tele and rapport Fw: tele and language

[Ann Hale]

In 2004, on grouptalk we discussed tele and humor, tele and affect, and I stored these discussions as they relate so much to sociometry matters.  I prefer Moreno's term "tele" as it speaks to the human being's capacity to be receptive on many levels, as part of their "nature". I like so much Marcia's take on the word (act).   Rapport taps into a similar source, but I associate the word with a learned response assisting the therapeutic process.  People understand picking up "vibes" or having "hunches"....use these if you have difficulty explaining the word of Moreno's.

Read further if you are interested in some of the old posts I sent on the subject. nn Hale
----- Original Message ----- 
From: Ann Hale 
To: Grouptalk at asgpp.org 
Sent: Tuesday, July 27, 2004 2:20 AM
Subject: Re: tele and language


I belive that Moreno chose the word tele because it was close to "telepathic"  I believe he was wanting to account for the phenomenon which occurs when people are doubling another person. And, specifically what occurs when people are actively tuning-in whilst in the altered state during a psychodrama. And, further, to account for what he had observed happening after a person became truly adept after "field training"  with prolonged exposure to the spontaneity state, the auxiliary world of psychodrama, and role training as a double of people in a wide range of psychological states, including psychosis.  

Nowadays we speak about electromagnetic fields, that thoughts actually leave energetic prints, disturbing the electromagetic field of a place and the space between people.  People can become trained intuitives, and all sorts of psychic phenomenon have been described in texts, research reports.  I definitely think tele is connected to the limbic resonance (which I wrote about on grouptalk last year when we were discussing tele) I have saved that discussion if we need to access it again.
>From Feb, 2004

I had a short discussion with Peter Howie and Diana Jones, about tele, specifically stating my position that I had no confidence there was such a thing as negative tele. If you are able to truly see and know a person as they really are and not a projectionnof an image onto them as happens with transference, than how can negative tele be possible?  The only scenario I can currently imagine is if the person is born with no soul;

>From 2004:
 I am re-reading Thomas Lewis" The Theory of Love and looking at "limbic resonance" as the source of telic connection.  To quote: (p 64)   "To the animals able to bridge the gap between minds, limbic resonance is the door to communal connection. Limbic resonance supplies the wordless harmony we see everywhere but take for granted===between mother and child, between a boy and his dog, lovers holding hands across a restaurant table."

"Because limbic states can leap between minds,feelings are contagious, while notions are not.'  I am going to be looking into what the HeartMath people have to say and read further about the dynamics between heart/mind and what can account for telic response


--------------------------------------------------------------------------------


_______________________________________________
Grouptalk mailing list
Grouptalk at asgpp.org
http://asgpp.org/mailman/listinfo/grouptalk_asgpp.org
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://grouptalkweb.org/pipermail/list_grouptalkweb.org/attachments/20090128/44c88e1f/attachment.html>