This site will become active again soon.

This site has been “dormant” for a while, though I will start to make it active again very soon, all the more because I have decided to start to be “intermingled” with English speaking foreigners who are based in Japan, and who are interested in “integrative teaching,” integrating Western psychology, epistemology, etc., with Eastern meditational methodology, philosophy, etc.

Also, I was very recently advised by one of my associates that I could for instance create a group called “Psychonautics as Cognitive Expansionism”on such a site as “Meetup.”  I may do so in the near future.

Posted in What's New | Comments Off on This site will become active again soon.

Why Japanese people cannot become innovators and/or cognitive expansionists

One of my coaching clients who had begun to read “Sapiens: A Brief History of Humankind” by Yuval Noah Harari, after coming to know about it through my online newsletter in Japanese, recently sent me an email, saying that she was not able to finish the whole book because the general tone of the author’s claims was too materialistic to her and because she couldn’t find any “perspective of God” in the book, which she believed was indispensable in a book about the human history.

I replied to her in the following way:

While I may be able to agree to your comments about the book, I personally have been literally flabbergasted by Harari’s claim that the “cognitive expansionism” (this is my own terminology) of modern Western empires has enabled the humanity to continually get out of their own boxes and to expand their own consciousness on a perpetual basis, thus making it possible for them to discover the unknown continent of America, go as far as California during the Gold Rush period, invent electric bulbs, cars, airplanes, telephone, radio, television, nuclear weapons, spaceships including Apollo 11, and so on. This cognitive expansionism further later enabled modern Americans to discover and explore “the unknown territory of altered states of consciousness” during the sixties’ Counter-culture revolution, as well as “the unknown territory of Cyberspace” to start various revolutions in the fields of IT, VR, AI, genetic engineering, molecular biology, etc., from the late nineties.

Am I the only person who can see, and be astounded by, the fact that there is the single invisible thread tying all the above-mentioned examples of the unknown territories having been discovered and explored by the Western imperialists since 1492 until the present time?

This consistent thread may be said to be the “cognitive expansionism a la modern Western empires,” and, of course, I can admit that this particular interpretation of the modern human history a la Harari may not be prevented from being heavily biased, but still I have never encountered such a worldview as his, which I can consider to be probably the very best “model of the world” currently available for coherently explaining what has been happening to the human history at least since the discovery of the New Continent of America made by Columbus in 1492.

Also, although modern Japanese people have been (unconsciously) enjoying round the clock, virtually without any exceptions, the phenomenal (i.e., superficial) manifestations of the philosophy implied in the cognitive expansionism, as newly discovered and explored both real and pseudo-real territories or products, such as cars, airplanes, radios, televisions, mobile telephones, the Internet, worldwide travels, modern medical care, and so on – as if they were incurable heavy addicts of these staffs – it is nothing but amazing to dare to point out that none of these discoveries and inventions has historically been made by a Japanese, and that such innovators as can make “epoch-making” discoveries and/or inventions of this caliber can never be produced in Japan, where cognitive expansionism cannot be taken root structure-wise.

If fact, I had more or less intuitively had this epistemological conclusion before I came back to Japan in 2001 after my stay in Europe for some 20 years, but have come to be able to begin to tangibly and unmistakably feel that it is indeed the case, during my actually living in Japan in the middle of Japanese people for the last 15 years; for me, my recently happening to read Harari’s “Sapiens” and “Homo Deus: A Brief History of Tomorrow” and discovering (that is, coining) the term “cognitive expansionism,” were “the last straw that breaks the camel’s back” that made me come to the very final verdict about the matter.

It is fabulously, or ridiculously, interesting that such a conclusion about the Japanese nation, which I believe may rather be taken for granted in the international community, may not be universally supported in Japan, and that an “inconvenient truth” revealed by such a non-authoritative person as myself (laughs) simply tends to be completely silenced and/or to fall on deaf ears in this community.

As I indicated in the above quotation, Harari’s claim in “Sapiens” that it was the modern Western empires’ “cognitive expansionism” that has started in 1492 the discoveries and explorations of a series of “unknown virgin territories” in the modern human history may be heavily biased, though I believe that he has provided us with the most relevant model of the world currently available for making sense of what has been happening in the modern human history, in the sense that such modern products as cars, mobile phones and the Internet may have already become “must” items for people living not only in Japan but also in the savannas of Africa, which means that the modern imperialism and/or capitalism has virtually held hegemony in the whole world, after having wiped communism out from the surface of the earth (this fact may not be denied by any intellectually sensible person).

