High Street in just a few moments and I'll help you
> reprogramme yourself right back to that Western Catholicism stuff, OK??!!!!!

The only programming I need in the Eight Bells is in the taste of the
current guest real ale. There are some brewers I would _definitely_ bow to
respectfully.

Tony Thompson