Some modern ‘schools’ of psychotherapy are what is known as evaluative schools. The practitioner of their type of school does not search in the mind of his patient for the reasons why of the patient’s difficulties, for he has already convinced himself that he knows the ‘real’ reason why for everyones difficulties. Therapy (if it can be called such) with this type of practitioner is not a matter of searching for anything, it is purely a matter of the practitioner convincing the patient of the practitioner’s beliefs. As some of these beliefs seem very strange to their patients - and to most other people, come to that - it can take years to convince them. (All the difficulties in convincing are ascribed to the patient’s resistance to accepting the truth.) Even after conviction has been achieved the patient still has his unwanted condition, but he now also possesses a thoroughly convincing argument as to why he has that condition. These schools have come a long way from the definition of a workable psychotherapy: One that can vanish unwanted mental conditions. I suppose the acquisition of a set of convincing reasons why one has a mental condition is an improvement upon not having such a set, but its a very poor substitute for being free of the unwanted mental condition.
If one were to inquire into the nature of the quality or ability that is closest to life itself one would eventually arrive at the subject of knowing. Life can know. All else is the subject of methods or systems of knowing.
The basic law, or agreement, of this universe is that one will only know that which is brought into existence to be known. Thus, this universe sets a limitation upon knowing as only being possible for the class of things which are brought into existence to be known.
This law is peculiar to this universe. A being can only operate, i.e. play games within this universe while in agreement with this law. Once he starts to know outside of this law he is operating outside the universe.
The action of bringing something into existence so that it can be known is called creation. Thus, in this universe knowing is limited to those things which have been created in the universe.
It should never be considered that knowing is by nature limited to those things which are created to be known. Life can know; it can know anything, whether it has been brought into existence to be known or not. In order to operate in this universe life considers, or agrees, that it will not-know until something is brought into existence to be known.
This limitation upon knowing is the basic law, and the only basic law, that governs this universe. Other universes can be constructed upon other basic laws, but they would all be some type of limitation of knowing, for while knowing is unlimited any type of universe or game is impossible. Bear the basic law of this universe in mind as you do the Practical Exercises, for all the games you have ever become trapped in in this universe have been based upon the basic law of the universe.
Purpose, Intention, Goal and Postulate can be regarded as synonyms. A game is a contest in conviction.
Conviction, then, is an enforcement of knowingness.
Enforcement of knowingness is called importance.
Purposes are made more intense in order to make them more convincing. Thus, importance is the intensity of purpose; the degree of ‘mustness’ in that purpose. As the intensity, or importance, of a purpose approaches zero so the purpose itself approaches zero. Importance bears the same relation to purpose as cattishness does to a cat: when all the cattishness has been removed the cat has gone too. Thus, to resolve a purpose in the mind it is only necessary to address the importance of this purpose; once this has been resolved the purpose itself will approach zero and finally vanish. This is the basis of all effective psychotherapy.
Significance is the consideration of both the nature of a purpose and its importance. So significance too approaches zero as the intensity, or importance, of that purpose approaches zero. There can be no significance in the absence of importance. Thus, importance is the basis of all significance.
So any purpose, to stay in existence, requires an importance ‘rating’. But importance is an enforced knowingness, and once the importance has gone the purpose too has vanished. Thus, all purposes are systems or methods of knowing, not-knowing, making known, or making not-known.
Purposes are held in suspension in the mind by opposing purposes. Thus, a purpose can only be resolved in relation to its opposition; it can never be resolved in isolation. A pair of purposes in opposition is called a problem. Problems are the basic building blocks of games.
It is necessary to clearly differentiate between the rather loose term ‘opposite’ and the very precise term ‘opposition’. Opposition is the exact opposing postulate, whereas opposite has a much broader use. E.g. The opposite of knowing is loosely regarded as not-knowing. However, the opposition postulate to ‘To know’ is ‘To be not-known’. This is not a matter of conjecture, but of logical necessity.
Life has four basic abilities. Every purpose in life must manifest in line with one or other of these basic abilities. The totality of these manifestations regarding a purpose we call the goals package of that purpose. Thus, all possible manifestations of the goal ‘To know’ are within the To know goals package.
Thus, all possible games regarding a purpose are within its goals package. Thus all possible non-games (complementary postulate situations) regarding a purpose are within its goals package. Thus, the totality of charge (upset) on any goal is to be found within its package.