Further, Harari made an interesting contention in his second book “Homo Deus” that there is a clear distinction between consciousness and intelligence, and that, while they used to be nearly entirely overlapped with each other in human beings, in the recent years, the intelligence decoupled from consciousness has begun to be taken care of by the AI (artificial intelligence), like in such cases as the chess game where computers can now beat the top level players, automated manufacturing factory systems, autonomous cars, medical diagnosis, etc.

According to Harari, AI will in due course begin to hold hegemony – not unlike the Western modern imperialism – over human beings, by monopolizing the whole “algorithms” which would control not only behaviors but also feelings of human beings (Harari says that this situation has already been happening to the customers of Amazon or Facebook, who are successively shown the ads on the computer monitor to tell them what they should, or are supposed to, like and/or want to buy, after continually submitting their precious personal information to their computer algorithm systems which continue to accumulate big data so that their sets of algorithms may become more and more perfect until they eventually become, so to speak, “virtual God”). Harari arrives in his book at the rather dismal conclusion that, when algorithms begin to control human beings, they will either be exterminated as outcasts of the society like animals who have been historically dominated and/or domesticated by human beings, or constitute an elite class of “Homo Deus (divine human beings),” who will become a small number of dominators of the society, after upgrading their own mind and brains so that they may be able to cope with the “God as Algorithm.”

Harari provides his readers with this kind of doomsday scenario because he believes that we will be able to create our own future by closely investigating our past, and wants us to regard his scenario as one of many possible options, and it is amazing to know that his books are now very popular in the Western countries and that he has been lecturing for international audience, as a guest speaker, at such influential bodies as Harvard, BBC, Google, Ted, etc.

Yet, I am not sure how many Japanese people could grasp the real meanings of Harari’s alarm bells, because they don’t seem to have the habit of “cogitating;” for instance, Japanese people have begun in the recent decades to read books considerably less and less, thus throwing an alarming number of publishers out of business. They seem to want to remain within their own boxes where they let their minds controlled by an endless series of cliches and stereotyped ideas. I used to advise my students in my courses and workshops to study English – or any foreign language, for that matter – to get out of their own boxes, or to do consciousness expansion related experiments by going to the areas and countries outside Japan where the staffs used for this purpose are legalized, but have personally known in person no single Japanese individual who has followed my advice (!).

When I privately mentioned to my students the “youth culture” which I knew was current in the Western countries, I frequently was told by them who probably didn’t know the actual state of affairs abroad that what I was talking about must be what had been the case in the past, but was no more. Once one of my students told me that his breathing technique was “far out” and was beyond chemical staffs like LSD. When I asked him whether he had compared these two methods himself, he told me “How can I dare to try such a dangerous staff? I have never tried it, but SIMPLY KNOW that my technique is superior to LSD” (because perhaps some authoritative person had told him so?). Here, I personally have no qualm whatever with his stance that he never tried chemical substances – people are totally free to do or not to do anything, and it might after all turn out to be better for his mental welfare – but what I unfortunately can NEVER accept and what I think is the very cause of the “ridiculousness” of the Japanese mentality in general, is for someone to make an a priori judgements and comparisons in relation to WHAT THEY DON’T KNOW; they don’t even want to try to know what they don’t know yet in the first place.

I believe that what I described in the last paragraph above is also probably the biggest reason why Japan has historically not produced any cognitive expansionist, or any innovator of the caliber of the CEO’s of Microsoft, Apple, Google, Amazon, Facebook, and Tesla, for that matter.

Incidentally, Japanese people in general, who have never experimented with chemically altered states consciousness, tend to boast of their own “altered states generating products,” such as comic cartoons and computer RPG games.

