Re: Re: [ET2] Think ENERGY-a plea for lenience/leniency.

At 04:18 PM 5/29/2003 +0000, you wrote:

>Firstly, more clarity and precision in your communications please Doc.
>I am finding your writing style and layout very confusing.
>
>Please remember some of us lack the mental models which you use to get
>your ideas across.
>I feel like I'm having to work twice as hard as usual to understand my
>e-mails.
>
>Please understand this is not meant as a criticism and I am looking from
>my side to see what part I may be playing in this inability to follow your
>words.
>
>Secondly, my question about perspectives was not from the thought-mind
>system, just via the thought mind system in response to some internal
>rumblings.
>
>Robert.

Robert,

Sorry, My response was on the subject of the validity or invalidity of
pain not on perspectives. When I read the original post my understanding
was it was questioning the value (validity) of feeling the pain or not. I
went to the content vs process frame and it would have been more useful
here to go to the energy frame and say the energy frame neither validates
or invalidates the validity of feeling the pain it simple removes the pain.

Oh BTW, Thank you for letting me know your view of my writing style. (I
didn't take it as criticism) Please go back and read what I wrote. I did
not state I go for "more clarity and precision" I don't. I go for
precision, which in my case allows my words and actions to line up or
participate in Even flow if you will.

Because of the energy routines/filters we have developed in our thinking
sometimes we take what someone else says and respond with what we would
have meant if we had written it.

My View: clarity is something the receiver gives to a communication
          precision is in the control of the giver of a communication.
Hope this helps.

Thanks for the information/feedback,
Doc

[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]

           
Received on Thu May 29 2003 - 12:36:51 BST