What's Actually Happening: APHS Frame & Field Podcast

This is What's Actually Happening, the APHS Frame and Field Podcast.

I'm Jim Zboran.

Each week we look at how human systems actually organize themselves through meaning, through frames, through the interpretation that's already running before effort begins.

Today we're joined with Chantelle Neufeld, and Chantelle is a first-time reader of the APHS papers, and we've been kind of working through all of the papers, starting with number one, now we're at four.

So more than kind of, we actually are.

So Chantelle, thank you so much for joining us and for interacting with the work and for bringing your perspectives to it.

I'm happy to be here.

This is fun.

Yeah.

Thank you, Chantelle.

Tell the listeners a little bit more about yourself, if they haven't tuned in before.

Oh, okay.

Well, I guess I'm a fellow hypnotherapist.

We met on a training, and I've listened to your other podcast episodes, and we have similar values and outlooks, and so I was very curious to read these papers that you wrote and really, I don't know, fine-tune them, integrate them, and yeah, I'm finding it really valuable in my personal life and my professional life to apply these different ideas.

Excellent.

So you've read the fourth one.

We're going to discuss the fourth one today.

What kind of, whatever you feel comfortable sharing, but what kind of differences have you been noticing, or how have you been noticing those differences appearing?

Well, so my background is that I was raised in a cult, and so coming from that background,

applying these lenses that are not so fixed and structured, and like, you know, you have

to have these beliefs in order to have such and such an outcome, to have more of a flexible

lens put on things, and having the idea of orientation, it's just been really helpful

to navigate things and to open new opportunities that weren't there before.

Like, yeah, it's just, it's just brand new.

I feel like I've up-leveled in the video game.

Yeah, excellent, excellent.

Well, that's what the papers are supposed to do, actually.

Oddly, or ironically, they really aren't, they really, really more describe the field.

They don't really tell you what to do, but in describing the field, we begin to see things.

And you said that weren't there before, but I wonder, were they actually there before?

And just obviously, there's thousands of things in our environment that we could notice.

We can only see seven plus or minus at a time, right?

Yes, exactly.

And so really, the orientation gives the perspective that we're viewing things from, that allows us to see things that are there.

And if we move our perspective somewhere else, or we change our orientation, we will see different things that were there before, but we couldn't do anything with them.

So really, the doing things with something is not the field.

It's what you see that the field begins to reveal, isn't it?

Yes, I keep seeing the kaleidoscope.

As a kid, when you have those and you turn it around and you see all those colors moving, it's like just a small shift in perception, it can change everything.

And then you're experiencing something brand new or in a different light.

Exactly.

Rearranges all the bits and pieces and the colors and makes new patterns.

And yeah, absolutely.

So excellent.

So really, what I want to have happen from these papers is happening.

This is really what it's about.

But it's not designed to tell anybody what to do or anything at all like that.

As you pointed out, there's really no requirements.

It's really just describing in a model form patterns that I've seen and many people have seen, and I've learned them from other people and I've developed my own insights, but they're there.

We just have to start looking at what they might mean.

That's all APHS does.

Really, what the patterns are, not even what they mean.

What they mean, why they got there, why they're there, what is their purpose, APHS doesn't go into.

That's all kinds of different fields from science to faith and all kinds of things may have answers, but that's not what APHS is looking to do.

It's looking to describe how human systems change in a changing environment and when change happens, how that happens, and when change is forced, why sometimes that doesn't happen.

And so it's really looking to describe patterns that are there, but it really doesn't say what to do with them.

Now, there are applications that can grow from that.

So in fact, I was working with applications from other people that I learned and eventually applications that I had been developing.

But from there, I realized that I needed to define the deeper thing that was happening or at least identify it so that I can separate out what the core was that application could be built from.

And so in other words, rather than building applications from applications and degrading it further from reality and further from usefulness, what is really the thing there, the reality, but not in the sense of what is ultimately true, but reality in the sense of what works?

What is it doing?

Even if I can't explain why it got there, what works?

And so the APHS papers are an attempt to explain what works, but without locking it into the level of, you have to believe this, because the test in this system, in the environment is, okay, does it work or not?

Is it producing results?

It's really trying to figure out how human systems that are self-organizing systems, how are they self-organizing?

And then the question becomes, well, how can we harness that?

And that's where the applications come in.

