It is currently Tue Nov 21, 2017 5:43 pm




Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 7 posts ] 
 How do we distinguish a 'Tangible' from an 'AOL' 
Author Message
Forum Beginner
Forum Beginner

Joined: Mon Nov 28, 2005 7:36 am
Posts: 9
Post How do we distinguish a 'Tangible' from an 'AOL'
The title really says it all.

I understand the definition of 'tangible' but I dont quite grasp when a tangible is, and is not, an AOL.

Thank you

(Sorry if this is something covered before - I did do a search for 'Tangible' but didnt find an answer)


Thu Jan 19, 2006 4:31 am
Profile
RV Professional
RV Professional

Joined: Wed Dec 08, 2004 6:38 pm
Posts: 468
Post 
For a descriptor to be listed in the T column, it must have substantiating descriptors already listed in other columns.

For example...

If your S column just has, "white," and your D column just has, "round," then it would not be correct to be writing, "clock," in the T column.

However, if your S, D, and I, columns are filled with clock-related descriptors (hard, smooth, ticking, flat, circular, round, moving, spinning, manmade, etc., etc.,), then, "clock," may be an appropriate Tangible.

When your session is finished, it is easy to ascertain whether you've correctly listed Tangibles. Simply apply the above-mentioned principles.

However, during a session, you aren't allowed to be thinking whether or not you have enough substantiating descriptors to list a particular Tangible. Therefore, you just have to know.

This, "knowing," comes through practice. You'll know whether, "clock," is a T, an AOL, or an AOL/S.


Thu Jan 19, 2006 4:49 am
Profile
Post 
Good question.... In addition to David’s good explanation.... I'll try.

Tangibles come from a non thinking impulse....a simple, one dimensional / one level /no moving parts impulse... Pen in the "T" column... "Bang" one word......

AOL's are always "formed" from multiple joined thoughts that hang around in your head and start to form an idea ex. (Liquid, cool, flowing, trickling = AOL water)

Alex


Thu Jan 19, 2006 6:40 pm
Advanced User
Advanced User

Joined: Sat Nov 22, 2008 6:22 pm
Posts: 51
Post Re: How do we distinguish a 'Tangible' from an 'AOL'
Sorry, but the last two posts seem to have contradicted each other. David seems to be saying that T's must relate to other descriptors. Alex seems to be saying that they come about spontaneously and should not result from a collection of descriptors. I know that Maj. Dames warned against interpreting something blue and wet as water, which is what David seems to be suggesting that we do.

Can you clarify a bit?
Thanks


Wed Mar 18, 2009 11:55 pm
Profile
RV Professional
RV Professional
User avatar

Joined: Fri Sep 28, 2007 10:49 am
Posts: 810
Location: The inner Galt's Gulch
Post Re: How do we distinguish a 'Tangible' from an 'AOL'
zorg wrote:
Sorry, but the last two posts seem to have contradicted each other. David seems to be saying that T's must relate to other descriptors. Alex seems to be saying that they come about spontaneously and should not result from a collection of descriptors. I know that Maj. Dames warned against interpreting something blue and wet as water, which is what David seems to be suggesting that we do.

Can you clarify a bit?
Thanks

Let me take a stab at it, just to see if I understand it correctly myself:

No, they're not contradicting each other, but complementing. Tangibles must have correlation to other descriptors and emerge spontaneously. The relevant bit to distinguish it from AOL is the source of the item in question, whether the matrix has given it to you or your own mind. The correlation rule is handy when you comb through your S4's after the session is finished.

_________________
“James, you ought to discover some day that words have an exact meaning.”
“The code of competence is the only system of morality that’s on a gold standard.”
(Francisco d'Anconia)
>>


Thu Mar 19, 2009 6:40 am
Profile
Advanced User
Advanced User

Joined: Sat Nov 22, 2008 6:22 pm
Posts: 51
Post Re: How do we distinguish a 'Tangible' from an 'AOL'
OK--so you're saying that high-level ideas are more likely AOL than T/I if they are not corroborated by other data, even if they are spontaneous?

I often spontaneously get high-level words in S4, for example "scandalous", "automatic", or "involved", which don't seem to relate to any other data. I put these in I or AOL, depending on how strong/clear the percept is. Is this right?

Thanks!


Fri Mar 20, 2009 6:37 pm
Profile
RV Professional
RV Professional

Joined: Wed Nov 24, 2004 1:18 am
Posts: 4274
Location: Shackleton Crater (provisional)
Post Re: How do we distinguish a 'Tangible' from an 'AOL'
Tangibles need to be justified by elemental S & D percepts. The way that you are dealings with intangibles is correct.

_________________
"Life is not measured by the number of breaths we take...but by the moments that take our breath away"
(Don't be afraid that your life will end -- be afraid that it will never begin)


Sat Mar 21, 2009 1:53 am
Profile WWW
Display posts from previous:  Sort by  
Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 7 posts ] 


Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 4 guests


You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot post attachments in this forum

Search for:
Jump to:  
Powered by phpBB © phpBB Group.
Designed by Vjacheslav Trushkin for Free Forums/DivisionCore.
[ Time : 0.081s | 13 Queries | GZIP : On ]