Does the BIP actually change who we *are*?

[Jasper]

At some point, you guys are going to realize how masturbatory this all sounds.

[Bebek Sincap Ratatosk]

I like the reality tunnel metaphor a lot for this reason, we can grow or shrink our tunnel, it can take in more or less data, we can point it in different directions... but the person looking down the tunnel is still the person looking down the tunnel.

But if you're looking down the tunnel and a gnat buzzes out at you, versus if you're looking down the tunnel and the train comes, there's a difference there, and there's a difference in the effect it has on you. I think every experience has the potential to change who you are on a fundamental level.

I agree... Experiences have the potential to change you. Paradigm Shifts, Metaprogramming etc. a near death experience can definately act like a train coming straight down your tunnel...

But that's a very different thing than simply exposing yourself to new ideas. In the BiP metaphor there's not really a clear difference between saying "I'm gonna examine things from a different perspective for a bit" and "Holy Crap, I'm An Entirely Different Person".

At some point, you guys are going to realize how masturbatory this all sounds.

That's why we have   

[Jasper]

I like the reality tunnel metaphor a lot for this reason, we can grow or shrink our tunnel, it can take in more or less data, we can point it in different directions... but the person looking down the tunnel is still the person looking down the tunnel.

But if you're looking down the tunnel and a gnat buzzes out at you, versus if you're looking down the tunnel and the train comes, there's a difference there, and there's a difference in the effect it has on you. I think every experience has the potential to change who you are on a fundamental level.

I agree... Experiences have the potential to change you. Paradigm Shifts, Metaprogramming etc. a near death experience can definately act like a train coming straight down your tunnel...

But that's a very different thing than simply exposing yourself to new ideas. In the BiP metaphor there's not really a clear difference between saying "I'm gonna examine things from a different perspective for a bit" and "Holy Crap, I'm An Entirely Different Person".

From where I'm standing, it sounds like you could just classify anything experiential as sensory input that gets hashed out, reacted to, and incorporates into our set of dynamic behaviors.

[Bebek Sincap Ratatosk]

I like the reality tunnel metaphor a lot for this reason, we can grow or shrink our tunnel, it can take in more or less data, we can point it in different directions... but the person looking down the tunnel is still the person looking down the tunnel.

But if you're looking down the tunnel and a gnat buzzes out at you, versus if you're looking down the tunnel and the train comes, there's a difference there, and there's a difference in the effect it has on you. I think every experience has the potential to change who you are on a fundamental level.

I agree... Experiences have the potential to change you. Paradigm Shifts, Metaprogramming etc. a near death experience can definately act like a train coming straight down your tunnel...

But that's a very different thing than simply exposing yourself to new ideas. In the BiP metaphor there's not really a clear difference between saying "I'm gonna examine things from a different perspective for a bit" and "Holy Crap, I'm An Entirely Different Person".

From where I'm standing, it sounds like you could just classify anything experiential as sensory input that gets hashed out, reacted to, and incorporates into our set of dynamic behaviors.

I suppose you could, but I don't think it would be an accurate representation of the way things work. However, I guess I'm in the minority on that bit.

[Jasper]

To that I say, it works without the distinction.  Why bother making up names for different kinds of the same thing?

[Bebek Sincap Ratatosk]

To that I say, it works without the distinction.  Why bother making up names for different kinds of the same thing?

Well, as I stated a bit ago... I think that kind of thinking has the potential to mislead people about themselves. Changing oneself, in any system I've explored appears as an extreme act or series of actions, not simply taking in some new reading material or thinking about a new concept... those may be necessary precursors to figuring out what actions we may want to take... but action seems imperative to actual change.

The road we speak about, is not the road we walk upon... no matter how much data we take in about the road.

The Menu is not the meal, no matter how deeply we study it.

The Map is not the territory, even if we remove all of our blinders and blow it up to the size of a continent.

Data isn't experience
Words aren't action

Changing perception isn't changing how that data is processed. If we are infophilic, new data won't make us infophobic (though an extreme experience may). If we imprinted as Top Dog, perceiving new data won't make us a bottom dog but an extreme experience may.

Changing our perceptions is like changing the filter on a telescope. We may want to look at UV or Redshift or radio frequency... but our instruments still function the same way. Only through action, getting into the guts and modifying the processing system can we make actual changes to how the data is processed...

[Jasper]

I'd agree that changing requires more than new information, but I'd also posit two more things:

People do not change in significant steps, they evolve over time into what they were going to be anyways.

Some information is passive and inert, like words, and some information is active and reactive, like our experiences.

[Chairman Risus]

At some point, you guys are going to realize how masturbatory this all sounds.

[Jasper]

At some point, you guys are going to realize how masturbatory this all sounds.

Yes, I think we've heard that one:

At some point, you guys are going to realize how masturbatory this all sounds.

That's why we have  

[Bebek Sincap Ratatosk]

I'd agree that changing requires more than new information, but I'd also posit two more things:

People do not change in significant steps, they evolve over time into what they were going to be anyways.