How can we harness that?

But the interesting thing is that even just getting those perceptions, those orientations, just the knowing of it begins to change our perspective.

In a sense, we're really building our own applications as we go, just by having that different perspective.

What do you think about that?

Well, yeah, as you were just talking, I was reminded of that parable that you shared in this fourth paper about how they invented pulley systems and they invented waterways and all these things, but they didn't necessarily have the truth to work from.

They were just working with what's useful.

Yes, exactly.

They could observe patterns, but they were in their system and they could observe patterns within their systems, but they weren't standing outside the system.

So they couldn't really see the truth, quote unquote, but they could see what was happening and they could start to identify patterns and then start to harness what those patterns, what they can do with what they knew would be outcomes from those patterns.

And in that way, they really were able to do a lot of useful things and improve their lives, not by being outside of the system and understanding the system as a whole, but they were able to take what they could experience from within the system, within the perspective of being in the system, and then begin to make that useful.

Yeah, like it didn't really matter that they hadn't figured out why everything was working or the specifics or anything like that.

It just was the basic question of, is this useful rather than is this true?

They were working on the useful thing.

Yeah.

Right.

It's really using useful as the ruler of whether something is valid or not.

Now, something might be valid in an application, but not ultimately true or not true in many other applications.

And that's okay.

That's just the nature of the world.

We don't know everything.

And so we kind of have to live with that.

But all too often, I think that people feel very uncomfortable with that.

Oh yeah, people are uncomfortable with uncertainty.

It reminds me of, I think it was an NLP class, we learned a quote that said, the one with the most flexibility controls the system.

Yes, that's a presupposition of NLP.

Yeah.

Exactly.

Yeah.

But it reminds me a bit of that.

It very much is that.

Exactly.

Because when you can handle uncertainty, you can be more flexible.

When you can be more flexible, you have more options.

And when you have more options, you can usually have more of an advantage in life.

And then you pick the most useful one for you, which isn't necessarily the most useful one for others or your therapist or...

Oh, and it won't be.

And it won't be the most useful for them because they have different perspectives and they're working in different personal terrains.

They're organizing towards different things and they have different resources and different challenges.

So it will probably be different.

I think that's one of the strengths with APHS that I was really going for was I really wanted to distill out what is the essence of the thing so that the applications could be more widely adopted.

And so I think I was successful in that.

And the nice thing is, even if it's wrong, you know, APHS...

It doesn't matter.

It's not about truth, right or wrong, or any of that stuff.

Yeah, for sure.

And yet, oddly, it's not saying truth doesn't matter now, is it?

No, exactly.

It's not saying that.

It's just saying that we're not talking about that.

Right.

It says, I don't really know, but I want to talk about this so we can do something with this.

Yes, exactly.

Exactly.

Go ahead.

When I was reading from your paper, what stood out to me is like the spine of everything.

I wrote it down here.

It says, this field invites verification through use, not acceptance through argument.

Absolutely.

I've been in situations where I've argued positions for decades of my life.

And eventually, I really realized that it really just doesn't make any difference to argue things with people.

And so, you know, I think that probably that desire to argue was really actually a desire for me to lock down some solid truth.

And so, in a sense, iron was sharpening iron.

And so, what I believed to be true was more clarified and became more sophisticated through use in that way.

However, it really didn't end up doing much good for myself or other people.

Yeah, it was just about being uncomfortable, being uncertain.

Yes, exactly.

And so, once I realized or I came to the understanding that I'm not going to know everything and I don't need to know everything.

And in fact, you know, nobody does.

So, there's no requirement that I do, you know, out of everybody in the world, I'm not required to know either.

Now, that doesn't mean that many, many people don't think they know.

And many, many people will argue that they know.

But I recognize that now is, OK, they are not comfortable holding ambiguity themselves.

But once again, it's not to say there's no such thing as truth.

And it's not to say that some truths are better than others.

But the truth, but better than others is more, is it useful than is it true, right?

Yeah.

My daughter and I were having a conversation this week.

She's an adult and she's like, Mom, you see everything through the lens of relationships.

And I'm like, sorry, but that's just how I'm wired.

And so, I was seeing the paper that you wrote through the lens of relationships.

And when you meet somebody new and you kind of enter into a new relationship, you don't know if they're as excited about it as you are.

