This morning’s article describes some mechanisms designed to release and increase your effective human intelligence. This article is excerpted from the Revised Internet Edition of Human Synergetics.
The Human Potential
N. Arthur Coulter, Jr, MD
Every human being is unique. We are not mass-produced according to some blueprint or master plan, each identical with the other. Each of us emerges from a different design, a different set of genes. But more than this, each of us has a unique history—a unique sequence of events that happened to us, together with our responses to those events and our reflections on the experience. Even identical twins, having duplicate genes, are distinguished from each other by their unique histories. In short, you are one of a kind. There is no other person in the world quite like you, there never has been, and there never will be.
In addition to being unique, every human being is precious. It took a billion or more years of evolution to make you what you are-an evolutionary process that is itself unique. Moreover, you are a being of incredible complexity — the design of the human ear or the human eye, for example, is simply magnificent. As for the human brain, it is a supercomputer whose intricacies and powers are far, far in advance of any of the artificial computers, which simply imitate and expand the simplest of those powers. The fact that a computer can do arithmetic much faster than a human brain may be of interest, but the really remarkable fact is that human brains invented arithmetic and designed computers to do it.
All this implies that each human being has a unique potential and that it is simply outrageous that everything possible is not done to permit that potential to develop. Yet every society on this planet not only does not do this, but is full of barriers and pressures to prevent it!
There are, for example, the twig-benders. These are groups that consider children to be a form of plant life and seek to capture them at an early age, hoping to bend the twigs in a direction that will force them to grow the way the twig-benders want them to. And so they indoctrinate them with their TRUTHS and inculcate them with their VALUES and above all instill in them habits and attitudes to ensure their obedience and conformity.
Of course, it doesn’t work. Children aren’t twigs. They are selfdetermined beings with a sense of their own individuality and worth, and they naturally rebel. But they are also small and dependent and, to the degree necessary, they submit to the twig-benders. The result is not only a messed-up world with a lot of messed-up people; far worse than that, it is a tragic waste of human potential. To paraphrase the poet, we all end up strangers and afraid, in a world we never made. And the tremendous potentials of our unique minds remain undeveloped. Comparatively speaking, we are mental dwarfs when we could have been giants.
Individual Synergetics starts with the heurism that we are unique, self-determined beings. Unlike some schools, its goal is not to eliminate “aberrations” or “neuroses” that cause people to deviate from “normality” (whatever that is), but to provide ideas and tools to enable the individual to eliminate the impedances blocking his uniq e development and to activate the unique synergies of his own mind. That is why we insist that the individual is always in charge of his own case. That is why we insist that coaching is not a form of psychotherapy, which implies that the coach is an Authority who Knows Best. No other person, no matter how wise or clever he may be, no matter how many books he has written or degrees he has earned or patients he has treated, can possibly know your mind as well as you do. True, he may see things that you have blocked from your awareness; but his vision is always partial and incomplete and superficial, from the outside. You are the only one who can see your mind from the inside; you are the only one who has access to all the data; you are the only one who can fit all the pieces together into a synergic whole.
It is this uniqueness that we respectfully and lovingly address; and all the ideas and tools of synergetics — no matter how pedantically they may be expressed-are designed from this perspective. Try them out if you wish; use them if they work; but never hesitate to adapt the tool to your needs or to change it to fit your own knowledge and experience.
The first step in Individual Synergetics — and the foundation of all that follows-is to focus on your uniqueness and to take charge of your own development. From this perspective, let us now examine the human potential, bearing in mind that everything that is said needs to be modified and tailored to fit that wonderful uniqueness.
The idea that the human mind is “an instrument of fantastic power and subtlety” whose “powers are barely tapped” has occurred to many human minds at various times and places. It is an appealing idea. Everyone would like to be supersmart, have total recall, and be irresistible to the opposite sex. The very appeal of the idea leads us to be defensive about it. At the same time, charlatans constantly exploit this appeal for their own enrichment, making matters more difficult for serious workers in this field. Despite these handicaps, there has been growing interest recently in the development of the human potential.