It is a fundamental error in psychotherapy to go outside a goals package looking for charge that is within the package. It is always within the package. There is no other place it can be. E.G. A man has a compulsion to drink. The totality of this problem, and all other possible problems on the subject of drinking, are within the ‘To drink’ goals package. To go searching outside the ‘To drink’ goals package for the ‘reasons why’ of his compulsion to drink is to court failure. Yet some ‘schools’ of psychotherapy maintain that the man’s compulsion to drink - and everything else about him, apparently - is to do with his infantile sex life. His sex life, both infantile and non-infantile, is within the ‘To sex’ package. His drinking life is within the ‘To drink’ package. They are separate packages, and its a fundamental error to address one in an effort to resolve the other. Its analogous to a medical doctor bandaging up a man’s toe when he has a cut finger. It may be necessary for some psychotherapists to resolve their own ‘To sex’ packages before they will be able to appreciate this simple truth. If so, then so be it.
Due to the nature of conviction (an enforced knowingness) the basic goals package is ‘To know’. All other goals packages are within this package. All other goals are methods of knowing, not-knowing, making known or making not-known.
(This truth can also be arrived at by examining the purpose of any purpose. Eventually you will arrive back at one or other of the legs of the ‘To known’ package. Once there, you can backtrack no further, for the purpose of each of these purposes is its own purpose.)
All goals packages are in exactly the same form as the ‘To know’ package.
All goals packages are addressed in exactly the same manner as the ‘To know’ package.
A goal can be general or specific. E.G. ‘To grow’ is general; ‘To grow petunias’ is specific; ‘To grow petunias in the springtime’ is even more specific. All specific versions of a goal are within the general version. Hence, only the general form of a goal is ever addressed, for all possible specifics are within the general.
Logical Note.
This section can be glossed over if desired. The purpose of the section is to demonstrate to those interested that the subject of the goals package rests upon a firm logical foundation.
The subject of logic rests upon two fundamental axioms:
1) The common class of a concept and its absence does not exist. ( x(1-x)=0. This equation is only satisfied when x is either zero or unity. Thus, in the algebra of classes (Boolean algebra)(symbolic logic) the symbols can only have the value of zero or unity.)
2) The universe can be divided into any concept and its absence. ( x + (1-x) =1.)
From these two basic axioms all other logical propositions are derived. One of these propositions states that the types of possible classes that can exist with two concepts, x,y, are four. Their sum equals the universe: unity.
xy + x(1-y) + y(1-x) + (1-x)(1-y) = 1.
(Any high school student can, by extending out the left hand side of the above equation, discover that it does in fact equal unity.)
Any goals package contains two concepts; these plus their absences (negatives) constitute the four legs of the package.
The ‘To know’ package is such a package. If we represent ‘To know’ by x, and ‘To be known’ by y, we can see from the above equation regarding two concepts that the four possible classes are:
xy This is the class To know and To be known. These are complementary postulates, and are a no-game class.
x(1-y) This is the class To know and To not be known. These are conflicting postulates, and are a game class.
y(1-x) This is the class To be known and To not-know. These are conflicting postulates, and are a game class.
(1-x)(1-y) This is the class To not-know and To not be known. These are complement -y postulates, and are a no- game class.
The sum of these four classes is the totality of the universe of the two concepts. To know and To be known. Within these four classes, then, the whole subject of knowing and being known is contained. When we consider each of these four classes from the viewpoint of ‘self’ and ‘others’ we arrive at 2x4=8 classes. When we consider each of these 8 classes from the viewpoint of ‘origin’ and ‘receipt’ we arrive at 2x8=16 classes. These 16 classes are the 16 levels we find when we examine the ‘To know’ goals package. We can equally, of course, cut the universe into any two purposes in the form ‘To -’ and ‘To be -’, and arrive at the same conclusion viz: That the whole universe of the two concepts is within that package.
Thus, we have proven within the rigors of strict logical reasoning that any goals package contains the full universe of its component concepts, and that no part of life is external to the package. In the language of the mathematician the 16 levels of the goals package are necessary and sufficient for our purposes.
All four legs of a goals package hold each other in suspension in the mind. No goal in a goals package can be erased (vanished) from the mind without also erasing the other three goals in the package. Thus, a goals package is the smallest unit that can be erased from the mind. To attempt to erase any purpose from the mind without also erasing the other three purposes in its package is merely an exercise in futility. E.G. A man has a compulsion to drink. He will never be free of his compulsion to drink until he is also free of his compulsions to not drink, to be drunk, and to not be drunk. They are addressed as a set, and they erase as a set.
The oppositions in any goals package are in the same form as the oppositions in the ‘To know’ package.
The complementary postulates in any goals package are in the same form as the complementary postulates in the ‘To know’ package.
However, the purpose of the goal may embrace more than one leg of the ‘To know’ package. E.g. You can grow something in order to be known as a grower; you can grow something in order to know what it looks like when its grown; you can grow a privet hedge in order to not-know the view of the local gasworks; you can grow a privet hedge in order to be not-known by your neighbors.
Thus it is an error to try and draw a one-to-one correspondence between the legs of a goals package and the legs of the ‘To know’ package. Life knows no such limitations.
Home
Search
Login
Register