In the last post (#7), I wrote this: So just how do you model using Meta-States? The answer lies in detecting and identifying the meta-levels that a person has reflexively brought to themselves that now qualifies their experience and operates as a frame to their experience. What this means is that as you and I access another thought-and-feeling about our first state, that second state operates dynamically to do several things-
It brings another mind-body state to it and so adds qualities or qualifies the first.
It sets the cognitive ideas within that state as the frame for the first.
It puts the first as a member of a class, the “class” being the classification that the second one creates.
Modeling Excellence Series #10
The Matrix Model originated from the Meta-States Model. It arose as a way to express what a “meta-state” is in a way that the average person could easily understand and use. So instead of taking about “states,” I began talking about “the games” that we humans play out in our actions and talk. So where did that idea come from? From T.A. (Transactional Analysis) and especially from Tom Harris (I’m Okay; You’re Okay, 1970) and from Eric Berne (Games People Play, 1965). People play “games.” A game is a set of actions that you can see or hear and so a “game” is an external expression of something internal.
While The Matrix Model originated from the Meta-States Model and not from any particular modeling, Bob Bodenhamer and I immediately used it as a modeling tool as we applied it to the experience of stuttering. And in doing that we realized that we could use this model as a format or tool for modeling any human experience and especially complex human experiences. In fact, the more systemic the experience, the more the useful the Matrix Model became.