We'll say 2009 was a very good year for Conversations For Transformation standing looking back from the future.
I'm not going to justify this. I'm not going to debate it's credibility. I'm not going to propound any proofs, verifications, or substantiations for all of the above. I'm not going to suggest you propound proofs, verifications, or substantiations of your own which either refute or validate all of the above by reading the newspapers, by listening to the radio, or by watching TV or other media, typical sources we go to for proof.
Rather, in this the sixth year of Conversations For Transformation, I suggest you prove, verify, and substantiate all of the above simply by the act of speaking their proofs, verifications, and substantiations.
Please be clear to what I'm referring here. Speaking proof isn't the same as fact-finding the evidence, as building a case for the agreement of what's already happened. Speaking proof is the mere act of generating through speaking all of the above as if they've already happened, as if they're already fait accompli, without evidence, within a context of looking back from the future.
I'll grant you this: we don't usually do things this way. In a business as usual world, we wait until something happens, and then we gather evidence of what happened. And only after we've gathered evidence of what happened do we have proofs, verifications, and substantiations of what happened. The way we usually do things is we wait for all of the above to turn out well first. Then if and when all of the above have turned out well, only then do we cite their results as proofs, verifications, and substantiations of all of the above.
But this isn't business as usual. I'm suggesting instead we generate proofs, verifications, and substantiations for all of the above by speaking them as possibilities. I'm suggesting proofs, verifications, and substantiations for any of the above exist only in language like a possibility. Furthermore I'm suggesting the only reason you find very few proofs, verifications, and substantiations for any of the above in the newspaper, on the radio, and on TV or other media is only because they're not languaged in the newspaper, on the radio, or on TV or other media like a possibility.
I assert the bad news you read in newspapers, hear on the radio, or watch on TV or other media isn't bad news. Neither, for that matter, is good news simply news which isn't bad news. Rather all of it, all of what we call bad news plus all of what we call good news, is simply "the news". "The news" is nothing more (and nothing less) than reporters' stories made up on a loosely knit background of events, in newspapers, on the radio, and on TV or other media in language devoid of possibility. That's all.
Looking back from the future when we'll say 2009 was a very good year for Conversations For Transformation, what we'll be saying is Conversations For Transformation is language spoken in a way that brings forth transformation like a possibility. There may also be proofs, verifications, and substantiations. There may not be. There could be. But there doesn't have to be.
Spoken in this context, Conversations For Transformation generate their own proofs, verifications, and substantiations like a possibility. Conversations For Transformation don't describe transformation. Conversations For Transformation are transformation.
That's the difference between a conversation we call "the news", and any conversation we include in Conversations For Transformation: the degree of transformation and possibility each brings forth in their spoken word, in the simple everyday quintessentially human act of languaging them.
Conversations For Transformation have evolved in the process of Life itself over these six years as they tend with ever increasing velocity and power to generate transformation rather than simply be about transformation. Conversations For Transformation, six years later, don't provide proofs, verifications, and substantiations for transformation. Instead Conversations For Transformation are ie have become proofs, verifications, and substantiations for transformation.
Looking back from the future we'll say 2009, the sixth year of Conversations For Transformation was a very good year for bolting new track in front of and under the wheels of the runaway train (so to speak), a very good year for being with people aligned on making a difference, a very good year for visiting with people intent on having and actually having an impact on Life itself, a very good year for inquiring with people into the issues which show up for anyone and everyone committed to living their lives in a Self generated context in which everyone's contribution counts, empowers, touches, moves, inspires, and enrolls.
If I were allocated the time to say only one thing I've learned newly in this very good sixth year of Conversations For Transformation I'd say the one thing I've learned newly is really a new confirmation of something profound I've already figured out, and it's this:
Nothing I speak ie nothing I write in these Conversations For Transformation has any validity or value whatsoever until You listen ie read them. Furthermore, any validity or value they do have only shows up in your listening ie in your reading. Without your listening ie reading Conversations For Transformation they have no validity or value whatsoever.
That's profound! It's not what I create, speak, and write which has validity or value. It's only what You do with ie what you get, listen, and read in what I create, speak, and write which gives what I create, speak, and write validity and value. My intention is you get how profound this is. My intention is if you get validity and value from these Conversations For Transformation, you get You not I are the source of the validity and value you get.
|Communication Promise||E-Mail | Home|
|© Laurence Platt - 2009 through 2017||Permission|