five aspects from barnaby

21 10 2009

Spoke with Barnaby yesterday, told him a little about XQ and my recent thoughts about indices. In our engagement, Barnaby came up with five different directions of thought.

  1. resolving past traumas
  2. comparison between two people
  3. comparison within one person
  4. pre-cognition and surprise
  5. statistics
  6. (2 as vector or point)

First, most therapies nowadays attempt to create the right frame for a person to revisit their traumatic experience in such a way that it is resolved. Mostly through storytelling, and with NLP changing the modalities. We started to think of the mathematical equivalent. That is, by using mathematical values and letters to aspects of traumatic experience, manipulating the unknowns, might alter the values or solve the unknown, thus resolving the trauma. Think super minimal therapy. By performing the maths, one performs the transformation of the psychological entities. It’s like untying knot of entangled energy. In my terms, the bunches of negatives in the mind that just circulate needlessly.

Second, when two people come together they share their experiences, for example we both had been bitten by dogs. What are the modalities of the experiences? We came up with:

  • intensity i, a value between 0 and 10
  • how long ago, time t
  • replay factor, how often we relive it, talk about it, rate r
  • how often did the experience occur?

The last one is actually the fifth point, but I think it comes in here. It is related to whether it is chronic. Getting bitten by two rockweillers at night on a beach alone is one thing, constantly engaging people on london’s streets without positive emotional feedback is another. There must be other factors, of course.

Third, when someone compares two different experiences in their own head. Not sure how useful this is, but I guess it creates some kind of scale. If we consider an internalised experience as an equation, or a program let’s say, a recursive equation, then we have different scales of magnitude, or periodicity. This defines, in some way, our behaviour… which is related to our individual as well as shared ecology of memes. Fair enough.

Leading to fourth, getting hit by a bus. Barney was hit by a bus, he didn’t see it coming. This is quite different from the experience I had where I saw the dogs coming at me. This is like in tango where one is going to do a performance, or if one just happens to be dancing and other people leave the floor so that you end up being the only couple. Or doing a presentation, or just ending up people listening. That is, being aware of the experience before it happens, the period of which can be filled with unsettling mental processes, versus it just happens. Actually, I can relate this to the stages before a dive: checking feasibility, putting yourself on the edge, and then the actual dive. The second period is about calming the mind. Pre-cognition, versus it just happening by surprise or you are just doing it.

Very interesting stuff. When making notes on an envelope, I started with an equation:

reality parity

where r is reality, b is barney and d is david… so the values of a person’s reality is the sum of various experiences… what we are suggesting is that we can do local relative comparisons between subjectivities. We do this all the time, of course, but we do so clumsily. By applying a little more accuracy, we come to realise how… biased… we are. It’s like the sense-map of our bodies proportional to the number of nerve cells. (The following image is not quite the one I remember, but hey…)sense map




Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )


Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: