|
|
Joined: Feb 2002
Posts: 272
Member
|
Member
Joined: Feb 2002
Posts: 272 |
Gino, you can't figure out the success rate based on postings on this forum as many people come here to post because they are just beginning to learn the PRWMS or because they are encountering problems and need help with them. Many probably leave as soon as they can get going with it, as they probably wanted to learn to PR with some purpose in mind, and when they get it to work, they get on with their lives with this new skill at their disposal. If you want to look up success stories, search for youngprer, Mastermind, CommonSense, razordu32, Alexk, .........Margaret and Tracey already told you theirs, quite unequivocally.  Going to go for an MBA? What's the piracetam doing? [This message has been edited by Hel (edited May 25, 2002).] [This message has been edited by Hel (edited May 25, 2002).]
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Oct 2000
Posts: 12
Member
|
|
OP
Member
Joined: Oct 2000
Posts: 12 |
OK folks, I wanted to promote a discussion on certain aspects of the system but we don’t need to get personal. Let me reiterate, I believe the system works it’s just that I have to question the need for certain stages. I have had one inexplicable success with the PR stage itself. I borrowed a biography about a British actor and just did the PR step. After this I was moved to ask the owner of the book if this actor was gay. I never had any knowledge he was but I just felt after the PR stage that he was. The answer was yes, he is gay and that fact is somewhere towards the end of the book. Now I don’t know how I knew this, it MUST have been because I PhotRead the book so I believe it works. Now to repeat my point about activation, if I can pick up things like that through the PR step alone why do we need to activate, which in my mind is a collective term for the different ways of reading ‘traditionally’. Now some would say this is ‘spontaneous activation’ – a term I’ve never understood. I think this ‘instant knowing’ is why most people buy the system. If this works for one bit of information why can’t it work for everything in the book. Paul Scheele and his team talk about the limitation we all impose on ourselves and the fact we have to break-through our self-constructed barriers so before anybody tells me I’m expecting too much just ask yourself if that’s another barrier your erecting for me. I have had some amazing experiences in things unrelated to PhotoReading that I can’t explain at all so I know that the absolute limits of human abilities have not yet been reached, only the limitation we’ve put in place for ourselves. I don’t believe Paul Scheele is satisfied with what he’s achieved so far with PhotReading, I’d be surprised if he wasn’t currently working on ways to improve the technique and push the boundaries of what he can convince us is possible.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Mar 2002
Posts: 3,351
Administrator
|
|
Administrator
Joined: Mar 2002
Posts: 3,351 |
Gareth, I hope the following explains the reason for "regular reading." The instant knowing you described is great but we forget that most of what we read, we read because we want to demonstrate our comprehension of the topic e.g. work related skills,respect of our peers and passing test etc. The activation stage is training out mind to answer our questions for us. If we had a photographic memory of what we had read (ie we could mentally read the page with our inner vision) we'd be slowing ourselves to the general reading speed. What we don't realise is we are actually asking our mind to sort the information into "usable" information. That is calculate, reason, compare, summarise, seperate and identify usful information about what we have read... in a word comprehend or "make it make sense", that is what it means to Photoread. A photographic memory image of the page is utterly useless as the information on the page has to be processed and a photograph does not do that, a thinking mind does. That is what we use the activation stage for. Our inner mind has read the book and when we 'activate' using superread, dip scanning, skittering we are allowing our inner mind to tell us straight forwardly what it is that we want to know by pointing it out in the text. Under normal circumstances out inner mind talks to our conscious mind in metaphors, images and abstract words and frankly 50% of the time our conscious mind doesn't seem to understand. The inner mind knows this is not the fastest way for our conscious mind to receive information from it so that our conscious mind can articulate the information and make use of it to suit our purpose e.g answer test questions. So the supperreading and dipping part of activation is our conscious mind saying to our inner mind ... point it out so I can see it clearly. Activation is not necessary if you don't need to know the text consciously not care if you comprehend it. Actually the PhotoReading stage is fantastic for eliminating reading material that you will not consciously enjoy. For example I have photoread a book and my inner mind just told me it is useless garbage and contradictory. Well I wanted to challenge this as the topic of the book was quite enticing. I activated it by asking questions about the topic (using the trigger words) and gad it is useless and contradictory. Moreover I know I've 'read' the whole book. After photoreading it I had a message from within me what was wrong to me about the book but couldn't 'say it clearly'. That's why I deliberately activated it. Now I can explain. The problem is this aspect of photoreading is difficult to explain because it is an experiential thing. If I were to try to explain it in one sentence I would say... The reason we work on deliberate activation is because the communication between the inner mind and our conscious mind is underdeveloped in 99% of the population and we often cannot grasp consciously what the inner message is. Basicly we haven't learnt to trust our inner mind enough. Our conscious mind demands that it gets the information in a manner that it understands... i.e words spoken to us in the exact format that we need them. Our inner mind tends to give us the information in abstact form and the conscious mind needs to learn that language. So intially we find ourselves "regular reading" parts in order to clarify that communication. As for whether photoreading works... A lot of people believe that they can't do maths either... which is fortunate for accountants who probably represent the 03% of the population who had the belief that sums work and took the time to learn it. Really your belief is the factor in determining whether you can or cannot do something. Alex
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Jan 2002
Posts: 1,150
Member
|
|
Member
Joined: Jan 2002
Posts: 1,150 |
"If this had a higher success rate" UGH! The seminar is 98%, and the learning course is 94%-96%. What more do you want? This guy has really ticked me off. PhotoReading works. With enough practice, you'll be able to do the bulk of activation through spontaneous activation. Having an attitude like yours is not going to get you anywhere. You cannot expect to get anywhere saying to yourself, "No, I can't do this. This doesn't work. This is impossible. No one can do this. ONly a small portion of the people I've seen have been successful with this." And ETC! Alright, now normally, I wouldn't post because I should be resting, but you forced me to post.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Dec 2001
Posts: 83
Member
|
|
Member
Joined: Dec 2001
Posts: 83 |
Enough said, If you all endorsing pring this way, I guess pring deserves consideration. Either that or you all work for LS. Let me be open-minded here. I will give pring a shot. I don’t think it’ll take me more than a weekend to learn the steps, but I’m sure it’ll take me a lot longer to master it. I’ll be the judge of that. I hope you all can help if I get stuck. Hel, I’ve been taking 6400mg of Piracetam for the passed 4 days. Any improvements have certainly been subtle. The funny thing is that when I take piracetam for a couple of days, and then I stop for a day. That day is when I start feeling my mind real clear, and short-term memory increases dramatically. Is like upgrading you computer from a Pentium I to a Pentium III. I will have to keep experimenting to determine why this happens.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Jan 2002
Posts: 1,150
Member
|
|
Member
Joined: Jan 2002
Posts: 1,150 |
Oooh! Me working for LSC? YEAH, SURE. So what are you saying, that this is a scam?
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Dec 2001
Posts: 83
Member
|
|
Member
Joined: Dec 2001
Posts: 83 |
no, I didn't wrote that. I said that I'm going to be open minded and give pring a try. I would have think that this was a scam, I would have not even bother writing anything on this forum. I guess you can not read between the lines. Don't worry, you will develop this when you get older.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Jan 2002
Posts: 1,150
Member
|
|
Member
Joined: Jan 2002
Posts: 1,150 |
Read the symbol that's in between the lines right here: ii|ii
[This message has been edited by youngprer (edited May 25, 2002).] [This message has been edited by youngprer (edited May 25, 2002).]
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Jan 2002
Posts: 1,150
Member
|
|
Member
Joined: Jan 2002
Posts: 1,150 |
quote:
Originally posted by Gino:
no, I didn't wrote that. I said that I'm going to be open minded and give pring a try.
"No, you didn't write* that." I guess you can not read between the lines. Don't worry, you will develop this when you get older. Hey, at least I can spell and do grammar when I'm young. See in between the lines? I'd bet dollars that I think three times as deep as you do. I've figured out things no other kids would dream of figuring out, so don't you dare say that I can't read in between the lines.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Mar 2002
Posts: 90
Member
|
|
Member
Joined: Mar 2002
Posts: 90 |
quote:
Originally posted by Gino:
Enough said, If you all endorsing pring this way, I guess pring deserves consideration. Either that or you all work for LS. Let me be open-minded here. I will give pring a shot. I don’t think it’ll take me more than a weekend to learn the steps, but I’m sure it’ll take me a lot longer to master it. I’ll be the judge of that. I hope you all can help if I get stuck.Hel, I’ve been taking 6400mg of Piracetam for the passed 4 days. Any improvements have certainly been subtle. The funny thing is that when I take piracetam for a couple of days, and then I stop for a day. That day is when I start feeling my mind real clear, and short-term memory increases dramatically. Is like upgrading you computer from a Pentium I to a Pentium III. I will have to keep experimenting to determine why this happens.
You are an accountant right. Here's the math. All supplements, drugs, chemicals have half-lives. Find out what the half-life for Piracetam is (ie-how long after you take it does it stay in your system). Calculate what amount of Piracetam is still in your system the day that you stop taking it. The amount that you determine is still in your system is the amount you should regularly take because that is the amount which you get the best results with. Try overdosing on using the Photoreading System. Then back off on the tools you use that get you the results that you are after. Then only use those daily to get the results you want. Hey, you aren't interested in taking personal shots - I know that. You just get ****ed off when marketing doesn't meet reality. Me too - I'm a lawyer for God sakes. I say - Prove it to me. So, I figured out how all the evidence related to me. I don't use all the steps all the time. I use other parts at other times. The System just taught me a better way of learning information consciously. Now, as to the alleged unconscious input - photofocus - it's only 20% of the entire system. I figured if I surprise myself 20% of the time - that's all that was quantifiably promised. The interesting thing is - it started at 20% but now occurs more than that. Took me a little bit to get the pay-off, but I figured I had my whole life to play around with the system. Especially since 80% of the system improved my conscious reading skills. Take it for what it's worth. Oh, BTW, any success story I post is entirely voluntarily. I don't push crap that doesn't work - you know what I mean. Be good! Good luck, and...
CommonSense
aka - Gene Bryson
|
|
|
|
|
