When thinking as a skill is recognized and built up to conscious competence, the individual becomes more aware of the extended choices he/she has to process data into actionable information. (Information is a subset of data, that pertains to the given topic to go from SVC to BVS)

When communication looked at in terms of cycles, that gives an interesting perspective on connecting and reconnecting with others objectively.  Processing the thought exchange can be tricky due to so many variables (differences in our cultural and personal “truth filters”), therefore the application of thinking and communication frameworks can provide a much better sandbox to play in so to speak that levels the differences.

The recently posted video on TLE about the Make A Friend “sand box” is a perfect illustration of this idea put forth here to propose a study of general thinking & communication skill development.  There is at least one TLE member (Maxim) I know who has a high level training in communication skills and until someone more qualified is stepping forward, I’ll take the lead on coordinating the thinking skill studies.

Summary: This forum is an invitation to facilitate the thinking and communication skill development studies so we can better utilize the MT materials.

Action point: All you need to do is declare your interest in one or both topics and coordinate it with me until we have others stepping forward who are more qualified to lead. 

Pointers: The optimization of a forum post is best when it is kept short and topic oriented. Therefore  my plan is to take as many com cycles into private email channels and only post the information that is directly relevant to the topic and serves the community.  I am not looking for debates here. This is an ACTION oriented post, an invitation to work.
Mind Map Library

(Grammatical clarification: "Some verbs can have both ACTION & NON-ACTION meaning!" The word THINK in this post has been intended as an ACTION verb, therefore under no variation was ever intended to target anyone's state of mind; as if it would if the word THINK is read and processed as a non-action verb.)


Tags: Action, Communication, Think

Views: 2026

Reply to This

Replies to This Discussion

I am interested. I am a warrior, emot. centered with intell. as my 2nd. I have done some work and some study on this topic and hail to the scholars that tend to articulate this material better than myself.

Its been known that some warriors communicate at times like a "bull in a china shop" and so, its important for me to REALLY read what I am putting out there, as I can be that at times! However, diplomacy and tact are skills I am always seeking to improve.

Its always an interesting challenge to discuss things with non-Michael folks, as I am increasingly finding myself in these kinds of conversations-especially for example a discussion that say, might be along the lines of the IM's. Of course with a fellow M student, one could just say the term as it relates to the discussion. However, to 'mainstream the teachings' so to speak, I have been having many dialogues lately on this very topic and do my best to describe the IM (& its usually the 4TH I am referring to) without trying to bog down the listener with a whole bunch of *stuff* that us Michael folk are naturally more privvy to! If this and other types of discussion would meet the criteria for such a group, I'm in! (or want to be!)
***disclaimer: My writing is, at times peppered with jokes and/or subtly nuanced innuendo....still ok?
I irreverently engage in serious topics, tinged with an ever-so-slight emotional edgy-ness. still ok?
~Mari Lynn

The recently posted video on TLE about the Make A Friend “sand box” is a perfect illustration of this idea put forth here to propose a study of general thinking & communication skill development.  There is at least one TLE member (Maxim) I know who has a high level training in communication skills and until someone more qualified is stepping forward, I’ll take the lead on coordinating the thinking skill studies.

To put it very bluntly in typical warrior fashion.  

Who are you to judge how well someone is thinking and communicating? 

Just because they don't think like you doesn't make them wrong.  Everyone views things differently.  I have more than once gotten something completely different out of a post then what others did.  Just because I didn't latch on to what Gerladine did or Bobby did doesn't mean my understanding is wrong.   It is where it is at because that is where I am at. 

From painful experience, I have learned that I will never be able to get another person to understand something exactly as I do.  When I have succeeded at that before, it forces the other person to shutdown their thoughts and just accept what I am saying.  If I wanted to talk to a robot, I'd have a conversation with an NPC in Skyrim. 

If the person you are talking doesn't understand what you are saying as you think you have communicated, then perhaps it is the fault of the speaker, perhaps the listener or perhaps both.  If both sides are just waiting for a chance to speak, then no communication will happen.  You have talked at us before.  You have received feedback and people speaking from their experiences.  Then you claim that based on that experience only one TLE member is "worthy" of communication as you define it. 

Based on the existence of this post, it seems you therefore believe that you must instruct us in proper thinking and communication.   

This is how your communication has been received.  To summerize,  I think that you think that we as group don't know how to think or communicate.  Therefore, you have decided you are the best person to teach us how to until someone else who, again, you feel is more qualified steps up.  And somehow, this is going to clear up everything. 

Keeping it blunt.  That is insulting.  

