Semantic Restructuring is the pursuit of enlightenment, enlivenment, empowerment through the creative re-arranging of the building blocks of meaning. For a better description, Start Here.
| Sun | Mon | Tue | Wed | Thu | Fri | Sat |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | 2 | 3 | ||||
| 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | 10 |
| 11 | 12 | 13 | 14 | 15 | 16 | 17 |
| 18 | 19 | 20 | 21 | 22 | 23 | 24 |
| 25 | 26 | 27 | 28 | 29 | 30 | 31 |
| Months | ||
|---|---|---|
| Jan | Feb | Mar |
| Apr | May | Jun |
| Jul | Aug | Sep |
| Oct | Nov | Dec |
Bateson, books, cogling, context, CPB, embodiment, framing, I Ching, paradox, perception influence, prisdem, semantic punctuation, sensation, techniques, unconscious
Dreamt last night about a computer with little inserts for the buttons; someone was changing the insert label for this one button in particular, the only button seen clearly. The changes were coming so quick that only one of the inserts was readable, a yellow one reading "sarcasm." There were other yellow inserts, but their text was blurred; so too for the single red insert. Was there truly an insert of green or blue? It seems like there must have been at least one or the other.
Whatever behaviors are attached to a given button, the truth is that big shiny red buttons are going to get pushed more often than quiet unobtrusive green ones. And who can say, from within that metaphor, that it should be otherwise? There's the issue of attractiveness to the pusher. There's the issue of ease of pushing. There's the matter of what is triggered by the button. Under attractiveness, "button design" if you will, there's size and gloss and color and accessibility. How to balance, say, a red danger button, small, matte finish, but easy to get at, with a fairly large, shiny green "I'm O.K., You're O.K." button right in the center?
The problem with the button metaphor, of course, is that people aren't machines. People resent having things "done to them". No one wants to be "worked on." No one wants to think they are being done to, being run. And, frankly, who would want to feel like they are running people? It's not good to make people feel that way. That was Erickson's genius, the ability to run people and yet make them feel they were running themselves; better still, in time they truly would be running themselves if at all possible. The biggest problem with the N-LP formulations is the instrumentalist view of doing things to people. Try doing things for them, or even with them; it's a much cooler place to be. Make it easier for folks to push the good buttons, harder to push the bad ones, and recognize that the relationship between what they want, what they're looking for when they punch a shiny red button and what is actually wired to any particular shiny red button need not have anything to do with each other.
[]
static link
writebacks: 0 (writeback = trackback +/- comment)