Outward (Exploratory) and Inward (Imaginative) Perception
Could we elaborate a little bit on the subject of perception? Life is all about perception. Perception is what creates two worlds (inner and outer) for human beings. I have a theory or assumption in mind that helps me find a connection between deBono,'s thinking system and many fields of psychology, especially coaching psychology.
My theory is that we can perceive outwardly as well as inwardly. By perceiving inwardly, I mean that when we visualize, we use our five senses to perceive a visualized or imaginative situation. This is not very different from perceiving a real situation outwardly, except that perceiving a real situation is more accurate, more detailed. In my opinion also, NLP is based mostly on an inward perception while Rational Emotive Behavior Therapy (REBT) as well as Cognitive Behavior Therapy (CBT) is based on both inward and outward. deBono's thinking system is based mostly on the outward perception. The 6 hats is a rather practical tool to emphasize this process with minor inward perception. What do you all think?
My theory is that we can perceive outwardly as well as inwardly. By perceiving inwardly, I mean that when we visualize, we use our five senses to perceive a visualized or imaginative situation. This is not very different from perceiving a real situation outwardly, except that perceiving a real situation is more accurate, more detailed. In my opinion also, NLP is based mostly on an inward perception while Rational Emotive Behavior Therapy (REBT) as well as Cognitive Behavior Therapy (CBT) is based on both inward and outward. deBono's thinking system is based mostly on the outward perception. The 6 hats is a rather practical tool to emphasize this process with minor inward perception. What do you all think?
Replies to This Discussion
-
Permalink Reply by Angela M. Kaiser on -
Do you believe then that memories are a combination of the two; the playing back of our outward films through our inward lens? Then if that is true, the older the memories get, does the inward lens play more of a factor, filling in the forgotten details or thickening the nostalgia?
-
Permalink Reply by Franis on -
Yes, perception is an interesting subject to explore.
It's been my observation that people are not familiar with describing anything about how they perceive. This is part of why NLP is so interesting, because it makes an attempt at doing that describing of the how of perception. Generalizations are pretty fascinating about how someone thinks to outline the ways in which humans are supposed to be wired. Generalizations are a simplification that are supposed to encompass complexity.
OK, so you say that humans have only two perceptual modes. You're saying these modes are "inside out" and "outside-in". Then you're classifying various theories of perception you know about and matching whether they fit one or the other of those two.
What if there were more perceptual modes other than just two? What if everyone had a unique perceptual mode that they felt they must learn to fit into a cultural norm? Basing this on how there must be more than two opposite poles to every big question like this.
Actually, one of the topics of my work is teaching perception. Turns out that humans are not so good at describing WHAT they perceive as well as how they perceive. This is a surprise to me. Especially people have trouble when they are asked to describe a sensory mode that is not their dominant mode - such as describing how or where a dancer moves next or how mechanical parts fit.
Mostly people get away with this by allowing others to do this describing of perception for them - get the "facts." Trouble is, these "facts" are mostly "opinion" but because opinions can be presented as facts it's hard to tell the difference. (People have made lots of money at this confusion; for instance someone mentioned the innovation level of the Fox News TV Channel. It has become mostly the Fox Opinion channel presented as news. But this makes them money!) Then they react to what these are. Advertising, news & other people all present "results" as being "true." It's more expedient to pick and choose who's world-view, attitude or point of view you're going to agree or disagree with or emulate or reject. It's pre-packaged.
-
Permalink Reply by Angela M. Kaiser on
-
Replying to Franis
"Generalizations are a simplification that are supposed to encompass complexity." (franis)
Mr. de Bono seems to do this pretty well with the 6 hats concept. Isn't a concept just a way to show someone a perception? That is why I was using the light of memories concept of my last note.
"Turns out that humans are not so good at describing WHAT they perceive as well as how they perceive." (franis)
A factor in this statement could be that different people have different levels of communicative abilities as well as the social norms for displaying one's feelings.
Regarding Fox News: fear is an easily perceived emotion and Fox has managed to exploit that fear to the fullest. I find it easy to be a beacon of light and logic in the darkness of FOX fed fear but am still amazed about how many Americans are brain washed by them! But that is just my opinion about their opinions they call news.
-
Permalink Reply by Franis on
-
Welcome to the fray, Angela. Thanks for posting.
Where was the "light of memories" of your last post? Refresh my memory or stick a new thing in it...
Think that the NING interface here tends to show you only the same part of the website routinely. If you want to meet new people, you have to make an effort to go poking around to see what other people are saying and doing here.