You don't know if they're going to text you back.

You know, you have to hold a lot of ambiguity.

And for someone with a sort of an anxious attachment style, that can be a bit of a challenge.

But this lens is very helpful.

You know, it's just like their truth can be different than mine.

Their timetable can be different than mine.

And I'm good with that.

You know.

It's a different orientation, isn't it?

Yeah.

Yeah, exactly.

Yeah.

Yeah.

And I think that's really a key to life.

I'm not saying there's an ultimate truth, but I think it's a key to life, is to pay attention to the orientations and everything else becomes a little bit more clear and sorts itself out a little bit quicker.

I had an interview this week, too, and I used it with my interview.

How did that work?

It worked really well.

I wasn't nervous at all.

And I'm usually nervous during an interview.

But this one, it was just like, it doesn't matter where it goes.

I'm just going to be myself and answer the first thing that comes to mind.

And that's going to have to be OK.

I've prepped enough.

And yeah, exactly.

It wasn't like I was like, you know, I think of it as dog energy and cat energy, right?

Like the dog energy is so excited to see you and jumps up on you.

And sometimes it can be too much.

Right.

But the cat energy is like you let them come to you.

So I was like, well, let's let's try that on for this interview.

Very good.

And in trying it on, you learn something and then you adjust.

But you don't have to be pre committed to a certain thing.

And then, you know, wonder what's wrong when it didn't work.

You know, maybe it just didn't work.

It's just an experiment.

Exactly, exactly, exactly.

And that's an orientation.

When we look at life as an experiment, that's that's an orientation to life.

And there are many orientations we could have that are very helpful.

And there are many orientations that are not helpful.

And unfortunately, what we learn from people is usually, you know, growing up and in our cultures, oftentimes they're unhelpful, maybe not ultimately unhelpful.

Maybe they were helpful in certain settings and certain times, but they become not helpful in other settings in different times.

And then we get stuck because we think they're universals.

Yeah.

When I was reading your fourth paper, I wrote something very similar.

Healthy orientation evolves, allows multiple interpretations and stays provisional.

And unhealthy orientation demands certainty, requires allegiance and resists change.

Absolutely.

Absolutely.

And my primary application that really APHS grew out of because I was seeing the need to really define, well, what's the operating things here?

What are the active ingredients and what is like metaphor and not so much activating, you know, or story and not so much activating because it's all metaphor, really.

But it was like the prime application for me, the prime application is my timeline surfing.

And you're describing it perfectly.

It's how to navigate a self-organizing system around us as self-organizing systems.

So we're moving, it's moving.

And I liken it to surfing your timeline.

And if you're surfing your timeline, you're on the field of the wave that's unfolding now, but you can't commit to anything.

You have to hold what's immediate and then you choose as you go.

And what you were describing there is, yeah, if you're on a surfboard and the wave's there, if you're locked in on a certain thing, you're not going to, you're going to, you're going to go under, you've got to be riding that wave as it happens.

But it's more than just letting the wave carry you.

You've got to direct yourself to go where you want to go with it, but you have to, you're not controlling the wave, you're responding.

But the wave is responding to you in the sense that it's carrying you where you want to go.

Even though you're not...

Co-creation.

It's co-creation.

And it's APHS that makes it possible to hold that position that we don't have to know, that we're self-organizing systems and we're changing and how it changes.

You know, so really that is a key application, the not holding too tightly to a particular outcome and seeing what happens, but using your, the way I put it is internal intention and external intention.

And internal intention is where the person can choose and they have control over that, but they're operating in an external world as well.

So what's internal intention is really working with non-material things.

It's ideas and thoughts and imagination and emotions, but we don't have control over the external world, in my opinion.

But the external world is self-organizing and it's organizing in response to what's there and I'm there.

And so it's responding at some level to me.

So my external intention isn't so much, okay, I'm going to create the difference in the external world by my intention.

Rather, I'm going to influence it by my internal intention, but doing things, you know, in a timeline surfer's world, the now is all important, doing things in the now that the external world will respond to.

And it's a co-creation in that it's not like, okay, here's what I want.

And then it gives it, it's like, okay, we're going to get there.

And sometimes it comes fast and sometimes it doesn't.

Yeah, it's very energetic.

Yeah, it's all energetic.