It is true that I can see that Japanese people, to whom the Counter-culture revolution has not been introduced at all except for T-shirts and jeans in the sixties, historically began to go into their own “drug-free” altered states of consciousness, through cartoons and computer games, and have since become “masters” versed in these virtual reality fields, but, unfortunately, there are at least two serious epistemological problems about their situation:

One, they are really and sincerely proud of their own inner world filled with fancy cartoon heroes and figures, firmly believing that their own type of altered states of consciousness is definitely superior to, and healthier than, the “type ARTIFICIALLY induced by ‘dangerous’ chemical staffs,” while not having tried to experience them themselves, possibly except for the very creators of the cartoons and RPG games softwares that their customers naively adore (laughs).

One has the intrinsic right to make one’s own judgment, but I think that it is an “epistemological suicide,” if one makes a judgment about something one doesn’t know; in the ultimate analysis, consciousness altering substances are dangerous to Japanese people, apparently only because the government tells them so.

It is here interesting to note that I recently came to know about the fact that the constitutions of the Western countries presuppose and guarantee (or rather reserve) the right of the respective nations in question to OVERTURN their own governments or royal regimes. Now, I believe that this fact is simply inconceivable to Japanese people (I have not known it myself until I recently heard this discussion made in an online video by a Japanese university professor specialized in international politics).

I think that Japanese people may have been “brain-washed” (probably during the GHQ occupation period after the end of the War) to believe that democracy is based on the people delegating their own representatives to the parliament where decisions are made by a majority – which I think is no problem – and that, once these representatives decide, they need to BLINDLY and UNCONDITIONALLY follow these decisions – which I think is very dangerous – while feeling that they literally helplessly cannot do anything, because these decisions “come from above,” by which I mean that Japanese people tend to completely surrender themselves to the authorities which they regard as existing above them; they may be after all forced to believe that they should not be able to say No any more to someone, once they have already surrendered themselves to him or her (this very unfortunately reminds me of the young Kamikaze airplane pilots at the end of the War).

Two, I personally explicitly distinguish “good trance” from “bad trance;” by the former, I mean entranced states of consciousness which paradoxically assist one to eventually get out of trance (and to go to the Meta position), while by the latter, I mean those which make one continue to remain in trance.

Thus, I consider TV, daydreams, sports, gambling, etc., to be bad trances, while I consider, for instance, Vipassana like meditation to be good trance.

Now, in my own opinion, comic cartoons and computer games should be regarded as bad trance, because I can say for sure that cartoon readers and RPG game players definitely cannot help but remain in the same entranced states, but cannot imagine them becoming more aware of their behavioral and psychological patterns after finishing their reading or playing. On the other hand, in my opinion, NLP exercises can be regarded as good trance, mainly because, for instance, each time one does an NLP exercise, one becomes more aware of what one was previously doing in an unconscious way, and because it further enables its practitioner to reactivate rather at will the entranced state one has experienced in the past; unless one finds oneself out of trance, such a psychological manipulation would be simply impossible. It is for the same reason that I can consider consciousness expanding substances to be good trance.

Further, I believe that most of the “pre-NLP” hard therapies, such as Encounter, Primal, etc., tend to produce bad trance in the clients, in the sense that the clients can temporally obtain “psychic releases” after catharsis-like experiences in these therapy works, but will need to sooner or later come back to the same works again and again because they are unable to change the programmings of their behavioral patterns through these works.

In this connection, when I used to be living abroad, the only Japanese scholar I was eager to meet in person was Shinichi Yoshifuku, a well known transpersonal psychologist, and I finally managed to meet him in 2012 in two of his workshops held in Japan before his death in the following year, and was simply dumbfound to know that he had been doing therapy works, which were as hard as, even harder than, those prevailing at the Esalen Institute, etc., during the sixties, i.e., the “pre-NLP” period. Yoshifuku even intimidated me in front of his clients of the workshop, by shouting “Immediately stop teaching such a nonsensical thing as NLP!”

I couldn’t understand why he said this to me at that time, but now thinks that he had been in the opinion that what “emotionally oriented” Japanese people really need is not such “superficial” psychological manipulations as induced by NLP, but rather proper “emotion-laden” therapy work of “psychology of the depth,” where the clients can sufficiently “ground themselves,” by feeling their own inner emotions, etc.