-
Permalink Reply by Dr. Yehia A. Ibrahim on -
I do thank all the repliers for my perception note. Will we be able to draw a mind map to show how the work the four gurus (Drs. Albert Ellis, Edward de Bono, Tony Buzan, and Richard Bandler) of our time be connected? This connection could be very helpful to those who use psychology training and counseling. I am certainly one of them. I may be able to draw a preliminary map and post it for your revision. I am so happy that Dr. de Bono gives us a golden opportunity to connect our minds through space and time. Happy 2010 for you all.
Yehia
-
Permalink Reply by Franis on
-
Greetings Yehia,
Yes, a mind-map of various authors in related fields is always an interesting thing to look at. Also it's educational if one is not familiar with all authors involved. It was in service of this exact objective that led me to invent mind-mapping on my own in 1972. Can't wait to see how you connect these authors' ideas!
Guess Angela had asked this question and got done with posting it immediately before I had posted my first response... so I'll reply also -
Angela M. Kaiser said:Do you believe then that memories are a combination of the two; the playing back of our outward films through our inward lens? Then if that is true, the older the memories get, does the inward lens play more of a factor, filling in the forgotten details or thickening the nostalgia?
Had an interesting experience about quality of remembering the last time I was in San Diego, where I grew up. Found myself driving past my old grade school. So I had a chance to compare a recent dream with my memories of what the school looked like. Turns out that the school was, in fact, exactly as I dreamed it - rather than how I remembered it. The difference was rather striking.
Of course, it's always possible that I was doing some sort of psychic activity such as "remote viewing" the school, which had changed over the thirty years or so since I'd last seen it. But this is not as likely as my conscious mind remembering wrongly - while my subconscious remembered the grade school exactly correct.
This result suggests that remembering a memory will change it in some way over time. I realized that I had a tendency to do this in the form of remembering the way I first put an experience into words, rather than remembering the experience anew each time I referenced it. in effect, I remembered what I had said about an experience over and over again, rather than re-experiencing the direct experience itself repeatedly. Of course, this led me to make the attempt to re-experience the more direct perception rather than remember what I'd said from that point forward.
Would like to hear what you have to say, Yehia, about this specific question, (as well as anyone else who was thinking of joining this conversation.)
-
Permalink Reply by Rad on -
I think perception also depends on the interdependency between the inner and outer that expresses in self. That is, perception is a relationship between meaning and performance. It sits at the very top of Maslow's needs. It is what motivates us all.
Michael Hall describes it as: "Rich inner meanings of significance and value inside (visions, dreams, values, understandings, beliefs, etc) actualized in real-time actions, behaviours, speech, and responses - performances - on the outside."
-
Permalink Reply by Rad on
-
Hi Graeme, I’ve noticed an update of your profile. I tried to explain the relation ship as I did by making a quotation from Michael. This is how I see it: My self perception ultimately displays into me becoming and affecting things to actualize that perception. Hence, self actualization. How I see myself, is what I become. It is inherent in all of us, to strive for the best you can be. To me it is the same as the being need of who you are at the inside and what you are on the outside, that can coincide at any other level of Maslow. It just happens to sit at the top of deficiency needs – things you can’t do without – only because it is a deeper need that is rarely thought of. Maslow approached the problem about self-actualization by looking at the special, driving needs (Being-needs, or how they were being as a person) of the self-actualizers. But who doesn’t like truth, goodness, beauty, wholeness, aliveness, uniqueness, necessity, completion, justice, order, simplicity, richness, effortlessness, playfulness, self-sufficiency and meaningfulness in their lives? Depending on your deficiency needs these things are becoming more and more noticeable to you. It is the basic human nature of what you are as a decent human being. You want to become congruent (on the outside) to what you are (on the inside). However, self-actualization needs - or being needs - are sacrificed to satisfy the deficiency needs. Self Actualization is inherent in all of us, we are only now starting to understand it a bit more. My motivation to achieve something depends on what my immediate needs are, either real or perceived. With self actualization it’s no longer about you anymore, its about who you are being.
To answer you question about Ham; I haven’t read anything about him, but if I can have a guess and create a periodical list I would argue that beyond self actualization might be pointing to enlightenment, or “ a typical characteristic of higher levels of human potential” as Maslow put it.
In terms of how dBT might help I don’t know but you could be putting on your Red Hat. Create a downright opinion about a suggestion that only you can ultimately rely on. Something that is based on entirely your gut feelings I suppose. On the other hand, if you hold the self actualizing values to be true for your own life, then look at perhaps simplicity as one of those values to hold onto - and characteristics to develop that self actualisers seem to display. I think we all hold the other values as true too.
© 2010 Created by Administrator
Powered by 
.