No attempt will be made, in this chapter to present a detailed chart of the potential abilities of the human mind. Instead, I will simply outline some domains of experience and action that are available to humans but do not appear to be fully used. These domains are used extensively in synergetics.
The average person appears to function largely on what we call the mind band of experience-he identifies with his ordinary consciousness and will. There is, however, potentially available an expanded consciousness, which we will call the broad band. Just as the discovery of the electromagnetic spectrum made possible a host of new inventions such as radio, television, x-rays, infrared lamps and cameras, so may the exploration and use of the broad band make available new abilities to the individual.
It is convenient to describe the broad band in terms of the following domains:
1. The tempos
2. The tracks
3. The holistic level
4. Synergic team functions
Whatever the ego is aware of, at any given moment, we call the contents of consciousness. A content may be a sensation-the sight of a tree, the sound of a passing car, the smell of a rose, the taste of orange juice. Or it may be an idea-the idea of justice or conformity or happiness. It may be a mental image-the face of a loved one or a barber pole or a prune. It may be an emotional feeling of sadness or excitement or fear. It may be the recollection of a past incident or the anticipation of a future event. At any given moment, a large number of contents present themselves to awareness. The ego can selectively focus attention on some contents while ignoring others; but the focus is ordinarily on contents.
These contents are usually not fixed or static, however. As time goes on, they may change-in location, in intensity, in the features they present, in their relations to other contents. They may disappear from awareness while new contents appear. The continuous shifting, changing, emergence and disappearance of contents was described by William James in a famous metaphor as the stream of consciousness.
The stream of consciousness may be regarded as composed of a number of processes involving the various contents. Now, just as physical objects in motion have different velocities, so do the processes of the stream of consciousness have different tempos. Some occur very rapidly, others slowly, some so slowly they appear to be stationary. It is convenient to select one process whose characteristic tempo is familiar to all as a basis for comparison-the process of ordinary speech. We refer to processes having the tempo of speech as orthoprocesses. Those that occur much more rapidly, we call microprocesses, those that occur much more slowly, macroprocesses.
We could, of course, devise a spectrum of process tempos, analogous to the electromagnetic spectrum. But it is unnecessary to be I so precise for our purposes. Just as visible light is used as a reference band in the electromagnetic spectrum, with infrared on one side and ultraviolet on the other, so can we roughly identify whether a process is an ortho, micro, or macroprocess.
It is at once evident that in ordinary’ consciousness, attention is focused almost entirely on orthoprocesses. Yet we can, if we choose, examine micro and macroprocesses. Indeed, this is one way consciousness may be expanded. We are not here referring, it should be noted, to the alteration of time sense that occurs under the influence of certain drugs, or in the state of hypnosis. What we refer to is a different kind of consciousness-expansion, one which opens the way to the development of a number of “new” abilities.
The microprocesses are particularly interesting. Usually we are unaware of their existence, but under special conditions we realize that an extraordinary number of very fast processes go on in company with the slower orthoprocesses.
A man driving a car with casual control suddenly observes the cars ahead abruptly stopping. In a flash he (a) evaluates his own speed, (b) predicts he cannot brake in time to avoid a collision, (c) evaluates the left lane to be unsafe, (d) decides to swerve to the right onto the shoulder, and (e) does so. All these processes occur in a fraction of a second. The driver may not be fully aware of them at the time, but they are recorded in memory and he can readily recall them. They occur in a rapid-fire sequence of flashes. In this case, they are simp y processes that ordinarily occur at ortho tempo, but have been speeded up under stress. (They are not “instinctive” because another person might panic under the same circumstances, and each process is one previously learned by the driver.) Not all microprocesses are of this type, however (i.e., speeding up of orthoprocesses).
Microprocesses occur frequently when the synergic mode is turned on, and indeed are one of the delights of the synergic mode. The experience of thoughts racing along several tracks simultaneously can be highly exhilarating. The expansion of consciousness to include microprocesses in addition to orthoprocesses is well worth the effort, in our opinion.