(By the way, I now find it exceptionally interesting and dangerously paradoxical that, although I have been through my online newsletters providing my Japanese students/clients with rather highly profound (i.e., “deep”) and comprehensive expositions on how human mind works, from an epistemological and/or NLP point of view, the typical reaction I have received from them was, for instance, “Your writing is too long and complicated for me.” Yet, the very same Japanese people would categorically say that they don’t like to have “superficial” experiences, but “deep” ones. I strongly wonder if what they mean is that they would like to experience only “‘deep’ feelings,” but cannot tolerate any “‘deep’ thinking” at all?)

I now have come to the conclusion that, while Japanese people indeed do need to go through heavy therapy works as “pre-NLP” experiences, in order to indulge themselves in their own “emotional quagmire” BEFORE deciding to want to get out of it on the one hand, they don’t need to go back to the same bad trance, again and again, as “therapy addicts,” on the other hand, and that they can indeed get out of it through such good trance producing tools like NLP.

By the way, it is William Burroughs, one of the most influential beatniks representing the Beat Generation, that provided us with a highly insightful definition about the difference between consciousness expanding “soft” drugs and addition inducing “hard” drugs. He made the following comment in his article featured in the edited book “LSD: The consciousness-expanding drug,” published in 1964:

I will describe a simple experiment that will make the distinction between sedative and consciousness-expanding drugs more precise. So far as I know this experiment has not been carried out in detail. Here is the proposed experiment: Administer a consciousness-expanding drug together with a precise array of stimuli – music, pictures, orders, tastes – timed and recorded so that the entire battery of stimuli can be exactly repeated. Some days later when the effect of the drug are completely dissipated expose the subject to the stimuli in the same order. To what extent is the hallucinogen experience reactivated? Everyone who has used consciousness-expanding drugs knows that any one stimulus experienced under the influence of the drug can reactivate the drug experience. There is every reason to believe that the drug experience could be recaptured in detail with a precise repetition of associated stimuli.

Now try the same experiment with a morphine addict. Administer a doze of morphine together with a battery of stimuli. Wait until withdrawal symptoms occur. Now repeat the stimuli. Is any relief from withdrawal symptoms experienced? On the contrary, the associated stimuli reactivate and intensify need for the drug. The same is true of alcohol. Stimuli associated with the consumption of alcohol activate the need for alcohol and conduce to relapse in the cured alcoholic.

The use of sedative drugs leads to increased dependence on the drug used. The use of consciousness-expanding drugs could show the way to obtain the useful aspects of hallucinogen experience without any chemical agent. Anything that can be done chemically can be done in other ways, given sufficient knowledge of the mechanism involved.

I have not personally encountered such a crystal-clear definition about the topic as his to date, and believe that the same distinction can be applied to the difference between good trance and bad trance. Namely, good trance is “consciousness-expanding” and non-addictive, while bad trance is “consciousness-stagnating” and addictive.

(Incidentally, this analysis made by Burroughs serves, as far I am concerned, as the most succinct rationale available as to why NLP and my own method as its derivative can be described “as ‘in-brain drug dispensers,’ meaning that they turn out to be a purely psychological set of tools enabling their users to reactivate the same states of consciousness they have experienced in the past, by simply secreting the same natural neurotransmitters like dopamine, serotonin, endorphin, etc., without depending on any outside substances,” as I expounded in the “Definition” page of this site.)

It is very sad that, while I think that Western people are at least intuitively amenable to Burroughs’ very intelligent definition, which would enable them to have decent and mature discussions among them about such delicate issues as drugs – I believe that this is exactly what has been happening in the Western countries in the recent decades – Japanese people who have no frame of reference whatever for discussing such a topic, are not in a position at all to discuss it in a mature and composed manner, and cannot but help showing totally knee-jerk reactions to any mere mention made about ANY drug of any nature.

Here, I may be able to make the conclusion that Asian people – or the Japanese nation, for that matter – are, in general, the people who live within the “consciousness-stagnating” paradigm and are “non-cognitive expansionists,” while Western people in general are the people who live within the “consciousness-expanding” paradigm and are “cognitive expansionists.” The former can function only within the framework where everything is known, and once they find themselves outside that framework, they get at a loss and simply don’t know what to do – they are rather very good at enlarging the size of the pie they already have – while the latter are ready to go out of the framework where everything is known, in oder to discover and explore an unknown virgin territory; they are rather good at making an epistemological quantum jump, enabling them to find another pie of an altogether different nature.

