backnumbers

@


A Psychonaut's Monolog

Office Kitaoka Inc.
Vol 007: 2018.9.4

"A Psychonaut's Monolog" Online Newsletter

*************************************************************
Guhen Kitaoka, as a psychonaut versed both in Western psychology
and in Eastern philosophy, expounds "An Integral Epistemology
for Enlightenment," as a new methodology for perpetuating
the ultimate state of human consciousness.
*************************************************************

"EPM FAQ #2"

Latest Info: Guhen's first "EPM (Expansive Psychology Method)" workshop in English was held on the 31st August. It went rather well in his opinion, despite the rather small number of attendants.

The second EPM evening workshop is scheduled to be held on the 28th September.

The details of the second workshop are shown at:

http://www.office-kitaoka.co.jp/en/works/eve/

Following the last issue of the current online newsletter, I would like to continue, in this issue, to answer the FAQ questions related to my first workshop in particular, and to my EPM work in general.

<< EPM FAQ #2 >>

Q05: I heard that your presentation at the beginning of the first workshop rather "confused" the audience.

A05: Yes, that may indeed have been the case.

Each time I delivered an NLP workshop/course in front of my Japanese students, I always gave my opening presentation for a certain length of time (usually lasting for from half an hour to one hour), in the way that it was structured in a non-linear and factual way, with lots of "nested loops." This style of presentation was what I had been taught by the four most important NLP trainers.

During my first workshop in English of last week, I did the same thing which I had always been doing in front of the Japanese audience for years. When I finished my opening talks, and began to ask the attendants to ask me questions and/or make comments, a couple of them "complained" by indicating that they had had a hard time to follow my stories and to identify my purpose(s) of continuously telling these kinds of apparently irrelevant stories to them for more than half an hour. They further asked me to try to make my presentation much more linear and logical.

I found these comments from the audience "extremely" interesting, all the more because this kind of style of presentation chosen by the co-founders and co-developers of NLP, which is epitomized by their preferred non-linear use of "clip-charts," has apparently been working well in the English speaking markets, and also because practically no Japanese student of mine so far has complained about it, as far as I remember - probably, they have not questioned my presentational style, either because they got too confused to make any comment or because nobody couldn't dare to challenge an authoritative figure in Japan, or probably both.

After this apparent complaint from the audience, I flexibly changed my presentation style, and began to intermingle with them in the form of epistemological Q&A discussions (an attendant gave me his impression after the workshop that I had "accepted comments from every kind" from the audience). From this moment on, the rest of the workshop went rather well on the whole, including the demonstration exercise I introduced to the audience. This is more or less what happened in my first workshop.

Incidentally, with regard to the confusion I apparently initially caused to the attendants, I could say that my unconscious mind may have chosen this "awkward" way of delivering my work in a "deliberate" and premeditated way, although this statement of mine may sound outrageous to the readers.

In fact, genius hypnotists like Milton H. Erickson never hypnotize their clients "in a linear way." They know that linear hypnotic induction doesn't lead the hypnotized subjects into very deep states of trance. They tend not to fail to occasionally momentarily wake them up before inducing them to a still deeper entranced state.

For instance, in a very famous Youtube video, Erickson deliberately asked (or rather forced) the female subject having a catalepsy on her right arm to come out of the trance. When she was greatly surprised to out of the blue see her paralyzed arm, he told her something like "Now, you are momentarily out of trance. And your great surprise to see your rigid arm now MAKES you easily go again into a still deeper and deeper hypnotic state."

(Here, Erickson was using one of the Milton model tools, i.e., "violation of causality," meaning that, although, according to NLP, there can exist no such causality as "X makes you do Y," he dared to use this very violation to forcibly further hypnotize the subject.)

Likewise, when a presenter wants to establish intimate rapport with his or her audience, it is said that he or she cannot do so in a linear way. I strongly believe that the repetitions of establishing and interrupting rapport with the audience in an intermittent way greatly assist the presenter to ultimately succeed in eventually establishing the deepest rapport possible with them. And that is exactly why I began my workshop of last week by "mildly confusing" my audience (!).

Be that as it may, this idiosyncratic style of presentation of mine is what I have been consciously and explicitly taught by the NLP trainers whose methodologies I have thought work extremely well.

Incidentally, the above is one of the examples of what EPM can teach its learners as step-by-step procedures in an explicit way, so that they may become personal geniuses in presentation, human communication, teaching, etc.

Q06: What were "epistemological" reactions from the attendants of the workshop to your EPM work?

A06: One of the attendants indicated during the Q&A time of the workshop that he had come to be interested in my workshop, because he had been seeking someone who might be continuing the legacy of such altered states of consciousness related works as advanced by Robert Anton Wilson, Timothy Leary and Alan Watts, all of whom are now dead.

(To this attendant, I said that I had taken part in a training workshop held by Philip Farber, who is a disciple of Robert Anton Wilson, in Holland, several years before.)