On the other side of the orthoprocesses are the macroprocesses — processes that go on so slowly that they usually escape notice, except for the vague realization that things have somehow changed. But they are there, and they are every bit as interesting as the microprocesses.
The mind-dweller characteristically is occupied with the present. He bases his judgments on the perspective of the moment and shifts with the tide as it turns without being aware that the tide is there. He interprets the past purely in terms of the values of “now,” and anticipates the future in the same terms.
Yet macroprocesses do occur; and most of us use them and are aware of them, to a degree. The flexible, patient pursuit of a longrange goal; the consistent application of a policy; the follow-through on a decision-these are examples of processes that occur at slow tempo that are familiar. However, there are others that go on that escape our notice, for which we have no names. We may look at a problem today and feel there is no way to solve it; the next day, looking at the same problem, we suddenly see how easy it is. The problem did not change, we did; yet we are unaware of the process by which this change occurred. This is another example of a macroprocess. We can expand our consciousness so as to become aware of these processes and to develop new abilities that use them.
To see each present moment in itself, in all the boundless variety and richness there to be found is, of course, important. But one can, do this without being stuck in present time. The domain of macroprocesses can also be lived in; it enables one, so to speak, to function as a four-dimensional being, to whom each “now” is but a phase of a process flowing on, and in terms of a perspective from which all “nows” are “present.”
It is in this domain that an individual evolves. These are the processes by which we may effect lasting changes in our being. They provide the means for achieving temporal organization of our experience. It is a domain well worth knowing better and using more.
As mind-dwellers, we not only confine ourselves to the tempo of orthoprocesses; we also limit our orientation to the contents of consciousness-the sights, the sounds, the images, the feelings, the desires, the memories, and so on.
But these contents do not just happen; they are produced by an activity that we refer to as operations. Thus, we associate one idea with another; we compare these ideas, noting similarities and differences; we recall a memory of a previous incident; we search for a felt idea; we express or sublimate or repress an emotion. Each of these acts is an operation, and, of course, we have always known of their existence. But our characteristic orientation is toward contents, not operations.
We may make the distinction between content and operation clearer by comparing what goes on in our minds with what goes on in a movie. The contents of awareness are like the moving picture on the screen; our attention is focused on the screen. The operations of awareness are like the processes going on in the movie projector. We rarely pay any attention to the projector.
Yet there is a simple act by which we can shift our orientation from content to operation. Curiously, this act apparently has no name. Borrowing a term from electrical engineering, we refer to this act as phase shift, because it is a shift in the phase of orientation. Phase shift goes counter to the “natural tendency of the mind”; but it is a simple act and one that is readily learned. With practice, it is possible not only to perform phase shift easily and habitually, but also to maintain it as an orientation without losing contact with contents. When this is done, another new domain of experience becomes available.
It is convenient to give this new domain a name. We therefore introduce the term main track to denote the domain of experience occurring as a result of the orientation to contents that we ordinarily use, and hypertrack to denote the domain of experience occurring as a result of sustained orientation to operations.
As with any new skill, learning to orient to hypertrack is awkward at first. (Remember your first effort to ride a bicycle?) But gradually we learn to use it and soon become fascinated with the new perspective it gives us and the potentialities for development it affords. An immediate advantage is a greatly heightened ability to understand other human beings. Operations produce contents. Hypertrack orients us to the causal level of human thought, feeling and action.
There are other advantages that will become apparent as we proceed. One point soon emerges, however, Our language is adapted for use on the “mind band” — main track and orthoprocesses. It does not lend itself readily to communication about the domain of hypertrack (or the other domains of the broad band). There are many operations and processes of the broad band for which words do not yet exist. Hence, it has been necessary to introduce a number of new technical terms to describe these operations and processes. “Hypertrack” is an example of such a term. We refer to the evolving collection of such terms, affectionately, as “synergese.” When syngeneers speak in synergese, it can be rather annoying to someone who is unfamiliar with the language. But every field has its technical jargon, including sports like baseball or football.
