Ginger said;
>I find when I comprehend an archetype, I re-live past experiences that
apply and interpret the memory using the new understanding. The amount of
information available to me doesn't change, but I derive more meaning from
what I observed. For me, I it's like replaying a video. I see the
scenes, I re-hear the dialog, I understand why people behaved the way they
did. Then I look for the turning point and I recreate the scene with new
dialog, new information sometimes. Then I "suppose" a different outcome
to occur. Collectively, this becomes a new memory I apply to any similar
circumstance I may find myself in. (snip)
Ginger, thanks for the specificity of your response. As I understand what
you said, you are describing how you access the representations you have
linked to a given archetype.
I am hoping to go one step further and discover whatever I can about how
you have the archetype itself represented in your mind. I wonder... if you
were to pick a particular archetype - one that you feel that you *really
have*, how do you represent it in your mind, and how do know that you've
*got it*? If you were to elicit the same class of data (how it is
represented) for other archetypes, what similarities would appear in the
*code* of how you represent them to yourself.
The third step would be to elicit the representations of an archetype you
do NOT feel that you've really quite got understood, and then contrast
that representational format to the others. Any patterns emerge?
Comparison of similars followed by contrast. What I'm going for getting
some insight into how this type of understanding is configured in our
minds. If I can get raw representational data (as above) from a dozen
practitioners, useful generalizations will very likely arise about the
*structure* of those key experiences that collectively have produced the
state of "understood/makes sense to me". It is my belief (based on my
experience in coaching top performers in other fields) that we then will
get some helpful insights about how to go about facilitating people to
reach a more rapid and deeper level (more actionable) of learning of the
core material of SD and systemic thinking. And yes, the content of the
reference experiences is likely to be of interest as well as possible
teaching stories or experiences that can be recreated.
Charles
Charles Parry
INTERNET:74150.236@compuserve.com
Specialized Resources International
Boston University Sargent Camp
36 Sargent Camp Road
Hancock, New Hampshire 03449 USA
Fax: 603.525.4151 Tel: 603.525.4451
--Charles Parry <74150.236@compuserve.com>
Learning-org -- An Internet Dialog on Learning Organizations For info: <rkarash@karash.com> -or- <http://world.std.com/~lo/>