|
Re: Further Answer to Len Bleier's Question
|
Bobby Matherne
|
Jun 20, 2001 05:45 PDT
|
Dear Len,
The basic hypothesis of doyletics is this:
Hypothesis 3: Memory Transition Age - At the age of five, humans
switch from using doylic memory to using conceptual memory.
This transition age was discovered by Doyle Henderson many years ago -- I
merely formulated it officially into a hypothesis. You can read the other
hypotheses at: http://www.doyletics.com/doyletic.htm
If one does hypnosis, either officially using a hypnotist, or unofficially
in a speed trace, and does NOT go back before the MTA of five years old,
what one has done is plucked a leaf off the tree of doyles. [See Golden
Leaf tree metaphor at: http://www.doyletics.com/goldenls.htm ) In other
words, one has removed one of the contexts in which the doyle fires off.
Since the individual contexts are hard to identify, sooner or later a
similar situation (but with slightly different trigger stimuli) comes up
and POW! the old doyle fires off again, never having been "erased" or more
correctly, converted into cognitive memory.
You see, one has cognitive memory after five years old, but not before. If
one terminates a trace or hypnosis session with the retrieval of a
cognitive memory after five, the doyle associated with the memory is
disconnected from that ONE memory event, but still latent and powerful.
To be a successful trace, the doyle must be held as the
time marks go below five. Lacking either of those two requirements, HOLD
and MARK, the doyle will return someday, as it was never traced and
"erased".
As Alan pointed out in his earlier post, his 'considering the concept of
doyles', i.e., his application of Hypothesis 3 by itself, made his hypnosis
work more effective right away. (I hope this is a fair statement of Alan's
work, but if not, he'll correct me, I'm sure.)
most cordially,
Bobby
Len Bleier wrote:
| |
The World-Wide Doyletics List is Devoted to
Dialogue Among Doyletics Users and Principals
~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^
Hi,
Understood and appreciated info but why does the
hypnosis temporarily eliminate the negative effects of
the Doyle, I know it does because I have experienced
it. Lenny
--- Alan James Spencer <ajsp-@broad.net.au> wrote:
| | The World-Wide Doyletics List is Devoted to
Dialogue Among Doyletics Users and Principals
|
~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^
| |
Hi all,
In attempting to satiate Len's thirst for knowledge,
let me explain that it
is the case that Doyles are not temporarily anything
and also they are not
eliminated they are converted to conceptual memory.
Nothing gets
eliminated, rather converted. This is something I
had a little difficulty
digesting.
When a Doyle is traced, SUCCESSFULLY, the Doyle is
converted, when the Doyle
is not successfully traced the offending Doyle will
continue to be active.
What may give the illusion of a temporary conversion
is when a combined
Doyle has been traced instead of the original
offending Doyle, and relief
has been obtained as a result of that. The client
difficulty arises again
as a result of the original Doyle doing what it does
and continues to do.
Hypnosis is sometimes successful just as many other
therapies, such as NLP,
and Regression therapies are sometimes successful.
Each and all other
models are destined to fail on ocassions because,
and purely because, the
teachers have not/will not, consider the concept of
Doyles. Students and
practitioners of Hypnosis haven't got a chance of
achieving reliable
results, and I may be in a position to know because
I have tried and been
trained in most of them, including Hypnosis.
Yours very sincerely,
Alan:-)
----- Original Message -----
From: Len Bleier <contend-@yahoo.com>
To: <doyle-@topica.com>
Sent: Tuesday, June 19, 2001 9:34 PM
Subject: Re: [Doyletics] Further Answer to Len
Bleier's Question
| | The World-Wide Doyletics List is Devoted to
Dialogue Among Doyletics Users and Principals
|
|
~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^
| | | |
Hi,
Thanks for answering my questions! I have some
|
more.
| | Why is hypnosis successful in eliminating, even
|
only
| | temporarily, the effects of doyles? Any ideas on
hypnosis? Thanks.
--- Alan James Spencer <ajsp-@broad.net.au>
|
wrote:
| | | | The World-Wide Doyletics List is Devoted to
Dialogue Among Doyletics Users and Principals
|
|
|
~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^
| | | | | |
Hi Bobby,
Seems like you have anothe Alan on your line. I
agree that every trace is
successful, when and only when we use the mark
|
|
and
| | | | hold correctly. I guess
you must get sick of folks wanting evidence so
|
|
as to
| | | | be able convince
others. I sure am.
Beginning to understand
Alan:-)
----- Original Message -----
From: Bobby Matherne <Bob-@doyletics.com>
To: World-Wide Doyletics Listserv
<doyle-@topica.com>
Sent: Tuesday, June 19, 2001 1:23 AM
Subject: [Doyletics] Further Answer to Len
|
|
Bleier's
| | | | Question
| | The World-Wide Doyletics List is Devoted to
Dialogue Among Doyletics Users and Principals
|
|
|
|
~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^
| | | | | | | |
Dear Len and other members of the List:
You asked about "free association" -- I
|
|
|
suspect
| | | | you meant the type that is
| | used in various therapy modalities such as
|
analytic psychology and
| | psychoanalysis. Here's how I answered the
|
|
|
question
| | | | earlier on the Red
Wagon
| | doyletics webpage. I encourage everyone to
|
|
|
review
| | | | the extensive material
on
| | the web site from time to time. I came across
|
|
|
this
| | | | segment when I was
| | adding links to the new Childhood of Humanity
|
essay in which I establish
| | the epistemological basis for doylic memory.
The Red Wagon Story is linked from the first
|
|
|
page,
last
counseling...therapist...".
| | | | Does that mean that it
| | is only a question of selecting a good
|
|
|
therapist
| | | | to do the job of
PANACEA!?
| |
How would you then differentiate PANACEA! from
|
psychoanalysis? Should you
| | give a short report to a psychoanalyst and to
|
|
|
a
| | | | psychiatrist about
PANACEA!
| | to show the differences between these two
|
disciplines and PANACEA!, how
| | would you state them in summary and in points
|
(1..., 2...., 3..., etc.)?
| | I would appreciate very much your responding
|
|
|
to
| | | | this point in a way that I
| | can later use with some friends psychoanalysts
|
|
|
and
| | | | psychiatrists I intend
| | to visit after I have experimented the tracing
|
process on my person.
| |
My suggestion is to save yourself the time
|
|
|
and
| | | | effort. Neither
| | disciplines you mention will credit some
|
|
|
un-heard
| | | | of science as being the
| | basis of their life's work. Their partial
|
|
|
answer
| | | | is enough for them and
| | you'll find, as Doyle has on umpteen
|
|
|
occasions,
| | | | that their ears will be
| | closed to your efforts and they will try to
|
|
|
cure
| | | | you of what they regard
as
| | your new found compulsion. ]]
I'll also call your attention to the next
|
|
|
question
| | | | about PANACEA!, which
| | for those of you who don't know about it, is
|
|
|
the
| | | | software program in which
| | Doyle created the first opportunity for folks,
|
unassisted by others, to do
|
|
|
=== message truncated ===
__________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Get personalized email addresses from Yahoo! Mail
http://personal.mail.yahoo.com/
~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^
The beat goes on. Want to keep up to date on Doyletics activity? Be sure you're subscribed to the Digest. Read recent Digest and subscribe at:
http://www.doyletics.com/digest.htm
|
--
^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~~The Beat goes on~~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^
Matherne's Rules -- http://www.doyletics.com/mrules.htm
Aftermath - Travels in a Post-War World by Farley Mowat
http://www.doyletics.com/arj/afterrvw.htm
|
|
 |
|
