Does intention influence the tasking?
+2
Rob
Psyforce
6 posters
Page 1 of 1
Does intention influence the tasking?
A former military RV-er and trainer stated that the intention of the tasker is of no influence on what the remote viewer will perceive. The written cue stands and not the intention of the person who set up that cue.
I have to say I disagree on the statement that the intention of the tasker is of no influence on the RV process. According to the quantum physics every thought is energy, as much as every 'solid' material is just another energy pattern. Those energy patterns do influence each other. And any mental action causes another reaction, by sending out waves of energy.
Do we get to see what the tasker intended or do we get to see what the tasker wrote down as the targets cue? Both are very much reality. Therefor we can not exclude that we get one of the two realities. Both exists simultaneously, until the RV-er chooses to view one of them.
Hence the "Schrodingers cat effect".
I have to say I disagree on the statement that the intention of the tasker is of no influence on the RV process. According to the quantum physics every thought is energy, as much as every 'solid' material is just another energy pattern. Those energy patterns do influence each other. And any mental action causes another reaction, by sending out waves of energy.
Do we get to see what the tasker intended or do we get to see what the tasker wrote down as the targets cue? Both are very much reality. Therefor we can not exclude that we get one of the two realities. Both exists simultaneously, until the RV-er chooses to view one of them.
Hence the "Schrodingers cat effect".
Re: Does intention influence the tasking?
For me, i'd have to say that the only intention involved in setting a task would be that of finding something interesting to look at, something interesting from a conversational point of view and something of interest from an RV point of view.... in fact the need to do anymore than present what you want to present seems completely unnecessary, and i believe one might muddy the task by involving all sorts of other things like computers, frames around pictures, or something else that might be on one's mind at the time, .. and why?, when simply setting up a picture with a TRN or formulating a cue with a TRN is all that one has to do, that works just fine, and as far as i can tell at this stage of my RV childhood i have seen very little to prove otherwise and in fact ive seen a body of evidence to suggest that in the wrong hands intention can and does interfere with target setting.
As for formulating cue's, i think that a good deal of thought (for me anyway) should go into that, i mean you get what you ask for, you dont want to be using the wrong words, you've got to get the cue right, something i seem reluctant to practise for some reason, must be that inertia thing i have going on when things are a good idea to get on with!!!! probably self sabotaging from my unconscious, i wonder if i started using intention, would my self sabotaging self interfere with that process... do you think i should try??? and am i crazy??
I prefer to keep things as simple as possible, i think that intention is great when you want to incorporate it into say astral projection, i think if someone came and 'got you' and bid you fly off with them halfway round the world and it was intention driven, then they should keep on doing it cos it works just fine, even if you do fall in the ocean en route...
when i prep myself for a session there is quite a lot of things i do before hand, to decrease the amount of disturbances, throw the cats out, unplug the fones, all of that is intention driven as i intended to have a session, and i want it to go well with no disturbances etc ....
How does one use intention to set a task anyhow?
Regards Enki
As for formulating cue's, i think that a good deal of thought (for me anyway) should go into that, i mean you get what you ask for, you dont want to be using the wrong words, you've got to get the cue right, something i seem reluctant to practise for some reason, must be that inertia thing i have going on when things are a good idea to get on with!!!! probably self sabotaging from my unconscious, i wonder if i started using intention, would my self sabotaging self interfere with that process... do you think i should try??? and am i crazy??
I prefer to keep things as simple as possible, i think that intention is great when you want to incorporate it into say astral projection, i think if someone came and 'got you' and bid you fly off with them halfway round the world and it was intention driven, then they should keep on doing it cos it works just fine, even if you do fall in the ocean en route...
when i prep myself for a session there is quite a lot of things i do before hand, to decrease the amount of disturbances, throw the cats out, unplug the fones, all of that is intention driven as i intended to have a session, and i want it to go well with no disturbances etc ....
How does one use intention to set a task anyhow?
Regards Enki
Greetings
Greetings and Welcome to the forum Enki,
It would appear that different camps ( RV instructors ) support different idea's.
True, intention is present when setting a TRN to a photo or even formulating a cue,
But to what degree and how, IMHO is yet to be fully explained... maybe something to
do with Quantum Mechanics.
The wording in formulating a cue is paramount, I speak from experience.
I have made a very simple one letter addition and it altered the whole outcome
of the constructed cue...again, yes you get what you ask for !. I would suggest
that you begin writing cue's a small pool. come back to them a week later and read
each one to see if you could improve the wording on each, this should help you with
setting out a good cue.
A good book to get is D Morehouse book Remote Viewing a complete user's manual.
The KISS principle is a good one to go by and will apply here. Go to it . . . do some cue's.
You are correct, reducing the amount of "noise" and disturbances around you is good, this in turn begins to get you "in the mode". Some call it a cool down, some an adjusting of the brain waves.
Try a different "intent" when setting a cue and see what happens, let us know !
regards
Rick
It would appear that different camps ( RV instructors ) support different idea's.
True, intention is present when setting a TRN to a photo or even formulating a cue,
But to what degree and how, IMHO is yet to be fully explained... maybe something to
do with Quantum Mechanics.
