The reference of Jack to p. 125 brought my to the side bevor, last paragraph. Reading first\u00c2\u00a0paragraph of p. 125, it contracts my experiencing\/ thinking only to “conscious” and “unconscious” – and sounds like: either -or. In the theoretical world of psychoanalysis there are three levels with fluent transitions: unconscious – preconscious – conscious. About last question of this first paragraph(p.125) I expanded that question into: or does temporality hide them from view – again. We all know this moment: a thought appears and immediate we feel – this I thought not the first time, on this point I already was. Perhaps we nothing loose? Sonner or later, it appears again ( more or less modified)?<\/p>\n
I\u00c2\u00b4m not concerned about too much theory or thinking and so; perhaps Jack\u00c2\u00b4s ceaseless advices bear fruit ( to stay or come back to the experience). If I read the text of Your introduction, Jack, ( about this first paragraph p.125) I compared this with my notices and start with small, verifying exercises, “swinging” from thinking to experiencing and in reverse. And if I get confused, I know today: I\u00c2\u00b4m off the experience. So, from your ” now, we are not very good….. to…..Ah well. Very lightening up for me. The whole paragraph. In German we say: sich etwas hinter die Ohren schreiben – to get sth. into one\u00c2\u00b4s head ?)<\/p>\n
Doing Ex. 22 first time, I thought, it is like water floating downhill. What happens if there is no movement. So, we stay on point A and A1 – but no more points like \u00c2\u00b4X\u00c2\u00b4or A2 and so on. This borders on close “being dead”. But how do we move from point to point, in awareness? Is there movement without participation of my consciousness?<\/p>\n
Second time Ex. 22, I thought : is it a jump – a step of most\/always unconsiously perceiption? Unconscious perceiption – this wouldn\u00c2\u00b4t be able to perceive, I mean this: that cannot be directly observed! Normally! And what is the nature of \u00c2\u00b4X\u00c2\u00b4?<\/p>\n
In my experience it is, or has to do with the flow, movement. This is my\u00c2\u00a0\u00c3\u00adndirectly\u00c2\u00b4 result. I\u00c2\u00b4m on point A, than on point A1. Here I look back to A and understand, I was there(A), now I\u00c2\u00b4m here (A1), what\u00c2\u00b4s about the \u00c2\u00b4between\u00c2\u00b4? It is in a vague, blurred “realm”. And it is immediate “clear” if my view is fixed to\/from a point. My picture is here: I\u00c2\u00b4m sitting in a rapid train, looking out of the window. Seeing(for example) a house; now this “realm” vaguesness, blurreness. My view with wandering eyes ” seeing and not seeing”. And suddenly fixation on a tree. This would be my point A1. And what is \u00c2\u00b4X\u00c2\u00b4 here? I look back, direction A (house). Now, my “picture” is no more helpful. But I know, my picture is more than a intellectual process, it is a picture, set in motion from my experience.<\/p>\n
Perhaps, now I must read the rest of the text for more understanding. By the way: I change\u00c2\u00a0nearly every week my procedure – first reading, than exercise and reverse. What is best?<\/p>\n
Arthur<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"
The reference of Jack to p. 125 brought my to the side bevor, last paragraph. Reading first\u00c2\u00a0paragraph of p. 125, it contracts my experiencing\/ thinking only to “conscious” and “unconscious” – and sounds like: either -or. In the theoretical world … Continue reading