You have your overleaves.  Perhaps you should look at them in detail and understand how that is effect your communication. 

Me again! Blunt warrior communicator here too!
As only a suggestion Z, it may do you well to read or re-read the recent 'Michael Speaks' transcript. Given your overleaves and your goal of discrimination, it may serve you well to examine your use of discrimination and put a "SELF" in front of it.
I read Christian's post and I tend to agree with him, warrior perceptions not withstanding. If you single out "a few" and "according to your perception" as having higher credence over someone else's ideas, thoughts, perceptions, etc. and you throw a little arrogance into it, that sure isn't a winning combo on how to "win friends and influence people"!!

~Mari Lynn

The Arrogance. I'd listen to anyone else here before you. Temper tantrum much?

To answers your direct questions. 

How is the effectiveness of communication and thinking is measured?

It is measured on a personal and individual level.  In this case, 

"Dear TLE members. You have an awesome opportunity here to ask any questions from a higher intelligence (MEntity) and by sharing the received answers to study among ourselves is an awesome thing. However I feel that you are all doing less of a job than you could if yo live up to your true potential so let me tell you how to do it better. First you need to know how to think because you clearly cannot do a good job at it. Furthermore you need to know how to communicate because you have hurt my feelings by misunderstanding me. But that is all right, I am here to save the day and I'll help you. Follow me. "

As your response points out,  it appears to me that you view my interpretation of what you have written starting this post as being childish.  Your cute response ironically is pretty much what you already said at the beginning of the post only with a bit more sarcasm involved. 

You obviously understood what I was saying about how your post has been interpreted.  Since I have just stated that this  is a little humored response rephrasing my interpretation is about the same as the orginal post,  I would say the fault of communication is on the OP. 

What is your qualification about this process?

You were the one claiming qualification.  

The recently posted video on TLE about the Make A Friend “sand box” is a perfect illustration of this idea put forth here to propose a study of general thinking & communication skill development.  There is at least one TLE member (Maxim) I know who has a high level training in communication skills and until someone more qualified is stepping forward, I’ll take the lead on coordinating the thinking skill studies.

You claimed the qualification.  You bestowed upon Maxim the prestige of being worthy.  You chose to step forward and say "follow me because I know what I am talking about".  

The only indication that I ever gave of qualification is that gained from long experience of HATING to be misunderstood.   To the point of being very precise in my speech to the point that all emotion is lost. 

And I never claimed to be right.  I never claimed you were wrong.  My attempt was to show you how your communication has been interpreted in one example.   

Now to address some points   

Who am I to judge your communication and thinking skills? I am a nobody and propose no such thing.

Going back to your question to actually answer it: I student of both topics. Both communication and thinking skill development. Now if I were to use the dominant US attitude, I am master coach based on the time I spent study these subjects and the way I implement them. However I am more comfortable to apply the modes voice and just call me a student. Have I provided you with satisfactory answer?

You contradict yourself.   I am nobody and don't propose to judge.  I am master coach, but really a student.    

So you answer my question by claiming on the one hand to be no one.  Which seems strange, in my experience people who know something well usually don't claim to be no one.   They usually claim exactly what you did in the second quote.  Therefore, my conclusion is that this is an attempt to appear "above it all".  Which you do again in the last paragraph by stating.

We are doing it here and now. Though there are better ways than debates as it is clearly only one of six avenue for the flow of consciousness and from where I stand: it is the least productive.

which seems to suggest again to me that you view my interpretation in a negative light. 

Now this. 

The blunt format you have chosen to ask your question is not the first time I got here on TLE and frankly it is disappointing since this is the community of the LOVING. But as a fellow warrior I can handle it so let's play in your sandbox Christian

 If i wasn't being loving in my response, I probably would not be able to write this response as I would be banned. 

Blunt, direct, and honest communication is the best and often the most loving in my opinion.  I have debated people in an online forum before, and when i feel it is necessary can be as vitriolic as an other basement dweller.  I did let loose a bit more in this response then I normally would have on this forum because I felt that perhaps the point might get across.   Based on the above letter you did get it on some level, which is enough.   

Yes I have been a long time student.  Since about 1998.  My profile can be found here. I have posted nearly every channeling I have received on my blog page.   A few are not things I wish to share with the general public.  

How I would suggest you study your overleaves is how I did mine.   I looked up all the overleaves in the dictionary.  I  looked up the positive and negative poles.  Michael is very specific with the terms he uses.  Therefore, it seemed best to figure out what those terms meant.  It was a start.  But that is my suggestion from my experience and my way of learning.  Yours most likely will be different. 