First, I'm not sure this is always true, I think there are several examples that extreme changes can happen, but aren't common. The slow evolution, I would argue usually doesn't seem to me a change to the person (their first four circuits), its a modification to behavior, maybe... perhaps the influence of experience and wisdom gained over time... but the individual tends to remain in the quadrants that they imprinted in (again using Leary's metaphor, I don't really think there are circuits literally ).

Some information is passive and inert, like words, and some information is active and reactive, like our experiences.

YES! I agree with this very much. Changing our perceptions may include words/passive data and/or experiences/active data. The former may break some bars in our iron prison or modify our reality tunnel... but it doesn't change who we are. The latter may break bars in our iron prison, modify our reality tunnel and/or change who we are (fundamentally affect our first four circuits).

Reading Morozzo, Di Grassi, and Cappo Ferro would not have modified my bio-survival circuit. Using a sword in combat for 7+ years has, I think modified my bio-survival circuit.

One exposed me to new data, changed my perception of sword fighting... the other modified a piece of me.

I like this conversation because I think I've contradicted myself about myself more than once

[Jasper]

I'd agree that changing requires more than new information, but I'd also posit two more things:

People do not change in significant steps, they evolve over time into what they were going to be anyways.

First, I'm not sure this is always true, I think there are several examples that extreme changes can happen, but aren't common. The slow evolution, I would argue usually doesn't seem to me a change to the person (their first four circuits), its a modification to behavior, maybe... perhaps the influence of experience and wisdom gained over time... but the individual tends to remain in the quadrants that they imprinted in (again using Leary's metaphor, I don't really think there are circuits literally ).

I'll submit to you that powerful experiences can snowball a lot more dramatically than slow changes, but the changes are impermanent if they aren't followed up by a series of subtler interactions, such as long thoughts on whatever it is, serious discussions or arguments about it, continued small decisions toward the new change, etc. 

I still maintain that we only become more who we are over time, with minimal augmentations to suit the conditions of our experiences so it makes what we think of as "sense".

[Bebek Sincap Ratatosk]

I'd agree that changing requires more than new information, but I'd also posit two more things:

People do not change in significant steps, they evolve over time into what they were going to be anyways.

First, I'm not sure this is always true, I think there are several examples that extreme changes can happen, but aren't common. The slow evolution, I would argue usually doesn't seem to me a change to the person (their first four circuits), its a modification to behavior, maybe... perhaps the influence of experience and wisdom gained over time... but the individual tends to remain in the quadrants that they imprinted in (again using Leary's metaphor, I don't really think there are circuits literally ).

I'll submit to you that powerful experiences can snowball a lot more dramatically than slow changes, but the changes are impermanent if they aren't followed up by a series of subtler interactions, such as long thoughts on whatever it is, serious discussions or arguments about it, continued small decisions toward the new change, etc. 

Oh yeah, I think it tends to be pretty true. Some instances I think may be large and permanent (usually near death experiences or something like that), but anything thats intentionally seems to take either a Large change and small supporting experiences, or a series of changes that culminates in a major and permanent change. I think we may safely be able to agree on this (OMGZ).

I still maintain that we only become more who we are over time, with minimal augmentations to suit the conditions of our experiences so it makes what we think of as "sense".

Yeah, I could agree with that. Though I think it is possible to make major permanent changes that are different that you were, I don't think many people do that, I don't think its something I've done myself at least not yet. However, I do think that by breaking bars in my BiP, I've exposed myself to new ideas and new information and even new experiences... all of which have helped me to learn more about the Me that I perceive (Do we Become more of whom we are? Do we Perceive more of whom we are? Are these simply two different ways of saying the same thing? And is this different than Changing whom we are?)

I love PD.com

[Jasper]

Yes.

[LMNO]

I'll go back to Leary here. Let's say that we imprinted Low on the first circuit (fight/flee) as a child. No matter what perceptions we change... what new ideas we think about. We don't change that basic program. We might learn to compensate for it in some manner, but the basic YOU would still have the initial response to run when faced with danger.

Now, if you take up a martial art, or live through a horrific event, there may be a metaprogramming change to that circuit and fundamentally modify the homunculus inside you. However, thats not gonna happen by breaking a few bars... it takes a lot more than that, I think.

Rat, whats' to say that one of the bars in your BIP isn't Circuit 1?

If you define a "bar" as "a psycho/physiological filter for experiential reality", wouldn't that include both whether or not you're a republican and if you're neophobic or not?

In my interpretation, the BIP is everything that shapes your perceptions of the world and how you act in it.  This would necessarily include the 8-circuit model, as it is another way of describing how you act in the world.

If you want to pad out the metaphor, you could say that the bars are conditioning, and the floor is imprinting.  But you can always get a sledgehammer and pound some mortar.

But either way, you're still in prison. 

[AFK]

And when it comes to prison, it isn't absolutely necessary to look at the word prison in its literal, commonly negative connotation.  Myself, I think of "prison" more as a visual of how the metaphor works.  I mean, if you really wanted to, you could easily call it the Red Brick Bank.  So you've replace bars with bricks.  Each brick being an experience, biology, physiology, values, etc., that influence and inform how one navigates the universe.  You are still encased in the metaphor but you don't have the negative "Prison" anymore. 

You could then say, you never can escape the Bank, so you're always in the money.  But the metaphor is still the same, it's just different scenery.