There is another sense in which language is inadequate. As noted, language is designed for the mind band of main track and orthoprocesses. It is not well-suited for managing the events of hypertrack or other domains of the broad band. Here, an analogy with computer science is helpful. The “language” that computers use is the language of numbers, actually a special kind of number composed of binary digits (zero and one). This is called machine language. It is very tedious and difficult to program a computer in machine language. Consequently, a number of special languages, called programming languages, have been invented. These are close enough to ordinary language (like English) that they are relatively easy to learn and to use. Programs to control computers are written in one of these programming languages (such as FORTRAN, which stands for FORmula TRANslator). The computer then translates these programs into machine language automatically.
In the case of the broad band available to the human mind, we are confronted with a more difficult problem, the opposite of that which computer programmers had to solve. Computers were designed by humans, and the language they use, machine language, is known. We still know very little, however, about the broad band. Nevertheless, by trial and error, we are gradually developing a special language for controlling the broad band more effectively. It is called SYNTALK 1. It is still not very well-defined, and a definitive version has not yet been presented. We won’t do so here. However, portions of SYNTALK I will be included in later sections of this book. This is a promising area for research by creative workers in synergetics especially computer programmers.
One further remark about hypertrack: the ability to use hypertrack is basic to tracking, a powerful technique for controlling thought processes. This will be described later.
Phase shift, as we have noted, is the mental operation of focusing attention upon operations rather than contents. The inverse operation, moving from operations back to contents, is relatively easy to use. But there is another operation that is possible, a shift from main track to a more elemental and primordial domain. We refer to this operation as prime shift, and the domain “below” main track as prime track.
Prime track is the march of events as sensed before their organization into contents of the mind. It is the series of black marks on a white background from which you are now forming words with meaning. It is the set of processes actually going on when you are SICK and have MEASLES or a COLD. It is the “real world” out there and not the SIGHT or SOUND that gives you knowledge of it. It is your friend as he actually is, not the GOOD OLD PAL you think of him as. It is yourself in a strange place without your bearings, not the “I” that is somehow LOST.
In dealing with prime track, we sometimes adopt the convention of capitalizing all words describing what is perceived on main track. This permits the individual to perform a prime shift if he so desires.
Prime shift evokes the realization that, in ordinary consciousness, our attention is focused, not on the actual present, but on the immediate past. By the time the raw data of sense have organized themselves into contents, time has already moved on. We are always one step behind in our perception of events. It is a very short step — a fraction of a second-but during that brief moment a variety of processes go on. This is another part of the domain of the fabulous microprocesses. In this fleeting moment many exciting and important things happen, of which we are ordinarily oblivious. Prime shift enables us to develop an awareness of these processes. We also learn that, once a content has been created, it tends to persist even when it no longer adequately represents what is currently happening. This is a major source of illusion.
One of the subtle fallacies to which the human mind is subject is the tendency to regard the sum total of its perceptions at any given moment as a complete representation of the world at that moment, When we reflect on this, we realize that this is not so; but the tendency persists anyhow. Several workers such as Arbib (5) and Fischer (6), have pointed out that perception is not just a passive process of highfidelity mapping of the environment, but an active process of continuously constructing and reconstructing a map on the basis of sensory input cues, with selective emphasis on those referents that are relevant to the goals and interests of the individual. Furthermore, the perceptual systems on which the human mind depend for information endow its maps of reality with a particular quality that is by no means necessarily universal. An animal with a well-developed sense of smell, such as a dog, probably has a different quality for its maps; and one can conceive of organisms sensitive to ultraviolet or infrared radiation, or to ultrasonic sounds, or to magnetic fields or other forms of energy, also having a quality for their maps that might be quite different from those of human beings.
