Werher Erhard - One of his Major Premises

About: Facebook item

Tags

  1. happening vs story
  2. AcidTrip
  3. BigSur
  4. napenthe
  5. AlteredStates

Comments


Mark de LA says
seth 2013-07-25 06:45:58 16667
hmmm ... i'm wondering if "the story" is not just the "emotional impact" and/or how some facts are interpreted by a person.  as such they certainly are disjoint from the facts themselves ... and, yes, they certainly are collapsed ... the actual facts having more potential possibilities.   discarding one's interpretation and going back to the tangible facts is certainly a good idea many times.  i remember my acid trip in Big Sur back in the 70's.  afterward i still had some really bizarre stories about it running around my head.   then virgin went: ok, this and that happened, so what?   that really helped me get my head together.

So do you still have an emotional impact from that?
I think a story is more complex than just emotional impact.  A story has thoughts, concepts, constructed meaning, & previous similarities baked into it. We all have the so-called "story of my life" as background for facing the current NOW.
I was in an LEC seminar once where we shared the story of our life centerd around explaining a problem we had & we listened to another person tell theirs. We kept telling the stories & listening to the other person's for quite a while until most of us got that it was merely a story.
 

Seth says
choy 2015-11-26 16:04:28 16667
seth 2015-11-26 09:21:41 16667
source:   Werner Erhard's Ideas and Applications
The Vicious Circle™

In the Vicious Circle™ segment, we suggest that it is a human tendency to collapse what happened, with the story we tell about what happened. This collapsing happens so fast it becomes hard to separate the two, and we think of them as one and the same. Almost immediately, and certainly over time, the story we tell ourselves becomes the way it is"the reality we know. It limits what is possible in our lives, robbing us of much of our joy and effectiveness.

When we are able to separate what happened from our story or interpretation, we discover that much of what we considered already determined, given and fixed, may in fact not be that way. Situations that may have been challenging or difficult become fluid and open to change. We find ourselves no longer limited by a finite set of options, and able to achieve what we want with new ease and enjoyment.
...


his diagram (two circles labeling domains) is a stark expression of:  what is vs represnetaions of what is ... of the world vs the metaworld ...  of the territory vs the map ... and it uses my new favorite word "happening" .   i fond it while following a taged train of thought ... what is more it is you item, not my own .

IamanI says
More! Two books which expand on Werner Erhard's ideas (on kindle) - They talk about quite a bit of the things we discuss.
  1. (*) -
  2. (*) -
  3. List of contributors & stuff at Amazon

Mark de LA says
seth 2015-11-27 03:55:59 16667
choy 2015-11-27 00:17:41 16667
The so what applies to repeating something I already saw back to me.

well my comment was about my experience and my awareness of what Erhard said in relation to the words that i use to say that same thing myself ... it records what Erhard actually said in the plane of this particular item ... which now represents that to me.    Additionally my comment was about  how I was able to find the difference in wording by thinking within tagged trains of thought here at fastblogit. 

i could well conceive that my comment has nothing to do with you at all ... and I was certainly not intending to inform you for the first time, of something that you already saw. 

However notice:  you tagged this item yourself using the word "happening" ... and I came across Erhard's diagram while thinking about 19080 in the context of "happening", because of your deed.  That is what happened.  Does it have anything to do with you at all? ... well, that is not for me to say. 

But, why do you even talk as if it would be necessary, that what actually happened must be about you?
I think you speak a different brand of English. None of this is terribly fascinating to me. The only thingy Erhard was pushing is "one's story" versus what's so as a distinction. Happening  is an amorphous word which sticks to just about anything.  His people mostly nowadays us the word occurs which is even more amorphous.  In LEC97 the tried out the following statement a sort of invitation to enlightenment :
" I would like to invite you to an experience unrecognizable to be related to be related to, the occurring of which, if ever, is only on the other side of that which is recognizable to be related" 
..
IOW, throw away cognizing from your past for a moment & grok what is NOW


Mark de LA says
seth 2015-11-27 09:04:15 16667
Yep ...

Which word best points to where it was intended to point, is a matter peculiar to each person's mind ... it is peculiar to their story.  For example: you might prefer 'what is' where i prefer 'what happens' although we probably are pointing to the very same thing ... "what is" just seems to point better for you ... "what happens" seems to point better for me. 

I wonder:  why did Erhard put "What Happened" in the left circle instead of "what is" ? 
Good question:
happen (v.) Look up happen at Dictionary.comlate 14c., happenen, "to come to pass, occur, come about, be the case," literally "occur by hap, have the (good or bad) fortune (to do, be, etc.);" extension (with verb-formative -n) of the more common hap (v.). Old English used gelimpan, gesceon, and Middle English also had befall. In Middle English fel it hap meant "it happened." Related: Happened; happening. Phrase happens to be as an assertive way to say "is" is from 1707.
Maybe to give you the feeling of being right! There is a distinction between happen, occur, IS.  For example the first  happen is in the past as occur unless you make gerunds by adding the ING .  IS is always now. In the LEC successor seminars they always use occur.


Mark de LA says
seth 2015-11-27 09:51:14 16667
source: mark
Maybe to give you the feeling of being right!
" funny" indeed ... Erhard must be playing quite a advanced game here  .

There is a distinction between happen, occur, IS.  For example the first  happen is in the past as occur unless you make gerunds by adding the ING .  IS is always now. In the LEC successor seminars they always use occur.
obviously one can use any tense of a verb:  past, present, or future ... and even various hypotheticals of those.  so your distinction between "happen" and "occur" made no real difference to me ... except perhaps for creating a anticipation of the effect it had on you. 

but for me it is actually hard to distinguish occur from happen.  Could you do it for me?

Also we might want to consider if a thing that does not change can even become an object of our human apprehension.  Do we not apprehend something just because some aspect of it changed ... even including perhaps the changes in our relationship to it?  IOW, do truly static things relative to us ever really register in our awareness?  And if you are looking at something that you think is stationary, you might consider that your eyes are scanning it so that i can appear in your consciousness. 
Yep - not going to waste my time!

Mark de LA says
BTW, one essay in the first book is on the RWG
http://landmarkinsights.com/landmark-forum-leader-article/the-freedom-of-being-beyond-rightwrong-winlose-etc/


Seth says

This is the only reference i can find here of  my #AcidTrip in #BigSur at #napenthe.  

#AlteredStates

See Also

  1. Thought I go with what happens - a qualia with 0 viewings related by tag "happening vs story".