In this connection, there is an “all-revealing” illustration which compares a ship of the armada of Zheng He during China’s Ming dynasty with Columbus’ ship at:

That is, this illustration insightfully proves that, when modern Western empires based on cognitive expansionism unanimously sought to discover new virgin territories during the 15th century, Asian empires at that time, certainly with more resources than the Western counterparts, could have done the same, if they had had only the desire to do so, but in reality opted for being content with “obtaining more of the same,” i.e., trying to conquer only their neighboring countries.

Posted in Cross-cultural Analysis, Yuval Noah Harari | Comments Off on Why Japanese people cannot become innovators and/or cognitive expansionists

About the forthcoming online newsletter/How I can be an innovation modeling consultant

I am currently planning to start to publish my online newsletter in English, entitled “A Psychonaut’s Monolog.”

In fact, I have been publishing an NLP related online newsletter in Japanese since 2003, and the total number of published issues is 386 to date (you can read the English translations of the initial 12 issues by clicking here).

I have been also publishing another online newsletter in Japanese for the subscribers of the closed membership (the latest issue No. is #48); I therefore already have rather a plenty of materials to translate into English, though I for obvious reasons will not be ready to translate everything I have written in these newsletters.

I would like to enumerate below what kinds of topics are expected to be covered in the forthcoming newsletter:

1) I would like to go through all the pages of the NLP related newsletter (a total of well over 1,000 pages), and pick up important and relevant discussions for translation, if and as necessary, which I will regard as hopefully interesting to the fellow English speaking psychonautical travelers.

2) I would like to do the same with the other more recent newsletter which was started in March 2016. In the different issues of this newsletter, I detailed the epistemological discoveries I had made after I left the NLP industry a few years ago and started to work as an executive life coach for my individual clients.

These discoveries are mainly related to a) how Western “pre-NLP” people (I am especially thinking of the participants of the Human Potential Movement in the sixties) came to recognize that everything they were experiencing may be only projections from the past, and that in-built programmings do exist in their own brains which determine their daily behaviors – I have succeeded in making explicit as a learnable set of exercises this very process which Western people probably are never able to make conscious by themselves – and b) how “pre-NLP” Westerners came to be able to “relativize the reality.”

With regard to the latter finding of mine, I have come to realize that all NLP and related exercises/techniques presuppose the “Choice Point,” a term which John Grinder, a co-founder of NLP and a friend of mine, used in his workshop held in London in 1988, in which I met him for the first time, and was literally flabbergasted by his highly refined epistemological teaching. The choice point is something like an imaginary fixed point of view in a virtual reality museum software in which operating the mouse can navigate you to go forward, to the left or to the right, enabling you to go into various rooms of the museum as you like, to scrutinize the paintings hung in each room, or like a virtual point of view in the Google Map system.

It is interesting to note that, in both cases, you can have a number of alternatives at a certain choice point, but “helplessly” cannot do anything between successive choice points (because there is no recorded data between them in the first place).

Grinder indicated at that time that human beings have a certain number of choice points in their daily life, that the reason why they repeat the same behavioral patterns again and again (possibly as part of their “Karma” repeated reincarnation after reincarnation) is that they have forgotten all the alternatives but one at each choice point, though they were initially available to them, and that NLP is a set of tools enabling its users to flexibly increase the number of alternatives at their disposal at each choice point (he further wisely pointed out that, if one has only one choice, one remains stuck, with two choices, one finds oneself in a dilemma, and, with three choices or more, one becomes free, because if you happen to find yourself in a dilemma, you can always go for the third choice!).

Now, I am now honestly not sure whether what I wrote in the last paragraph above is the literal transcription of what Grinder actually said in the workshop, or whether it is what I later came to understand in my own way after much trial and error – probably the combination of both was the case – but, in any case, this model did bring the most decisive and long lasting effects on me; retrospectively speaking, I even can go so far as to say that the single element that made me eventually decide to dedicate my whole life to NLP was the almost divine-like revelation I came to arrive at in Grinder’s workshop in question that I could become free and liberated in not a philosophical but a practical sense, solely by increasing the number of alternatives I can select – and fortunately three choices should always turn out to be sufficient – at each choice point in my real life.

