>Date: Fri, 11 Aug 1995 04:15:19 -0400 >From: SimonDnB@aol.com >Subject: The Desire Profile, 2+ pages I offer the following to gs@lumina as a modest contribution, for whatever it is worth... THE DESIRE PROFILE: A Model For Self-Assessment & Self-Participation By Bal Simon, 8-11-95 Consider Smith-1. S/he (she/he) is at a movie theater watching a romantic flick. There's a tender love scene onthe screen. S/he is enjoying this scene, when suddenly, Smith-25, some rows away, starts laughing and telling jokes. If Smith-1 bears any resemblence to me, then s/he will likely get somewhat annoyed. Consider Baldridge-9. S/he has decided to take a walk. There s/he is, having a pleasant time, enjoying hir (his/her) own company, when s/he passes a donut shop. Again, if Baldridge-9 is anything like me, s/he will experience conflict between hir taste buds and the "conscience" installed by hir doctor to stay away from such foods. One more: Consider Wudrow-X (where X equals the number of Wudrows to contemplate buying a halibut for dinner this evening). A fire starts in Wudrow-X's house and s/he has to choose between being burned or cutting hirself by going through hir bedroom window. ***** Though their situations are vastly different, Smith-1, Baldridge-9 and Wudrow-X all have something in common: They have what might be called *Active Desires.* Smith-1 desires that Smith-25 shut up. Baldridge-9 wants a donut, and Wudrow-X wants to survive. Let's see if we can constuct a ranking of sorts. If I were in these situations, my ranking - in order of "most intense desire first" - would be: 1 - Escape from the fire 2 - Get Smith-25 to shut up 3 - Have a donut For me, I might categorize my desires in these cases as follows: 1 - Escape from the fire - Survival Need 2 - Get Smith-25 to shut up - Comfort Need 3 - Have a donut - Preference >From this I would like to introduce a "mental model" (of the type discussed by Bois in _The Art Of Awareness_) that I call ==The Desire Profile==. This model, in its most rudimentary form, consists of three "components." 1 - An "object of focus" (OF) 2 - A grid that categorizes "intensities of desires": Preference Comfort Survival Need Need ----------------------+----------------+---------------------- 3 - A "peg, " represented here with 3 asterisks (***), which identifies the relationship between the OF and the desire grid. Now, let's make this a little bit more elaborate by making our tri-value schema one of infinite-valued possibilities - in otherwords, a spectrum. I would represent teh above 3 examples as follows: Preference Comfort Survival Need Need (1) ----------------------+----------------+---------------------- *** OF = Escape the fire Preference Comfort Survival Need Need (2) ----------------------+----------------+---------------------- *** OF = Wanting Smith-25 to go away Preference Comfort Survival Need Need (3) ----------------------+----------------+---------------------- *** OF = Having a donut THE VALUE OF THE MODEL: Creating amodel without a reason might have merit as a kind of exercise, but there ought to be some value or relevance to it before one asks others to consider it. I use this model in my ongoing participation. For some time now, I have used it to help me, to some extent, to make sense of my life, to help me communicate with others in a more even-handed fashion, etc. I do not assert that it will have this value for anyone else, but I suspect that it might. Thus, I ask you to consider it. Maybe you will find it useful... I use this model, first as a tool for self-diagnosis or self-assessment. I ask myself "Where am I on the grid?" To make this assessment, I need only explore the intensity of my desire. (Obviously, if I were Wudrow-X, I would make this self-assessment AFTER I got the hell out of danger!) Next, I use this self-assessment as data for the question, "How am I doing with respect ot how I postulate I OUGHT to be doing?" In exploring this, I fully acknowledge the difficulties associated with the word "ought." I use this term in a sort of engineering sense. This touches on issues of ethics and morality, but in the main, I use it to see if I am "operating within spec," i.e., whether I am participating optimally given my circumstances, given my "within" (to use Teilhard de Chardin's word), etc. Let's say, for example, that I said to myself, "I N-E-E-E-E-D that donut! ! ! Boy do I need that donut!" Ny self-assessment, using the Desire Profile would look something like this: Preference Comfort Survival Need Need ----------------------+----------------+---------------------- *** OF = Having a donut Just by looking at this, I would be "forced" to acknowledge the unreasonability of the intensity of this desire. This could "wake me up" to my habit and help me to avoid getting all worked up over not having it. In the case of being in a movie theater in the presence of a Neanderthall who just figure out how to laugh at jokes, I might consider my assessment reasonable, but not optimal, and probably not helpul. Thus, again, I might want to look at options other than getting steamed. If the theater is somewhat crowded, I might not have the ability to change seats. I might, however, experience an option to meditate, or to find some other way to move the peg toward the left. I might also wake up to the fact that I could talk with this loud person or even to management. But getting worked up would not be considered a viable option... ******** ADDING A SPIRAL: In my use of this model, I have found that circularity comes into play frequently. For I can generate an "object of focus" called "A Desire-2 To Participate-1 Optimally With Respect To The Food I Take In." Preference Comfort Survival Need Need ----------------------+----------------+---------------------- *** OF-2 = A Desire-2 To Participate-1 Optimally With Respect To The Food I Take In. And the level of desire here might or might not be appropriate, depending on my circumstances. Example: if my doctor said, "Bal, better change your diet or you will be dead in a decade," well - I think I'd be reasonable to move the peg farther to the right than if s/he said, "Bal, you have the body of a 18 year old! How the heck do you do it!" (I only wish!). Using a multiordinal approach, one could, in principle, extend this out indefinitely. In practice, however, I have found it useful to go out three sprial loops. Once in a blue moon, I have gone out four, with each spiral creating new options for self-assessment and self-transformation. ************* I created this model some time ago in order to cope with a number of prolems that I had at that time. I communicate it to you now for two reasons: 1 I am interested in contributing in some small way to how we participate with each other, and 2 I want to SHOW what I meant in my posting of 8-08-95 when I wrote: "...Doesn't anyone have an interest in mapping processes of our participation in ways that shed some insight that we can take with us on our explorations away from gs@lumina? ... My next entry will involve something of this sort that I have considered for awhile, but have not yet shared with others. ... Maybe others can see what I mean and form a new way of participating in these communications. Not because my model is all that great, but because it can show that model creation is a GOOD ALTERNATIVE to debate. More difficult, but possibly worthwhile at various stages of our participation." I would appreciate your comments, criticisms, questions, etc. on both counts. Best regards, Bal Simon