Fairness...the unfair thing to do...

[Guest guest]

David,

 

My original post that I sent gave both WIIFM (the ability to get any

results one chooses) and it also gave the " how to " (determine outcome,

determine identity for outcome, install identity).

 

Your response took exception when I suggested the possibility that your

soul not only doesn't care what identity you use but it wants you to have

EVERY identity you want.

 

From a meta-program POV you had associated into the identity you were

using at the time and didn't exercise the ability to disassociate and

realize your identity was not you. (That is why 100%

Association/Disassociation is one of the Fundamentals of Mental Fitness

Mastery at http://www.secretsuccess.com/mentalfitness.htm )

 

At 02:41 PM 4/12/2005, David wrote:

>Presenting me with a choice, how-to-do-it, and WIIFM gives me the

>information I need to compare it to my current set of choices.

 

I did this (see above and original post) and you slapped my hand, after

saying that is what you got up until now. Anyone else?

 

 

>Presenting a choice without WIIFM requires either that I drop what I'm

>doing to figure out how I benefit from it, or that I accept some

>implied value system that prefers that choice. And I would respond to

>either of those with hostility and resentment.

 

Also we can respond with hostility and resentment when our attention skips

over WIIFM and the " how to " and all the metaphors and think a personal or

" sacred " belief is being attacked (i.e. our identity).

 

 

>And presenting a choice without the how-to-do-it would require even

>more work on my part, before I could even determine whether it's of

>use to me. I usually respond to that by assuming that the person

>doing the recommending doesn't even know how-to-do-it, so the

>recommendation can be safely ignored as groundless.

>

>For me, that's fair.

 

Is it fair (I'm not really into fairness because fairness moves me away

form being at cause or response -able), to overlook the WIIFM and the " how

to " and claim unfairness?

 

Is it fair to use fairness as criteria?

 

That's an unfair thing to do!

 

Since fair is a nominalization and has a different meaning and value to

each person. Who's definition are we to settle on?

 

Utilize Everything,

Dr. Houston (Doc Results) Vetter

http://www.achieve-your-potential.com

[Guest guest]

On 4/12/05, docresults <docresults wrote:

>

> My original post that I sent gave both WIIFM (the ability to get any

> results one chooses) and it also gave the " how to " (determine outcome,

> determine identity for outcome, install identity).

>

 

Well, yes and no.

 

In your original post, you failed to pace my experience. Where in my

post did I say that I had some outcome that I wanted desperately, but

was unable to achieve?

 

Was I open to that advice?

 

Was I looking for it?

 

Was it specific enough (through an isomorphic story, or whatever) that

I could easily see how your 'how-to' fit my particular situation?

 

From my perspective, 'no' on all counts. So, whatever WIIFM and

'how-to' you put into your message, I didn't get out of it.

 

--David Brandt

[Guest guest]

At 11:06 AM 4/13/2005, David wrote:

>On 4/12/05, docresults <docresults wrote:

> > My original post that I sent gave both WIIFM (the ability to get any

> > results one chooses) and it also gave the " how to " (determine outcome,

> > determine identity for outcome, install identity).

>

>Well, yes and no.

>

>In your original post, you failed to pace my experience. Where in my

>post did I say that I had some outcome that I wanted desperately, but

>was unable to achieve?

 

David,

 

I paced your experience by starting my post with " Here are a few things to

ponder " and using phrases throughout such as " I suspect... " " As far as I

can tell... " " Please consider this... " etc. and I paced your experience by

responding to your last sentence, " That's what I've got so far. Anybody else? "

 

You did not say 'anybody else' say it in a way that specifically paces my

experience and shows me WIIFM and 'how to'. You said, " this is what you've

gotten SO FAR. ANYBODY ELSE? " And then you take offense when 'anybody

else', shows you how to go further.

 

Nowhere did you say you had an outcome you wanted desperately (if you had I

would have given a more detailed 'how to').

 

You did say, " And my values are the way they are, because of my identity. "

 

And you did say, " The soul is the next level up the hierarchy - my soul is

a strong

determining factor in my identity... "

 

And you did say " ... because the answers to " why am I alive? " tell me a lot

about how

to answer " who am I? "

 

 

And I did show you where those beliefs are limiting you in a way that

presented another perspective without coming out and saying, " David, your

beliefs are wrong/not any good/not serving you well/not very useful. "

 

 

>Was I open to that advice?

>Was I looking for it?

 

And you did say, " That's what I've got so far. Anybody else? " Which does

suggest open and looking!

 

 

>Was it specific enough (through an isomorphic story, or whatever) that

>I could easily see how your 'how-to' fit my particular situation?

 

 

That would all depend on whether or not you took to hear my opening

sentence. " Here are a few things to ponder " .

 

 

> From my perspective, 'no' on all counts. So, whatever WIIFM and

>'how-to' you put into your message, I didn't get out of it.

 

 

Again, David, I did not know I wasn't supposed to respond to " That's what

I've got so far. Anybody else? " or that there was a particular way you

required a response. I saw some structural problems and suggested looking

at them.

 

And again I apologize for stepping on beliefs that you held closely.

 

Utilize Everything,

Dr. Houston (Doc Results) Vetter