Incidentally, I can add that the Choice Point model presupposes three things; one, human beings behave on the basis of the TOTE process. This well known “Test – Operate – Test – Exit” model proposed by George Miller, Eugene Galanter, and Karl Pribram, means, simply put, the black box-like behavioral process of “Input – Programing – Output” (this “Input” neatly corresponds with Grinder’s choice point).

Two, we can ascertain that we have a set of programmings at each choice point, which will be endlessly and forever repeated, unless we can have more than one alternative at each point, in which case the existing programmed patterns are bound to be interrupted. NLP turns out to be a very efficient set of tools which enables us to increase the number of alternative behavioral patterns.

Three, in order for us to become aware of the fact that we have a set of programmings at each choice point, we necessarily need to go into the “Meta Position,” meaning the Observer or Witness position, from where we can look at ourselves in an objective way, not unlike the “Out-Of-Body Experiences.” (The concept of Witness, which ancient Indian Vedanta sages say is the highest possible state of human consciousness, will be expounded in detail in the forthcoming newsletter in due course.)

Incidentally, with regard to this third presupposition, Stephen Covey, a personal development consultant, quotes a very interesting maxim “Between stimulus and response there is space,” in his well known book “The 7 Habits of Highly Effective People” (it appears that the original author of this saying seems to be an Indian guru, whose name I have not yet identified).

According to my own understanding, the more one is in the Meta position, the more space one can find between stimulus and response, and the more flexible alternatives one has in the space in question; this in return means that one is said to be purely like an automated and preprogramed robot, when one finds no space between stimulus and response, while one is said to be an enlightened and liberated person, when one can put infinity in the space in question (!).

Now, although the Choice Point model was the most important single factor in my whole studentship of NLP, Grinder mentioned this model only a couple of times in his London workshop in 1988, and, as far as I remember, I have not heard him mention it any more in his subsequent workshops and courses I took part in during the eighties and the nineties.

This must mean either that he stopped mentioning it because this model had turned out very trivial epistemology-wise, or that it has been so deeply and thoroughly ingrained in the Western NLP practitioners’ mind that they unconsciously have come to take it for granted in a matter-of-course way.

I of course believe that the latter is the case, and indeed I myself have never expounded this model in detail in my own courses and workshops held in Japanese after casually mentioning it a couple of times a la Grinder, because it had already entirely become part of my unconscious and automatized mentation, and also because I sincerely believed, that is, wrongly, that my Japanese students were able to understand the model sufficiently easily to start to take part in the NLP exercises while unconsciously assimilating the model. Of course, I can now say that it was not the case at all.

I came to consciously know that the Choice Point model is a literally crucial aspect of the process of self-transformation, only after discovering that “Japanese people in general believe that their reality is an absolute entity (as something which exists in an a priori way), which they are not supposed to to be able to change in any way (one of my executive clients went so far as to make the comment ‘How can a human being dare to try to change the “sacred” reality given to us by God?’, which, by the way, may be the most aptly epitomizing the attitude of Japanese people vis-a-vis this issue),” as I wrote in one of the recent posts published on this blog site.

Namely, Japanese people who have not gone through any “pre-NLP” disciplines apparently can never conceive of choice points – they typically cannot make head or tail of them, even they are given left brain oriented logical explanation about the model – and this sadly means that Japanese people in general who are devoid of the Choice Point model cannot possibly be made consciously aware of the TOTE process, the existence of the programmings, nor the Meta position, because these three things are something which is presupposed by, and implied in, the model in question alone – while general Western NLP practitioners, whose mentality is amenable to such cognitive expansionist paradigm as Counter-culture, seemingly can accept the model as naturally as they breath air.

In this connection, I can incidentally add that, when I said to Grinder, whom I met again in his workshop in Tokyo in 2016, that he had mentioned the choice point in the 1988 workshop in London no more than a couple of times, he, after agreeing with me about the crucial significance of the model, began, the following day, to very frequently mention and emphasize the model in front of his Japanese students (!). Also, when I indicated to Grinder that, because Western NLP practitioners have been accepting the Choice Point model in a totally matter-of-course manner, they may begin to laugh at me rather in a contemptuous way to hear that I had to dare to make explicit for Japanese people what even kindergarten children in the West may be unconsciously doing, he replied that other Westerners may laugh, but that he himself would like to congratulate me on my epistemological work by saying “Bravo.”