Prime shift enables the individual, to some extent at least, to free himself from exclusive linkage to main track contents. It brings to attention events and processes at the subgestalt level, processes that are filtered out by exclusive focus on main track. It also brings to awareness cognizance of what is left out-the realization, not just at an intellectual level, but at a concrete, action-influencing level, that far more is going on at a given moment than a person can possibly be conscious of.
Korzybski was fond of insisting “whatever you say a thing is, it is not.” This paradoxical statement could be irritating, but its intent was to focus cognizance upon what is left out of any verbal representation no matter how precisely and thoroughly it is expressed. He also adopted the convention of frequent use of “etc.” to remind the reader or listener of the necessarily partial and incomplete character of his statements. It is a wise convention.
Prime shift is also useful in breaking up identifications-the unconscious linkages (and blockages) of the Identic Mode. When combined with phase shift, it provides a powerful tool for clearing impedances, those “irrational” patterns of perception, thought, emotion, body control, and action that slow down and interfere with the effectiveness of mental function. This is discussed in more detail later.
Prime track, main track, and hypertrack thus comprise three levels of the broad band, just as microprocesses, orthoprocesses, and macroprocesses comprise three different characteristic tempos of events. It should be noted that hypertrack or prime track processes can also move at any of the three tempos. There are thus three times three, or nine, different “narrow bands” of the broad band as thus far described.
But this is not all. Effective function in the broad band requires the development of synergies among the various tracks and tempos. Thus, there is main track-hypertrack synergy, consisting of interactions that promote processes at both levels. Similarly, there is macroprocess-orthoprocess synergy. And so on. Etc.
As these synergies occur (as well as other synergies discussed later), there emerges a synergic whole that is greater than the mere sum of its parts. For lack of a better term, we sometimes refer to it as the “holistic” or whole being level. This emphasizes one of its aspects. But in another aspect, it is an old friend-the synergic mode.
A characteristic of the whole being level is that the individual no longer identifies with his consciousness and will. These become merely particular functions associated with main track and orthoprocesses the “mind band” of experience. They are the command functions of the ordinary ego.
As a working hypothesis, we propose the view that the human mind is still evolving, and that the ordinary ego is a “transitional control center” which, like a butterfly emerging from a cocoon, will some day expand into a new control center, the Director, competent to the management of the broad band.
Be this as it may, there is another aspect of the whole being level that needs to be described, an aspect that is actually another domain of experience of the broad band. If, from the orientation of hypertrack, the individual performs another phase shift, an operation that concomitantly embraces all tracks and tempos, this new domain emerges into awareness. We refer to this domain as ultratrack
It is extremely difficult, at first, to sustain an ultratrack orientation. What seems to be necessary is for a relatively high degree of synergy among the various tracks and tempos to be first established.
It is very difficult to describe in words the view from ultratrack or the processes that occur at this level. At this point, it seems wiser merely to define it as we have, as the level from which all tracks and tempos are viewed and managed, and to rely on the experience of the reader to fill in details.
Synergic Team Functions
A relatively stable orientation to the broad band is difficult to achieve at present. The operations of prime shift and phase shift are relatively easy to learn, however, as are the operations of selective focus upon microprocesses and macroprocesses. With practice and the use of exercises and techniques described later, one finds the broad band becoming increasingly accessible. Even here, however, this is best achieved in an environment in which the individual is relatively free from pressures and distractions. In ordinary social discourse and interactions, there are very strong constraints that force the individual to function almost entirely on the mind band. It is possible to resist these constraints to a certain degree, but the effort and struggle involved are considerable. It seems wiser, at first, simply to accept these constraints as “forces of nature” like the force of gravity, and to reserve efforts to expand into the broad band for synergetic sessions.
One of these constraints is the simple act of verbal communication, which plays so dominant a role in social discourse and interaction. This act, almost by definition, constrains the individual to orthoprocesses and main track. And it is curiously difficult to be silent in the presence of another without feeling uncomfortable about it. The maxim that “silence is golden” seems to apply to another era.