It's all about like, you know, if you're trying to manipulate things or if you're trying to be something or, you know, instead of just being open to what comes along.

Yes.

And that's a very key element.

And I would put a nuance there.

You have to be open actively.

There has to be.

You have to have some intention.

There has to be the intention and that intention will require action.

But you will know when the action is right for your intention from what unfolds.

And then you could take that way.

And sometimes it unfolds immediately.

I mean, it's fast.

And sometimes it's a process and you have to get there.

But it doesn't matter.

It's all your orientation in going there in your intention in getting that.

You will begin self-organizing towards that.

So you will begin becoming that person who does that.

But you're not in a vacuum.

The external world is organizing too.

And it's self-organizing too.

And it's responding to what you're doing as it organizes itself.

And it's not organizing for you, but it's responsive to you.

And so, in a sense, don't take that metaphor too far.

As within, so without, as some people like to say.

But it's more about balancing your energy and maintaining your sovereignty versus trying to manipulate the outside world to reflect your ideals.

It's all about that.

Now, APHS doesn't go so much into that.

It more defines and describes what's there.

But applications will then do that.

Like my timeline surfing application does that.

It says, OK, here's what you can do with this.

There's the environment.

Now, here's what you can do with it to make things happen the way you want them to happen or harness them or co-create.

And so this is where the APHS becomes valuable.

It's not so much in the field.

It becomes very valuable.

It becomes very valuable because it allows you to get orientations that will, you as a self-organizing system, will build your own applications just on the fly, right, as you're finding.

But you can also, for a practitioner, a practitioner can begin to build their own applications based on this, like I've done with timeline surfing and others.

I have a new book coming out, Recursive Becoming.

And that is actually already out.

It just came out last week.

And it's in a different area.

It's in the area of longevity.

And it considers childhood not to be a phase, but to actually be a method used by a self-organizing system to begin to orient itself to like a completely unknown environment.

And because of that method that's used in the childhood phase, the organism grows like leaps and bounds.

And it interacts beautifully with the world.

And it orients itself very well to the world.

But people lose that because they begin to lock in.

After the first 20 years, they begin to lock in things that should not be locked in or don't need to be locked in.

And they lose the ability for all practical purposes to use the method of childhood to really vibrantly live within a changing environment and an environment where you don't know things and you don't know how it's changing.

And you're not in control, but you can still make choices.

And so recursive childhood recaptures that.

But that's an application.

And some of the methodology in there is, there's not a lot of methodology as such, but the underlying methodology that can be drawn from examples is APHS based.

So applications are really what makes the difference.

But ourselves as organizing systems are already creating applications from the new knowledge.

And the new knowledge is what the field is.

It's not inventing it, but it's exposing it.

It's giving words to it.

And once that self-organizing system locks onto those words, they're like, oh, okay, now I know what to do.

And then it's like, oh, okay.

And then it starts to go in those orientations.

So the self-organizing system navigates the terrain.

And the APHS helps to define the terrain, not so much in a real sense, like an ultimate truth sense, but in the sense of, okay, we can navigate by this.

And so this will bring us where we want to go.

Yeah.

Well, that reminds me of the parable that you were sharing about how they created the different systems to make their mills and everything.

Yeah.

Absolutely.

It's a, this was one of the most fun papers for me to write.

It's probably in terms of the form of it, it's probably the oldest in my thinking.

All of it, it's all mishmash together over 40 years, but probably about 20 years.

I started thinking about that parable and it was, I was going into a lot of new ideas, but I didn't really know if they were true.

I didn't really, I suspected they weren't really true.

Yeah.

And then you're just like, does it matter?

Because this is useful.

Well, that's the thing, because previous to that beginning, that thinking on my part, I would need to know the truth of it before I really would engage with it.

But the problem is by not really engaging with some things, I couldn't really begin to inhabit them and they couldn't really become intuitive.

And try them on to see if they fit.

Yeah, exactly.

But, but they never became in my part of my wardrobe.

And so, you know, and the question is, you know, do I have to reject ideas when I know that the underlying system, no, you know, in my opinion, that's not really what's going on.

And then that was, so now that perspective, I really needed to work out, well, how could I, how can I engage things that I know, or at least don't believe are true, and yet still get what works from them.

And, you know, so, and so really it was, I began to realize, well, you know, you know, not to walk off the edge of a building or a cliff and, you know, why no gravity, but, you know, what, what if I didn't know gravity, it would still work the same way.

