Three kinds of Talk
Video does NOT contain the first 5 minutes of aphorisms that is on the audio below.
Jun 5, 1989
AKS/News Item Gallery = jcap 1989-02-22 (0502)
Condensed AKS/News Items = See Below
Summary = See Below
Excursion / Task = See Below
Diagrams = needed ( Dneeded )
Transcript = See Below (ck edit)
Summary
Jan Cox Talk 0502 – Jun 5, 1989 ** – 1:18
Notes by TK
Kyroot reading to :04.
There are three kinds of talk: 1) motor-talk;
2) limbic-talk;
3) cortical talk.
These three correspond to their areas in the Nervous System loop. Motor-talk is involved with the world of action: “what I have done (or others have done)”; it is related to the Primary Level. Limbic-talk says “what has happened to me” vs. what was done; it is related to Secondary Level although has the Primary Level for its ultimate basis. Cortical-talk is involved with the world of ideas and possibilities; also about what it thinks. Related also to Secondary Level.
Via talk, the simple can be made complex and the complex can be made foolish and irrelevant. E.g., conversation between two people (or Internal Dialogue) where disagreement/misunderstanding occurs; issue of capital punishment where the complex is made simple; issue of a father’s concern with son’s drug involvement where the simple is made complex. Expletives make complex and/or simplify.
Consider that The Dialogue is actually a trialogue: one voice of action; one voice of Thinking of Action (TOA)-planning; a third voice worries about the consequences of either (limbic-talk). Note that this is also true at Life’s level of talk-thru-man. The first two voices don’t really suffer, can’t take responsibility for their activity or it would interfere with that activity. The third voice fills the need for another form of talk, making optimum efficiency.
1:13 End of Public Tape.
Diagram #?
Excursion
Excursion: for four days reconnoiter your internal dialogue to gain a hint/feel as to the relative percentages of composition of the three kinds of talk.
And Kyroot Said…
There’s this certain game that’s totally unknown to the
city, I call it: The Less You Say, The Less You Pay.
***
When it comes to matters more important and complex than
mere fiscal ones, remember this approach: When they present the
check, try and leave town…(not alone, of course, take the bill
with you).
***
One guy’s pet confides, “No matter any other drawbacks, one
good thing about being a dog is that you don’t have to practice
at it.”
***
Sometimes enough has been said when someone first says,
“Enough’s been said.”
***
All cliches can work both ways.
***
In the city are many signs and arrows saying, “One Flight
Up,” and one guy mused, “Most people here ain’t GOT one flight
up.”
***
An interviewer asks a guy, “What’s been the most difficult
aspect of your life?”, and guy sez, “You mean up to this point?”,
and interviewer says, “Yes.” Guy says, “Getting up TO this
point.”
***
People only talk so much because they have to.
***
Never answer a question that someone really wants you to.
***
No one’s cup REALLY runneth over, (if you doubt this just
ask for their spillage).
***
If it weren’t FOR talk, most people’s brains would be even
MORE underemployed.
***
Almost every situation can turn out “OK” if you don’t care
how most situations turn out.
***
It is at your own peril that you forget that all maps are ad
hoc.
***
There’s this one old dude with a linoleum mustache who may
live near Buenos Aires who sez that no matter what they’re
called, or how they’re performed, all dances throughout the world
are just crude variations of the tango, and he adds that HE’S not
fooled for a moment.
***
Even though you may not be so-called “native Americans” I
can plainly see that you’re all still under the direction of Ole
Chief Two Eyes.
***
When it comes to everything else, there’s more TO it than
that.
***
To fully grasp court affairs, you must see that the
messenger IS the news.
***
Even though your mother told you not to keep making ugly
faces ’cause it could get stuck like that and you found out that
wasn’t so, don’t be so sure regarding uncomely thoughts.
***
Surface noise is not just a problem with cheaply pressed
phonograph records.
***
In the city, if they ask you to take a urine test, tell ’em
you’ll go ’em one better… and Kyroot added: As they say, god
loves a cheerful giver.
***
Transcript
#502 Copyright 1989 J. M. Cox
6/5/89
Let’s see if we can explode something I have hit kicked , hit pushed. It goes like this…There are three kinds of talk. Motor talk, lymph talk, and cortical talk.
Consider the loop itself of the nervous system. (Diagram)
Within this you would have motor talk, limbic talk, and cortical talk. This has to do, literally, with the physiology of man’s nervous system. This is NOT psychology. (Recall what Kyroot pointed out about “only those who believe they have a soul, have a soul.”)
Motor talk is concerned almost exclusively with action. It talks about what it has done. Sometimes it talks about others have done, which is a form of gossip. Motor talk is primarily about the world of action, it being the aspect of the person doing the talking. Motor talk is concerned with primary matters.
Limbic talk is to a great extent about what has happened to it;
with a BIG emphasis on what has been DONE TO it. It may talk about what has happened to others, but on the basis of something based on what happened to them while they were doing it. The limbic system starts moving very strongly into the area of secondary activity. If it talks about primary activity, it is represented as a secondary activity.
Cortical talk is very non specific in the 3 D sense. It is involved, mainly, in the world of ideas and possibilities. And it is further concerned with what it THINKS. (The limbic system is concerned with what it FEELS.) Cortical talk is, in the main, about secondary stuff. From one point of view, this is a kind of piling for a Tower of Babel.
There seems to be in each person a preponderance of one type of talk. If you know how, you can tell by looking at people what talk is predominant in them, and a person’s talk is not going to change.
Via talk, the simple can be made more complex, and the complex can be rendered foolish and irrelevant. This is true both inside yourself and between people. In the city, this is noticed but on a negative basis. From the motor talk’s point of view the cortical talk can take a simple straightforward situation and make it impossibly complex. At the same time, one of the talkers can take a pearl and drag it into the mud. Mere talk can take that which is simple and make it more complex, for Life’s purposes. It can take potential work and make it happen just by talking.
What if the dialogue — your life — is not only Life’s dialogue to itself through man, but what if there is actually a trialogue going on? What if the dialogue is evolved of for two specific things, that’s why there seem to be two….
Could you conceive of there actually being three activities going on? Like this: One voice directing acting, one voice thinking of acting, and a third voice worrying about the possibilities. Could you neuralize any possibility of limbic talk being in charge of worrying about the possible consequences of acting?
There has to be a lag between thinking and doing: “stop talking and do something.” The voice of action does not have to worry. The voice that finally does something does not have to suffer if something goes wrong. The thinking voice does not take responsibility because it already said, “I am not sure we know what we are doing.” So who is left to suffer? The talking and acting voice really do not have enough energy left to be concerned about consequences.
There are not actually three separate voices in you, of course, but this description is correct. You need to see that there is a need for another side to the dialogue within your own nervous system. All three voices are going at the same time but not in a linear 3 dimensional sense. There is a need to explain further, to consider the possible consequences of the activity of these other two voices.
Looking with two eyes, you cannot say with any certainty that there are not three voices talking. The system itself has three types of talk, and it is not simultaneous; it is three people dancing. All reality is resting, not on the back of a giant turtle like in the old myth, but on three people dancing — and all you can see is two.
Think about it. Things never go where you think they should and you can’t see but two dancers. How is it that the two voices never seem to make some shift that would stop this kind of suffering, especially after all these years? They do not suffer, that is why; there is another voice that is in charge of suffering. The “doing, acting” voice does not remember or have any concern with whether anything works out according to plans. The “thinking” voice never has to pay the price for its plans. It never seems to notice that all its daydreams never get acted on.