This group is a meditation group. Usually, there is activity when someone has a channeling they wish to share.   We'll talk about it for a day or so and then the board goes quiet.  Many new comers drift away because of that.  

Nothing is ever directed here except by self-direction.   Michael has stated many times that if you choose to learn you must do the work. This is another reason why many new comers leave.  

It seems to me based on your posts that you are seeking something.  But it also seems that this group does not meet some expectation.  Therefore, you open posts like this.  As i have written this over at least an hour, it occurred to me that this is precisely how I would act in the negative pole of being a warrior -COERCION.    The fact that Troy has created a group for you specifically that allows you a measure of control that you don't have here leans toward confirmation of that.  

If you truly wish to learn, then you must do the work.  That work always starts internally. 

Mama mia, here I go again.... (Abba)

First of all I cannot keep up with the volume of posts.  I thought I would post something to defuse any oppositional energies, intentions and statements.  At this point I feel a bit surprised and overwhelmed at the thought of it.  

I did have some interesting thoughts on the ongoing situation that has developed around Zsolt.  First of all I don't have any charge regarding what his general attitude and deportment as several others have expressed.  I guess that validates the statement about Troy's group being about discrimination and passion and in my case being in flow.  From Maureen's blog ...

[MEntity]: In this person’s case, they’re in a lifetime that is emphasizing a motivation to Flow. This person is not supposed to be hung up on anything. At all. The more this person is capable of navigating life without entanglements, the more they’re fulfilling their Goal.

Zsolt, I recommend that blog as it speaks about discrimination.

Another idea that went through my head... this is not intended as a pejorative...comes from the 70% male energy.  I don't know if you manage to be a lightening rod in your other endeavors as you have here but but a metaphor that goes with all that male energy is "inserting yourself into things".  As you did in your photos you stand tall and erect with your ideas and beliefs.  The sexual imagery makes it easier to remember.

What I've observed in Zsolt otherwise is someone who is simply coming from what he knows and where he is at.  As any teacher will tell you the only place you can start is where you are at.  The beauty of MT for me is it helps to understand where someone else is coming from and thereby have to take things personally (identification).  And to navigate unattached.

What I see is someone very much in discrimination.  Wanting to edit and manage posts of others.  Measuring things against the standards learned from other teachings.   What we know is that as one evolves he is continually moving from the negative pole (contracted) to the positive pole (exanded and inclusive).  In fact, Zsolt, that is one principle I think you would really appreciate as it shows there can be a whole continuum of different thinking between the two poles.  

I looked at SOT (school of thinking) website.  I thought it had some good ideas.  And if you like them, and are drawn to the Michael Teaching then I believe you will see that once you immerse yourself in it then you will see that it is luxurious in its ability to help refine your thought and life... maybe even ten time SOT;)  I downloaded the X10 book.  It seemed to be aimed mostly at business managment.  MT takes you all the way to agape... er, ah... gives you a map.... you do the walking.

Further on the topic of thinking:  Besides the negative/positive poles, ordinal and cardinal knowing the 7 attitudes would be very useful.  Although you list yourself as idealist and that comes through, you are channeled as pragmatist.  From that it makes a lot of sense that you are focused on "application".  To me that translates into the "what works" which is what pragmatism is all about.  Because of that you have more fluidity of using all the attitudes than someone in the other 6.  Knowing the attitudes will give you a better understanding of others.  Of all the OLs it is most tied to thinking.  And there are so many nuances.... I'm still learning.

Another tool that you can apply to the attitudes is the hands across technique.  Being a pragmatist when you get caught in dogmatism (I've seen a little) which is the negative pole of pragmatist you can move into any of the positive poles of the other attitudes that seems appropriate.  This is a thought expander of tremendous value. 

Back to SOT.  I know that it must be for more than business people but I got from it that it a lot about achievement... something young souls are very much into.  Mature souls are more into relationship and knowing one another.  Old souls are mostly about putting it all together in the full context... as well as the lower soul age activities as appropriate and chosen.  Just knowing about soul ages puts you ages ahead in your understanding how others view their world.    And then get to know the Internal Monads.  Do they effect thinking..... you bet!!!

In the downloaded book X10 they speak of intimacy in terms of how much a potential customer is made aware of your product or brand.  While it is a valid idea.  This way of looking at intimacy is an anathema to many old souls... or they just wouldn't give a damn about it.  

One day I'll have to tell you my scientology story.   I don't think it serves to mention me a skilled communicator you might not get that impression if you met me ;)  Besides, I left sceintology because it was stultifying.  Making someone special is kind of a young soul aspiration.  Otherwise, I appreciate you have benefited from my presence and participation.

