Why is the Herbert quote so powerful?

[Guest guest]

Pretty much what you said.

 

He’s got the away from… and even gives some

alternate methods of dealing with the fear… but where do we go next?

 

I overcome my fear, I transmute my fear… and then I…

 

What?

 

Abide in Zen emptiness?

 

That can be useful, but if you don’t know what you’re

doing, it can lead to similar results to the poor TM dupe in the other post.

 

Word to the wise: Have a phuking plan… or get used

to being part of someone else’s plan.

 

Keep smiling,

 

Ben

 

 

 

 

 

On Behalf Of docspeed2001

Monday, March 30, 2009 7:29 PM

 

Why is the Herbert quote so

powerful?

 

 

 

 

 

 

,

" viannaflowerchild " <viannaflowerchild wrote:

 

Group,

 

Just for funnzies let's disect the following, sentence by sentence.

 

> " I must not fear.

 

This is a presupposition that fearing is NOT good. And it presupposes that

there will be given methods to enhance 'security-of-mind'.

 

> Fear is the mind-killer.

 

Gives a reason NOT to fear, because if you 'fear' then you have a dead mind

(Mind-killer)...

 

This is part of the 'agitate, agitate' formula for a propulsion system to

enhance doing something else besides 'fearing'.

 

Which is actually quite close to reality because of the Triple-Warmer, fight or

flight energies being released and over-whelming of subjugating all other

energies.

 

> Fear is the little-death that brings total obliteration.

 

More propulsion system.

 

> I will face my fear.

 

Now giving a solution.

 

But the solution is much too general and simple to be effective.

 

> I will permit it to pass over me and through me.

 

This is nice. It's a form of simple dissociation, so that the fear is NOT

attached and over-whelming, but is like wind.

 

> And when it has gone past I will turn the inner eye to see its path.

 

Telling what to do when it is gone.

 

Looking at it from a distance to see it's path presupposes that you are

dissociation and not attached.

 

> Where the fear has gone there will be nothing.

 

A hypnotic command. A submodality swish. Changing the mind-killer into

something that is totally gone, none existent.

 

> Only I will remain. "

 

Sounds good.

 

I would definitively build in some resource states so fear the mind-killer will

lead to dissociation, then to association into some type of power state, ie, a

state where they've had courage, self-confidence and control in the past and

anchor it automatically.

 

So group,

 

How would you define the above quote from Herbert?

 

Anyone got the cajones to do the drill and get the skill?

 

John La Tourrette, PhD

[Guest guest]

On Mon, Mar 30, 2009 at 6:29 PM, docspeed2001 <docspeed2001 wrote:

> , " viannaflowerchild "

> <viannaflowerchild wrote:

>

 

<snip>

 

>

> I would definitively build in some resource states so fear the mind-killer

> will lead to dissociation, then to association into some type of power

> state, ie, a state where they've had courage, self-confidence and control in

> the past and anchor it automatically.

>

> So group,

>

> How would you define the above quote from Herbert?

>

> Anyone got the cajones to do the drill and get the skill?

>

> John La Tourrette, PhD

>

 

" I must not fear. "

 

Starting with a statement of purpose, almost a statement of identity.

 

" Fear is the mind-killer. Fear is the little-death that brings total

obliteration. "

 

Chunking down from the 'identity' level to the 'values' level. These

are the ways that fear violates core values, giving propulsion to

control and eliminate fear.

 

" I will face my fear. "

 

Chunking down again, to the level of habit and behavior.

 

" I will allow it to pass over and through me. "

 

I already stated, at the higher levels, that the fear is separate from

me. I can use that presupposition now and dissociate from the fear,

noticing the space between it and me.

 

" And when it has gone past I will turn the inner eye to see its path. "

 

I want for this to be about noticing the flow of energy and sequence

of states that leads to paralyzing fear, but I know that's not what

the author intends. The author seems to be describing a much more

chronically dissociated state. (Which matches my recollection of

Heinlein's writing style.)

 

" When the fear has gone there will be nothing. Only I will remain. "

 

The goal of this technique seems to be to dissociate whenever a fear

response happens, and to stay dissociated until the fear passes.

That's better than being stuck in TW overload, but there are better

approaches. The author could just as easily talk about taking control

of the fear and replacing it with something else (chaining from fear

to dissociation to a resource-rich state, as Doc suggests). Also,

when dissociated and watching the fear, there are plenty of ways to

track the fear back to its source and address the root cause of it

(tracing back the sequence of states or the energy flow, then use EM

or IDD or parts or...).

 

 

--David Brandt