The wording in formulating a cue is paramount, I speak from experience.
I have made a very simple one letter addition and it altered the whole outcome
of the constructed cue...again, yes you get what you ask for !. I would suggest
that you begin writing cue's a small pool. come back to them a week later and read
each one to see if you could improve the wording on each, this should help you with
setting out a good cue.
A good book to get is D Morehouse book Remote Viewing a complete user's manual.
The KISS principle is a good one to go by and will apply here. Go to it . . . do some cue's.
You are correct, reducing the amount of "noise" and disturbances around you is good, this in turn begins to get you "in the mode". Some call it a cool down, some an adjusting of the brain waves.
Try a different "intent" when setting a cue and see what happens, let us know !
regards
Rick
Last edited by R.Hilleard on Fri Sep 26, 2008 3:46 am; edited 1 time in total
Re: Does intention influence the tasking?
Interesting topic.
One I would say I haven't seen conclusive proof yet where the problem lies in some of these Rv taskings, sometimes it could be either;
a. a tasking problem - not clear and concise or the intent/needs to the tasker are confused.
b. Intent of the tasker does influence the target/session.
Coincidnetally I have created the format of a test project to test the theories of this in action - but just have not found the time to test this out yet.
I agree with rick 110% the setting up of the target and the cue is paramount to successful remoet viewing - this is for two reasons;
1. It absoulutely sets out the goals and reach of the target so nothing can be fluffed or missconstued.
2. It also helps clarify and record on paper the intent of the teasker - this helpe the tasker and the viewer when feedbacking.
Target tasking should be one the THE primary lessons taught by all Rv teachers as once the student leaves the doors of an Rv school, the first thing he will want and need to do is source targets. I have se the use of single wordds in target cues/instructions really affect what the viewer actually viewes and hence their results.
all the best...
Daz
One I would say I haven't seen conclusive proof yet where the problem lies in some of these Rv taskings, sometimes it could be either;
a. a tasking problem - not clear and concise or the intent/needs to the tasker are confused.
b. Intent of the tasker does influence the target/session.
Coincidnetally I have created the format of a test project to test the theories of this in action - but just have not found the time to test this out yet.
I agree with rick 110% the setting up of the target and the cue is paramount to successful remoet viewing - this is for two reasons;
1. It absoulutely sets out the goals and reach of the target so nothing can be fluffed or missconstued.
2. It also helps clarify and record on paper the intent of the teasker - this helpe the tasker and the viewer when feedbacking.
Target tasking should be one the THE primary lessons taught by all Rv teachers as once the student leaves the doors of an Rv school, the first thing he will want and need to do is source targets. I have se the use of single wordds in target cues/instructions really affect what the viewer actually viewes and hence their results.
all the best...
Daz
Re: Does intention influence the tasking?
I think the area of intention and tasking is one that needs more research, Daz and I have spoken about this before. I believe the intent of the tasker is crucial, as is personal influences and feelings about a project as the project unfolds. If a project is set and the initial few sessions are received by the tasker and for what ever reason biases him or her negatively to the results then this can affect the remainig sessions. I have seen this in action, and it opens up a whole are that really needs looking into.
A.
A.
Re: Does intention influence the tasking?
Mmm....Interesting! I agree completely that any tasking should be concise and unambiguous! Since that will also avoid any discussion after the session work.
I believe I have read somewhere in the Stargate files that it is best that the Tasker "knows the Target inside out" meaning that s/he is able to provide detailed feedback information and is really 'connected to the target', before setting up a cue (question)
I agree that TASKING as well as 'objective report writing' should be payed much attention to in RV training. All of these subjects are part of the protocol and procedure and I believe they are equally important to the succes of a Remote Viewer.
Regards,
Psyforce
I believe I have read somewhere in the Stargate files that it is best that the Tasker "knows the Target inside out" meaning that s/he is able to provide detailed feedback information and is really 'connected to the target', before setting up a cue (question)
I agree that TASKING as well as 'objective report writing' should be payed much attention to in RV training. All of these subjects are part of the protocol and procedure and I believe they are equally important to the succes of a Remote Viewer.
Regards,
Psyforce
Sometimes I assume TOO much!
I'm assuming here that if the target setter (what ever they're called) knows as much as possible about the stuff, then when the RVer (does that spelling work somehow?), when they need to connect to the target person to join with others to find clues as to where to start the viewing (i'm assuming again that's how its said), then they can bounce off others like a tag team type thing?
Kind of like... (oh geez, just read about the 'kind of like' thing - sorry bout that), a high jumper's run off is very different to a long jumpers take off. Their preparation for each type of jump needs to be very different too.
Does any of that make any sense at all? Hope so
Kind of like... (oh geez, just read about the 'kind of like' thing - sorry bout that), a high jumper's run off is very different to a long jumpers take off. Their preparation for each type of jump needs to be very different too.
Does any of that make any sense at all? Hope so
Jenny Smith- 1 star
- Posts : 14
Join date : 2009-11-03
Age : 61
Location : Far south east coast of NSW Australia
Page 1 of 1
Permissions in this forum:
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
|
|