And, you know, you know, if I walk off a cliff and, or, you know, the edge of a building, you know, I still am going to learn from experience in life what happens, and I don't need to explain it.

And so at that point, I realized, well, or it became more clear to me that really things can be very true in a model sense that for outcomes, to predict outcomes and to, make novel applications of what you think is true, but you don't really have to know what's true.

And so I developed the idea of the, you know, of primitive tribe and beneath dwellers as kind of a way I was, I'm almost sure that the first time I started using that particular metaphor was on a phone with somebody trying to sell me coaching.

And we had some kind of a conversation and, and I mentioned it, he said, I'm going to use that.

So I knew it was a good one.

I didn't, it wasn't fully developed the way it is in the paper, but that was the seed of it, that thinking that came from that time.

That was about 20 years ago.

So, so the paper really goes back a ways in a, in a very, you know, in the form is, it's really, you know, what it was way back then.

But it's, it's evolved greatly in terms of the structure of it, but, you know, the way it presented, but.

Yeah.

Like my cult background, it was a really helpful metaphor about those like beneath dwellers and the superstitions people have and the different beliefs people have and how it can seem so foreign to people, to others.

But to them, it's like, that's their only truth at the time.

Exactly.

And, and that truth at the time, it, it has a value to the person at the time, but oftentimes what's resourceful in one setting is not resourceful later.

And then of course things, you know, there's no end of, you know, examples of where people manipulate things too.

So it doesn't mean that it's always useful for, for the person believing it.

It's, it's, but it, it has some kind of a usefulness.

They think it's useful at that time.

And they, they.

Well, I mean, every client that's ever come to you has come with their, you know, protective walls that are useful to them.

Exactly.

Were useful to them, but are not useful anymore.

And they're trying to figure out how do I get past this wall?

Exactly.

Yeah.

And it, and, and in APHS views it, that's not a problem.

That's the, that's, that's a sign of, of, of the way humans grow.

And so it's actually a sign that things are working, that, okay, something's in the way.

And the self-organizing system is now trying to figure out, well, how do I get around this?

Or how do I get through this?

Or, but we interpret as, oh, this is a problem.

When actually it's just the self-organizing system, identifying that we need to do something different.

Yeah, like this is the path.

Exactly.

So, so, and, and when people are coming for help on things, that's actually, they're, them as a self-organizing system has already moved to the, to the level of solving the problem.

They just don't, they don't, they're working out the details.

They may need somebody to show them some details they don't have, but because they're self-organizing towards a direction, they're going to recognize what details will bring them there.

And so that's why they go for coaching, but they were working out that problem a lot longer than, than that, before they realized they had a problem, what they term a problem.

But really, when you stand back and look at it, it's not a problem.

It's the self-organizing system working in the environment it's in.

And it makes complete sense what, you know, what it's doing, even if it's completely wrong.

But it makes complete sense to the person doing it at that time.

They just recognize that the outcomes aren't what I want.

And so something...

Yeah, they didn't necessarily make themselves flexible so they could see all the choices that they had.

And so...

Exactly, exactly.

And the orientation and, you know, that's the, the needed thing is to shift that.

Exactly.

So they can see more choice and then they would pick the one that works best for them.

Exactly.

The way I really started learning that was, you know, in, as I worked with hypnosis and these ideas, I really realized that it's probably predated hypnosis.

I forget exactly where I started realizing it.

But, but people would be focusing on the problem and they were taught to focus on the problem and they were told to work on the problem.

And so they're focusing on the problem.

But there were other solutions, but they weren't seeing them because they were focusing on the problem.

So they were focused on this, like in the entire field, they were focused on one little tiny corner.

And what I was found I was actually doing that was helping people was, was drawing them back from that corner, giving them space to not have to focus on the problem for a moment.

And then, and then bringing them back where they could see the whole field.

And then once they identified what the solution was within their field, I helped them focus on that.

And then we brought it all the way to, now we focus on the solution and focus on the solution.

And then the problem, they didn't see the problem anymore.

So in other words, it wasn't a big deal.

And then they could solve it.

And then hypnosis was a very powerful tool to be able to do that.

But really that orientation is going to determine what you can see, what you can't see.

If you're only oriented to problems, that's all you're going to see.