Abba again:  

I’m nothing special
In fact, I’m a bit of a bore

I've just mentioned a few things in the Michael Teachings that impacts thinking.  If you take the time I think you will find it will give you a context in which you can place some of the materials in SOT (not invalidate it, but validate it and expand)

There is a lot to MT.  Others have made that point but I thought I would tie some of it to what you know.

On your monitoring of your section of this site, I suggest against it.  I think you have made your entry.  You've been given the opportunity to look explore a lot of material here.  No matter what got stirred up by your presence I sense that the painful entry is over (that darn sexual imagery).  You know your assignment should you choose to accept it.  By that I'm playing with words.  You've already chosen it.

With that I'll leave with another quote from Maureen's blog:

[MEntity]: That this person is Innocent.

[MEntity]: That you are Innocent.

[MEntity]: That none of you are out to harm each other.


Much to ponder on here in this thread.  An opportunity for learning from a range of perspectives is what my heart tells me. 

(please forgive the aside here, but I would be interested in your Scientology story Maxim). 

Ma-Li.... I don't know when or what format but I'd be glad to tell that story.  The first chapter I once told to a group was entitled, "How I lost my virginity and found scientology." 

After I posted my above reply I realized how conflict adverse I can be.  I hear that it is an artisan thing.  I also know that it is good practice to create the space for conflict to show itself so it can find resolution....whether that space is in interaction with others or in the stillness of self.

Christian, that was a thoughtful reply.  I hadn't read it before I posted (I just had to get what I said out).

Zsolt... I love you just they way you are... no remodeling required!

Ma-Li said:

Much to ponder on here in this thread.  An opportunity for learning from a range of perspectives is what my heart tells me. 

(please forgive the aside here, but I would be interested in your Scientology story Maxim). 

 I hear that it is an artisan thing.  I also know that it is good practice to create the space for conflict to show itself so it can find resolution....whether that space is in interaction with others or in the stillness of self.

Maxim, those words above are a helpful thought.  It's good to know that that might be an artisan thing.  And I like your chapter title very much.  I came across a book title once which read, "Nobody loves a eunuch'.    smile.

I was reading Shepard Hoodwin's The Journey of Your Soul on roles.  He explores the subject by making comparison.  In this passage he is comparing sages, scholars and priests with their common love of knowledge and how they communicate. ( page 116)

Also, although oration is the negative pole for sages, scholars, with their love of knowledge, and priests, with their need to inspire, can also be quite talkative.  (Incidentally, simply talking a lot doesn't necessarily indicate negative-pole function.)  When sages talk a lot, they tend to focus on their views or a "story," while scholars are more likely to give detailed "raw" information or theory, without sages' expressiveness and sense of drama.  Priests often like to speak about what inspired them (or didn't).  In their negative poles, sages talking too much are likely to irritate others, whereas scholars are likely to simply bore them, and priests might pressure or numb them.  Sages tend to want people's attention on themselves in order to provide an audience for their self-expression, whereas scholars tend to want attention on the facts, and priests, on their vision of the higher good.

When I read that I laughed out loud because I'd experienced those things with those roles... the dramatic story in spades from the sage, plenty of facts from the scholar and numbness from a priest out of control though it isn't always so obvious and distinct in the older souls.  This kind of information is vital to my exploration of communication and thinking.  To compare it to the scientology model which puts communication in the category of mechanics and technology, the MT info adds soul... since we are not all the same in our process.  As I said before, this is not to make less of the SOT models or the scientology models but to add more context.  At the time I studied the scientology communication model I was often frustrated though I did have some success with it... having persisted as long as I did with it. (in michael terms, I sometimes got in touch with essence)   Even as I've studied Michael it has taken me years to feel some ease with a sage cast artisan nature.  But that brings in self karma, internal monads and the joy and journey of self discovery.

When one studies the Michael Teachings, one discovers that "reason" is the negative pole of the intellectual center. It is the ordinal part of that center of which the positive is "thought."

Perhaps you might think of "yielding" to emotion  or moving because there might be learning there. There are 3 centers in the MT and "reason" is the negative pole of the intellectual center,

Feel free to moderate me.

Reply to Discussion








PLEASE CONSIDER A DONATION to help keep services alive and low-fee, and to keep your resident host and channel alive and well! THANK YOU SO MUCH! This is my only source of income, so I have to do a bit of humble groveling and ask for your support. Thank you!

© 2014   Created by TROY.

Badges  |  Report an Issue  |  Terms of Service