Nevertheless, there are a few simple techniques that promote function on the broad band in the presence of another, which we have found useful. This is especially so when the other person knows something about synergetics and is interested in applying it. Indeed, use of these techniques while interacting with another syngeneer may quickly lead to a synergic relationship in which each helps the other to operate on the broad band. For this reason, these techniques are described here, although they properly belong in the field of Group Synergetics.
These techniques are not new-they have always been available to you, and no doubt you have used them on occasion. They do, however, promote synergy. And their habitual use, as part of a life-style, helps the individual function regularly in the synergic mode, using the broad band.
1. Affinity make. In the course of relations with another human being, aspects of his action or being periodically emerge for which one feels affinity. This is true of most of the people one encounters. Each of us has so many facets that some are bound to be “likeable.”
When such affinity is felt, express it. This action is an affinity make. When it is done, both parties feel better and a surge of synergy occurs.
Two important qualifications should be noted:
a. An affinity make is primarily expressed by action, not words. It can be by a look or a gesture. Of course, a verbal statement is a form of action and is often the simplest way to do it, but it is more the way it is said than the explicit content that makes the flow of affinity. An example: “I hate you,” said in an affectionately jocular manner.
b. It must be genuine. Most people are aware of the power of flattery and are pretty good at detecting it. Whether detected or not, flattery does not promote synergy. This is not stated as an ethical judgment, but as an observation of human beings in action.
Opportunities for affinity makes are constantly occurring. But there is so much dysergy in the world that these opportunities are often overlooked. Yet an affinity make is a powerful synergy generator.
2. Empathy make. This consists essentially of the operation: “Put yourself in the other fellow’s shoes.” This does not mean doing so from your viewpoint and values, but from his viewpoint and values. It is not necessary to accept his viewpoint and values, merely to understand them and to see how events and situations look from his perspective.
An empathy make has several values:
a. Each human being is like a walking, talking library, with years of experience, data, and know-how different from yours. It is always possible to learn from another human being, no matter how humble, no matter how great. An empathy make enables one to take advantage of this opportunity.
b. An empathy make promotes affinity, mutual understanding, and effectiveness of communication.
c. An empathy make develops the ability to see things from a variety of perspectives simultaneously. It turns on the multiordinal mode. From this, it is a small additional step to the synergic mode.
3. Semantic telepathy. Affinity and empathy makes help one to communicate with others in a synergic team with remarkable effectiveness. We refer to such
communications as “semantic telepathy.” (The word “telepathy” is used here not in the usual sense of “direct thought transference” but in the sense of nonverbal communication of meaning.)
Consider two individuals, Mr. A and Ms. B. Mr. A has an idea that he wishes to communicate. He first of all encodes the idea into words and speaks the words. Ms. B hears the words and decodes the message. If all goes well, the idea she gets will be the same as Mr. A’s. When this happens, we say that semantic communion has been achieved. Semantic communion does not necessarily mean agreement, merely understanding.
Semantic communion is the primary goal of communication, and one can use a variety of means other than the verbal message to achieve it. The set of these other means constitutes semantic telepathy. The receiver, for example, may make a deliberate effort to predict the message. One way to do this is to follow the rule: “Focus on what he means, not what he says.” As soon as she gets the message, she calls out “clear,” and Mr. A immediately ends the verbal message.
The sender, in framing the verbal message, uses empathy makes in order to state the idea in terms that fit the perspective of the receiver. He is continuously aware that the same word may have different meanings to different people or even to the same person at different times. Since semantic communion is the goal he does not insist on the “correctness” of his meaning, but accepts hers.
If the idea is abstract, such differences of word meaning may be considerable. So he follows the natural movement of the mind, in which a concrete perceptual experience usually precedes an abstraction from that experience, and begins with a concrete presentation that readily evokes semantic communion, and then moves to the abstraction, rather than first stating the abstraction.
One very useful technique is called bridging The sender evaluates areas of agreement he has with the receiver, and separates these from areas of difference of outlook, disagreement, or conflict. He then uses the area of agreement as a bridge through which to transmit his message, A good rule here is: “Pick an agreement with her.”