If you orient, if you, if you weren't into solutions, you can begin to navigate to a different part of the map.

Yeah.

Like how I learned it is when, when we have the brainwaves that are more in our conscious mind, we're more into like, you know, right and wrong, good and bad.

Like we're really looking for truth or not true.

But then in hypnosis, it relaxes your body so much, you know, certain types of hypnosis, obviously, that you get more into like your heart space where, where everything has more possibility and it's not so black and white.

And you're able to see like a, a big perspective.

And that's, that's why I fell in love with that method of therapy because it's just so much more efficient.

Yeah.

Yeah.

What, what I think is going on there is heart space is a good way to put it because really that's, to me, to me, that is really looking at the other than conscious and the head space, you know, contra to that would be really the conscious mind.

And really within Western cultures, especially the conscious mind is made supreme.

And it's seen as the, the, the controller or the, or the boss of the other than conscious.

And it doesn't really work that way.

And that's where problems come in.

But some people think that's all that there is.

They do, they do.

And, and even though in their daily experience, they're not, they're always in the other, other than conscious, but they don't realize that.

But when the focus moves from, and this is where hypnosis is working with the other than conscious.

So when we move away from the conscious, we move, we just naturally go to the other unconscious.

That's how we move away.

And that's when we go to that heart space you're talking about.

And that's where, you know, the head space is what's trying to, to, to, to lock onto, you know, the solution and, and, and the truth.

It has to know the truth and has to figure things out.

The other than conscious doesn't care.

Yeah.

So like, yeah, we were in that training together.

They were, they were doing some examples of some people.

And so then someone brought a problem.

And then the question was like, what is this problem kind of like?

It's kind of like what, you know, and then there, other than conscious brought a metaphor and then there, and then they worked with the metaphor, not with, you know, problem, you know.

That's, that's the active ingredient in that method.

It, it, it, it, it actually brings you into hypnosis with that question and hypnosis I'm using in a very technical sense, not in a, like you go into a trance type thing.

You do go into trance, but it's very mild.

But simply by asking that question, you're, you're appealing to the, to the, your creative side.

And you're, you're now, you're now directing the mind to make a metaphor.

So now it must go to the other than conscious at some level in order to make a metaphor because the conscious mind can't make metaphors.

It could, but it's, it'll be clunky.

Yeah.

Yeah.

Because it, because it will be contrived.

Whereas the metaphor that the other conscious mind, you know, corresponds point by point to the reality of what's going on on the inside.

And so that's, that's, that's, see, there, there's a good example of how applications when they're, there's active ingredients in applications that make all the difference.

And you, you create the application to, to, to trigger or to bring in those active ingredients.

Boom.

You know, you, you, you've got it.

And that's other than conscious is, is like a vital active ingredient in APHS.

It's, it's how, it's how this whole thing works.

Yeah.

I feel like that's what these papers are kind of describing or trying to put words to put words to previously.

The next paper goes into a real meat of it.

It's, it, this was, that was another really fun one for me to write was the, it's about the, it's a theory of mind for APHS and a theory of mind.

There's, there's a number of theories, theories of minds and, and are they true?

Well, who knows, you know, so that's why it was very important to, but can they be functional?

Yes, they can be absolutely functional.

And so, you know, I think my theory of mind is very functional.

It's very functional within the world of APHS, at least, you know, and so I believe it's functional, you know, everywhere, but that's my opinion.

I'm excited to read it next week.

You will enjoy it.

Yes.

It's you'll have heard some of those things in there.

Maybe some things will be a little different perspective.

Maybe they won't be, but this, this paper was necessary to come before that paper to help people understand what I'm looking at here is a model, not truth, but the model can be true in application.

And really that's what I'm most looking at.

And I don't have to lock on, on an interpretation of the model to use the model and, or I can have my own interpretation of what reality is and how it works.

And I can still use that model.

I don't have to, you know, I don't have to lose those to take, to take on this model that might be effective for them.

So it is definitely going there.

You're, you're, you're, you're other than conscious is, is pointing the way.

Pointing the way there, but I think you're going to really enjoy it.

It's, it's a, it's a bit more dense.

It's a little bit longer.

I'll send it to you a little earlier than I've been sending the previous papers to give you a chance to interact with a little bit, you know, as much as you like, but it is definitely going there.