Here, I can conclude that why Japanese people cannot relativize their reality is finally demystified (!).

(By the way, my current impression I have after having taught a certain number of Japanese people my own new techniques developed by modeling Western NLP Practitioners is that they seem to need to be further taught how to apply these “one-level up” (i.e., more abstract) techniques to their inner reality. Namely, those who find themselves in a vicious circle seem not to be able to get out of it, even if they are explicitly taught subdivided or fractal (i.e., more abstract) versions of the escape method; they will always encounter a new situation where they come across something they cannot figure out in a still more subdivided or fractal way. Also, it is very interesting here to note that Western “cognitive expansionists” may begin to willingly try to comprehend the whole situation when they encounter what is totally new and ungraspable to them, while Japanese people in a similar circumstance may typically begin to shrink back, and may remain at a loss and immobile in a totally disoriented state.)


I indicated above that I have successfully developed my own unique exercises by modeling “how Western ‘pre-NLP’ people […] came to recognize that everything they were experiencing may be only projections from the past,” as well as “how ‘pre-NLP’ Westerners had come to be able to ‘relativize the reality’.” This reminds me of the fact that native English speakers more often than not have great difficulties to logically explain the syntactic structures of the language they speak, while I, as a non-native foreigner who started to learn English as late as at the age of 12, later came to be able to logically analyze all the syntactic and grammatical aspects of the language in a, say, quasi-perfect way.

I believe that this IS the strongest USP (unique sales proposition) of mine, in the sense that I can give, say, unheard-of and/or out-of-the-box advice to Western masters of NLP as a Japanese epistemologist well versed in NLP, as well as to Western executive businessmen as a unique Japanese consultant well versed in cross-cultural communication.

My unique greatness, if any, can be found in the very fact that I can go out of the box to always look from outside at what the already innovative and/or genius Westerners are doing in a totally unconscious way, in order to successfully model it so that I may be able to provide them with an explicit set of learnable tools – they intrinsically cannot make their unconscious patterns explicit from within the box they find themselves in – which in turn will not fail to enable them to endlessly become more and more innovative and/or genius, through my further assistance with incremental modeling work given to them.

No wonder why the Japanese students I have so far taught my innovation modeling methodology in my courses and workshops have apparently not been impressed by it at all, all the more because they themselves were not up to the level of the targets of my modelings, e.g., native English speakers, Western NLP masters, etc., and were utterly unable to make sense of what these Westerners are doing within their heads in the first place.

Also, I feel that the fact that my works have turned out not to be so effective to Japanese people in the last 15 years is, as far as I am concerned, something like a valuable “medal of honor” for me, all the more because, paradoxically speaking, I have rather succeeded in making what the Western masters and/or geniuses do unconsciously and/or automatically transparent as a learnable set of psychological tools, SOLELY by contrasting the behavioral and psychological patterns of Japanese people (i.e., non-masters and/or non-geniuses) with those of the Westerners in question. It is very clear that, without my ill-fated but inevitable failure to “wake up” the sleeping Japanese people, I would have never been able to arrive at my recent important epistemological discoveries, which I hope will turn out to be both of great value and seminal to serious Western epistemologists, including both NLP masters and visionary business entrepreneurs seeking to become more and more innovative and ingenious.

Be that as it may, I might hopefully prove to be an exceptionally unique person who would be in a position to provide international VIP people with such an innovation modeling work.

I personally and stealthily am inclined to believe that the real values of my high level unique “innovation consulting services” might be properly grasped only by such visionary and genius entrepreneurs as the CEO’s of Microsoft, Apple, Google, Amazon, Facebook, and Tesla (!). I further clandestinely desire to be part of a think factory of such enterprises, so that I may exclusively work for them as an innovation modeling consultant.

If you happen to be interested in my consultancy work as described above, then please consider having personal coaching sessions offered by me, and contacting me through the Contact page of this site.

