Re: PCP course exercise

Fri, 27 Jan 1995 09:52:59 -0600 (CST)

Dear Beverly:

Sounds interesting.

What are the typical alternatives to "to be" when students do this exercise?

I have been intrigued with the fact that the classic rep grid seems confined to
portraying only "to be" type relationships among the respective clusters of
elements or constructs. It would seem that grid procedures are needed which
would portray "to have" (territory) and transitive action verbs (cause-effect,
antecedent-consequent) relationships as well. oiguration of data it would seem
that, instead of reducing a narrative document or story to its
element/construct components one could eventually develop techniques to move
from this data set to a narrative document or story (which potentially had
never existed prior to the generation of the rep grid data set.

But it seems perhaps that you are taking "to be" in another direction. Toward
subjenctive? From absolutistic to probabilistic/possibilistic? I don't know.

I hope this thread of discussion continues.


From: IN%"" 26-JAN-1995 17:52:44.17
To: IN%""
Subj: PCP course exercise

Return-path: <>
Received: from (
by KUHUB.CC.UKANS.EDU (PMDF V4.3-11 #9008)
26 Jan 1995 17:52:37 -0600 (CST)
Received: by id <>
( for; Thu, 26 Jan 1995 23:28:52 GMT
Received: from by id
<> ( for with ESMTP; Thu,
26 Jan 1995 23:28:46 GMT
Received: from ( [])
by (8.6.9/8.6.9) with SMTP id KAA05098 for
<>; Fri, 27 Jan 1995 10:28:35 +1100
Date: Fri, 27 Jan 1995 10:37:58 +1100
From: Beverly Walker <>
Subject: PCP course exercise
Message-id: <>
X-Mailer: Mail*Link SMTP-MS 3.0.1
Content-transfer-encoding: 7BIT
Precedence: list

Dear Bob and others of similar interests,

I have been playing with an exercise in my pcp teaching which I think has
potential both as a teaching tool and as a clinical technique. I haven't
quite brought it off yet so I'd appreciate feedback from others who might try
It follows from Korzybski's general-semantics which Spencer McWilliams
highlighted in his plenary address to the Townsville conference (and to be
included in the forthcoming book of selected papers - plug, plug). Spencer
drew attention to the similarity between Kelly's discussion of the 'language
of hypothesis' (and the problems of statements like 'X is lazy') and
Korzybski's analysis of the problems of usage of the verb 'to be'.
The exercise I have been using is to get students to write an account of
someone they know (and I say it should be someone they like as I want to
avoid too much confrontative self-exploration, given the context in which I
am teaching pcp). They then go through the account underlining each use of
the verb 'to be' and rewrite the account without using it. They then look at
the two accounts and see what differences there are as a result. They find
that the second account gives much more a feel of the possibilities of
I think this exercise would be quite powerful if they took someone they had
difficulty with - but myself I think that would need to be in a
clinical/counseling context to provide the individual with the backup for
revision of what might be core or superordinate constructs.
I've also suggested to students that they might like themselves to go back to
their self-characterisations and see if they use the verb 'to be'
extensively, and what would happen if they re-write it. But once again, too
possibly confrontative for a formal teaching situation.
Anyway, I'd be interested in any feedback about using this exercise.
It also illustrates a major problem Linda Viney and I find in co-teaching a
graduate subject in pcp - that to get a feel for the theory you seem
inevitably to engage fairly powerful forces for some students.