I am not sure whether this attendant was able to find a continuation of the works of such important thinkers as mentioned above in my own EPM work, but this is at least exactly what I have been INTENDING to achieve for the last 35 years. Whether I have succeeded, or will succeed, in doing so is only what time will tell (laughs).

I have consistently been of the opinion since I came back to Japan in 2001 that those who are already interested in such altered states of consciousness related thinkers as mentioned above, as well as Ken wilber, Israel Regardie, Colin Willson, Gary Lachman (who used to be a member of the pop music band "Blondie," and whose books I highly appreciate), etc., or Madam Blavatsky, Gurdjieff and Ouspensky for that matter, are exactly would-be "supporters" of my spiritual and epistemological work, which I have only recently begun to call EPM.

Unfortunately, Japanese culture as it currently stands is not "counter-culture oriented" - for me, meaning "not altered states of consciousness oriented" - and it appears that all of my Japanese students had knowledge about these great thinkers only through information found on Wikipedia. For instance, I think that nearly all of the thin and voluminous books written by Colin Wilson have been translated into Japanese, while, in my own knowledge, none of the books written by Gary Lachman, a self-claimed disciple of Colin Wilson, has been translated.

In this situation, the fact that I have to date published a total of 500 plus issues of my public and closed online newsletters in Japanese may turn out to interest the readers, because it means that I already have thousands of pages of epistemological and spiritual writing on hand albeit in Japanese, which may not have been properly appreciated by my Japanese readers to date, but which may hopefully prove one day, once translated into English, that my EPM work IS a continuation of the works of such important thinkers as mentioned on this page.

Further, another attendant sent me his post-work feedback of my workshop:

"The workshop was a good place for exchanging ideas and and getting to know more about Guhen and his presented methodology. Guhen accepted comments from every kind.

His techniques and methods, applied with empathy and understanding of the wholeness of the being can contribute to improve our state of mind and increase our awareness about what we are able to.

I wish you a lot of success in your future projects and I hope you will find good audience for it."

I was glad that my "integral work" based on both the Western and the Eastern wisdom may be understood by Westerners, all the more because this attendant indicated to me elsewhere that the exercise I had introduced during the workshop, which was "Neuro-Logical Level Alignment" using the model of "Meta Position (Witness or Observer)," would remind him again and again that he is that one [i.e., Atman and/or Brahman] in every stage, never separated, ever part of all aspects of his life (I thought that this post-work comment of his sounds extremely oriental, for which I thank him deeply).

Q07: What kinds of theories is EPM based on?

A07: It is generally said that no theories, concepts, nor hypotheses exist in NLP, but only "models" which work.

In fact, when I began to introduce the NLP "model" of "Neuro-Logical Levels" to the audience of the workshop, one attendant asked me "Do you believe in it?" - by the way, all of the participants asked their questions and/or made their own comments independently and spontaneously during the workshop, which I have never encountered in my works vi-a-vis Japanese students - I answered him "No, I don't believe in it. This is only a 'model' not unlike the molecule structure of H2O (consisting of two balls of H, a ball of O and two sticks connecting these three balls)."

To this comment of mine, another attendant asked me "Is that a truthful representation?" I said to him "I don't know either whether this model is a truthful or a pseudo representation. I don't give a shit to the truthfulness of the representation related to this model, but the sheer fact remains that this very model has enabled to me to achieve such an outcome of mine as to sustain a specific state of consciousness (e.g., enlightenment) for 86,400 seconds a day. I buy a model only if it works for me. That is the end of the story."

It appeared that the attendants of the workshop got my point.

Q08: I heard that you said in the workshop that there were three co-founders of NLP.

A08: Yes, it is everywhere said that it was two co-founders of NLP, John Grinder and Richard Bandler, who created NLP in 1975.

Yet, there has been the third co-founder named Frank Pucelik, who was one of the authors of "NLP Demystified," which I translated into Japanese.

It was Bandler and Pucelik that were delivering Gestalt like workshops to their private students at the University of California Santa Cruz (UCSC), presumably at the beginning of the seventies, who apparently were achieving higher performance than Fritz Pearls himself, the founder of Gestalt Therapy.

When Bandler approached the then linguistic professor, Grinder, to ask him to model what they were doing, he apparently first refused to do so. After Bandler's repeated insistence, Grinder finally reluctantly went to see their work, and was so impressed by it that he eventually agreed to modeling their performance as therapists and/or coaches.

This is how NLP and its first technique "Meta-model" were born.

Subsequently, Pucelik dropped out of the founding team - this story is detailed in the book "The Origins of NLP" edited by Grinder and Pucelik. Pucelik apparently currently lives in his home country, Ukraine, and works as a consultant.

© Copyright 2018, Office Kitaoka Inc. / Guhen Kitaoka. All rights internationally reserved.