And I think that is really where, you know, hypnosis is, is really a great tool to, to go there.

But in my opinion you know, in what I see and what I found hypnosis is the active ingredient, but it's not the hypnosis itself.

It's, it's hypnosis is the doorway to that learning capacity that we have at another than conscious level.

And it's that learning capacity at other than conscious level that is the active ingredient in everything, NLP, everything.

Yeah.

They just have a little different doorways to get there.

But, but the active ingredient is, is our capacity to, you know, to shape things by metaphor, like instantly and, and, and really.

Like speak the language of the other than conscious.

Yes, exactly.

But, but they won't, but because it's an application of what I think is working they, they might, they might not even know it themselves.

But, but, you know, they are picking up on what they see and they're, they're accurately using it.

And APHS tries to define those things and give language to them.

But many people have seen these things.

And when they're reading your papers, they're just recognizing them.

Well, that's the important thing.

That's how I felt anyway.

And to me, that's the important thing because that, that is the validation that these aren't just, these aren't just my ideas necessarily, but they are, they are accurate representations of what other people can see too.

All I'm doing is I'm, I'm putting language to something that's there.

I'm not trying to invent something.

If I'm inventing something, I'm inventing applications that.

I feel like you're, you're shining a light on something that wasn't written there, but that we just didn't have the words for.

Exactly.

And, or, or enough words for, or maybe with a different emphasis, but, but yes, that's what APHS is, Applied Philosophy of Human Systems.

It's a field that isn't really saying, you know, what you need to do with it.

It's not saying why it's there.

It's just shining a light on what's there.

And, and then it's up to people to determine what that means, how it got there, if they need that, or it's, it's up to them to determine, well, how can I use this?

You know, to, to my advantage in my application.

And it's like handing somebody a compass and telling them exactly what they should do with it.

When, you know, you, it's ridiculous.

Like they know how they, they know where they want to go.

Exactly.

Exactly.

In their own way.

And once again, we come back to orientation as really being key with you, with your metaphor of the compass.

And yeah, the compass, you can show somebody how to use it.

You can, you could give it the principles of it, but ultimately what's important is where they want to go with it.

And so what you're really doing is you're equipping them to go where they want to go, you know, by, by helping them to understand the field of what a compass is.

Right.

Yeah.

Not only that, but like the, the whole GPS idea too, or even when you're, you're driving and you need a reroute, right?

Like.

Yeah, exactly.

But it's like the person themselves is the only one who knows, you know, the, the way for them and anyone else trying to tell them how to do it is a little ridiculous.

Yeah.

Well, it could be helpful, but it's up to the person being told to determine.

Yeah.

Ideas could be like more choice is always helpful, but telling them which choice is not.

Exactly.

That to me is, is really, it takes away from a human's free will.

And, and to me, that is the freedom to choose themselves.

And to me, that's, that's like ultimate, you know?

For sure.

Yeah.

So Chantelle, what, what do you know now from this paper, having read paper four in book one, so paper 010.04, what do you know now that you didn't know before?

I feel like the useful versus truth thing really stood out with this paper.

Like I might've read it in previous ones, but this one is where it really solidified and integrated.

I feel like I'm going to use that going forward in everything.

It's like not looking for the truth or is this true for me?

Is this right for me?

You know, are they, are they respecting my boundary?

You know, like those kinds of things or is this useful in this situation or is it not?

Is there a more useful thing and, and trying to be more flexible and open to possibilities rather than overthinking things and trying to like, just put my finger on specifics and be like, this is the right way for me right now, you know, like being so dogmatic about it versus just being open to see what happens and, and being more comfortable with that uncertainty and ambiguity.

Sounds like you're surfing your timeline.

Oh yeah.

Awesome.

Well, Chantelle, is there any last thoughts or words that you'd like to share before we close up today?

I can't think of any.

Awesome.

Well, this was a fun little paper, I thought, and I hope that you enjoyed reading it well as well.

And more importantly, I think you've got some important orientations from it, which to me says it's successful.

So thank you.

Welcome.

Thanks for listening to What's Actually Happening?

The founding papers of Applied Philosophy of Human Systems.

Those papers are available at APHSfield.com, APHSFIELD.com, including everything we discussed today.

I look forward to continuing the conversation with you next week.

Until then, see what you notice.