A frequent obstacle to semantic communion is the existence of a distinction made by the sender but not by the receiver (or vice versa). This is a source of confusion. The idea of empathy, for example, may imply or include the concept of sympathy to the receiver, whereas for the sender these are two somewhat similar but distinct ideas. Whoever makes the distinction is best able to communicate it.
Another obstacle is an apparent agreement that obscures the fact that semantic communion has not really been achieved. The receiver may nod agreement because the verbal message evokes a clear picture in her mind, not realizing that the picture is not the same as that of the sender. This can be minimized by a policy of not taking semantic communion for granted, a policy adopted by both sender and receiver. Semantic communion can be checked by the sender using a concrete illustration of the message he has sent, or by the receiver repeating the message in her own words. The mere cognizance of the possibility of this source of confusion minimizes the probability of its occurring.
There are other purposes of communication besides semantic communion such as achieving agreement, persuading the receiver to accept an idea or to do something, or simply to convey affinity (or rejection or some other state of relationship). But, for most of these, semantic communion is prerequisite. It is indeed remarkable that despite the tremendous expansion of the physical means for communication — telephone, mimeograph or other forms of replication, radio and TV, etc. — semantic communion is so often not achieved. Misunderstanding piles upon misunderstanding, and affinity and empathy go down, with a concomitant rise in mistrust, hostility, and conflict. While such failure to achieve semantic communion is by no means the only cause of human problems, it is a major cause of many and a contributing cause of most.
4. Synapse. Affinity makes and empathy makes can be used with anyone. So can semantic telepathy, but it is much more effective when done by two syngeneers. When each party knowingly focuses on semantic communion as the goal of communication, the interchange of information and the degree of trust and rapport can reach remarkable heights. And as this occurs, a step beyond semantic telepathy becomes feasible.
Any message tells far more than it says. Surrounding the explicit statement-what the message says-there is a network of plausible inferences and connotations, the implicative residue. When semantic communion is rapidly and easily achieved, communication can be expanded by focusing on the implicative residue.
The basic rule of semantic telepathy is: “Focus on what he means, not what he says.”
The basic rule of synapse is: “Focus on the implications of what he means. ” It is a step beyond and much fun.
5. Franktalk refers to presentation without rancor of ideas or evaluations critical of the actions or viewpoints of another. An implicit convention governs franktalk. If this convention is broken, franktalk is ineffective and often counterproductive. It is therefore recommended that franktalk not be used unless one is sure that the convention holds. The convention is usually easy to establish by use of affinity makes or bridging (or both) beforehand.
The convention is simply neither to take offense nor to give it. If the sender “talks down” to the receiver, displays or feels hostility, shows an unwillingness to receive franktalk in return, etc., the convention is broken. If the receiver feels hurt, imputes unfriendly motives, or feels called upon to defend or justify, the convention is broken. The sender does not try to persuade; he simply presents for consideration. Similarly, the receiver accepts for consideration. That is all.
Franktalk gets behind the veneer of politeness we so often use to hide from one another. Among syngeneers, it can be highly effective and useful.
6. Totaltalk. This is an advanced mode of communication that emerges when the previously described synergic team functions are used so regularly that they form a synergic whole and when a broad band orientation has become characteristic. We can distinguish four channels:
In totaltalk, all four channels are used concomitantly. For example, one reads the mind band and uses it. Simultaneously, one reads
implicative residue, as much as one wishes. This can be done as a mind, consciously. It can also be done as a whole being, “knowingly.” By “knowingly” is meant the whole being analog of consciousness. But one should not be bound by this analogy. To “know” in this sense is “to-be-able-to-be-conscious-of-if-the-need-arises.” It is this, and more, but words fail. Get the feel?
It is possible to describe in greater detail the enormous variety of processes that go on in totaltalk. But a verbal description would take a whole book in itself and would still be inadequate. Instead, let us merely regard the four available channels, focus on the implicative residue, and let out minds go where they will.
One final word: ETC.