I would have to say the ease in which you can do it. And the value of that is: your ability become flexible. and as i think about the significance of being flexible, I would say to yourself that a higher state of being whould be quite significante.

Now if you were to tell me how easy it is to meta spin and blend that with a sense of pleasure while at the same time wrapping that up in a blanket of flexibility you may begin to feel a wonderfull state of being. Now, bring all of this to bare on the little problems that you face today and notice how easy and flexible your state of being has become.

I fell for the bait-and-switch. I've been marginally following your blog because i've heard great things about you on the mindlist (no longer a member). And i even heard a couple tapes of yours a while ago. So i like ya.

However, the meta-states that you refer to (drawing from heavenly hall's work) aren't exactly the stuff that philosophers talk about. I'm just nitpicking of course.

A state of being is way different from a meta-state. If you were to use Michael Halls work you'd have to get into the one book that makes sense called Figuring Out People. In it he outlined a rather wonderful categorization for meta-programs and meta-meta-programs.

You'll find what you need to refer to states of being somewhere in this realm. His discussions of meta-states (including his rants on time and stuff) aren't rigorous enough to talk intelligently about the relationship between primary states and states of being without referring to sometime outside the paradigm of meta-states.

Be Well

However, the meta-states that you refer to (drawing from heavenly hall's work) aren't exactly the stuff that philosophers talk about. I'm just nitpicking of course.

A state of being is way different from a meta-state. If you were to use Michael Halls work you'd have to get into the one book that makes sense called Figuring Out People. In it he outlined a rather wonderful categorization for meta-programs and meta-meta-programs.

You'll find what you need to refer to states of being somewhere in this realm. His discussions of meta-states (including his rants on time and stuff) aren't rigorous enough to talk intelligently about the relationship between primary states and states of being without referring to sometime outside the paradigm of meta-states.

Be Well