3) In the online newsletter in Japanese for the subscribers of the closed membership, I introduced the works of such important thinkers as Neville Goddard, Robert Scheinfeld, and Fumio Nishida, whose works I would like to elaborate on in the forthcoming newsletter in due course.

In brief, I found that Goddard’s claim that you are within the godly consciousness, whenever you imagine as if your desire was already fulfilled, while you live within the sinful consciousness, whenever your desire is not fulfilled, and that to achieve the godly consciousness by imagining that your desire is already fulfilled does mean your redemption, is simply fascinating.

He further advises us to “think from [something],” instead of to “think of [something].” In the latter case, according to him, you are outside of what you desire, and therefore will never be able to obtain it, because you are continually sending your unconscious mind – or the whole universe, for that matter – the presupposed message that you don’t have what you desire in the first place, while in the former case, you are already inside of what you desire, and therefore will not fail to obtain it, because you are continually sending your unconscious mind the presupposed message that you already have what you desire in the first place. I found that this position of Goddard must be very valid and extremely useful.

Also, when I read “Busting Loose From the Business Game” by Scheinfeld, I was simply stunned to know that a simple mantra (or affirmation) he devised can be used to deprogram, rather than reprogram (a la NLP), our behavioral patterns, so that we may approach the so-called divine consciousness which is intrinsically devoid of all programmings.

I have been using my own version of mantra based on the original version a la Scheinfeld since I came to know about his method a couple of years ago, and have been ascertaining that once the old programmings are gone through the mantra, they would never come back to me. It is true that, when I used to extensively practice NLP exercises during the nineties (when I was staying in the UK), I had a similar feeling that the old programmings never would come back to me, but I tangibly realize that Scheinfeld’s “deprogramming method” has an “additional vertical” aspect; namely, while NLP, as a “reprogramming method,” can enable me to achieve, so to speak, horizontal self-transformation, it seems to me not to be able to make me devoid of more and more of old programmings to approach the pure divine consciousness, that is, upward, like in the case of Scheinfeld’s method.

Also, I am glad to say that I have succeeded in integrating NLP with Scheinfeld’s method to create a magick-like new technique so that the phenomenal world and the noumenal (yonder) world may be vertically transcended and fused in a cyclic and endless way.

By the way, Scheinfeld regards the phenomenal world as a holographic world, following another important thinker, Michael Talbot, who wrote “The Holographic Universe,” etc.

I will discuss the works of these holography oriented thinkers in the forthcoming newsletter.

Also, I happen to come across a quite interesting Japanese sports consultant, Fumio Nishida. I read nearly all of his books written in Japanese, mainly in oder to understand how the mind of ordinary Japanese people works, and came to know that unless one’s “amygdala” begins to feel pleasure, none of one’s efforts in the fields of sports, art, business, language learning, meditation, diet, desk work, etc., can bring any positive and enduring outcomes.

Unfortunately, Nishida never mentions any sources of his ideas either in the footnotes or in the bibliographies of his books – which I thought is quite unethical on his part and is not academic at all (he seemingly even goes so far as to recommend a kind of plagiarism to the readers (!); I think that his books would never be translated into foreign languages) – therefore, I had to begin to try to identify by myself who the worldwide authority in the study of amygdala is, and this search eventually led me to discover the name of Joseph LeDoux whom I will mention in the next paragraph.

4) I have published a total of seven recently written essays on my Japanese site. They mainly covered the topics related to my recent study of influential neuroscientists like LeDoux and Stanislas Dehaene, as well as to the important history books “Sapiens” and “Homo Deus” by Yuval Noah Harari.

I intend to translate these seven essays in my forthcoming online newsletter in English, as faithfully as the original texts possible.


PS: I have been encouraged by an adviser to write a several thousand pages long book in English, bound in sheep-skin, about human consciousness. Well, I now think that I would like to write an at least several hundred pages long book on the history of human consciousness, in which the contents of the forthcoming newsletter will certainly be incorporated in some form or another. For this purpose, I may need to dedicate myself to scholarly research hopefully with some kind of sponsorship, which also should cover my current work as an epistemological modeler and/or innovation modeling consultant.

Posted in Innovation Modeling Work, Online Newsletter | Comments Off on About the forthcoming online newsletter/How I can be an innovation modeling consultant