Main Hype / Dev. Thread - Beyond Limitless: Into the Wonder

[SaintSovereign]

@emperor_obewan

IMO, the times for me where ZP subs have been able to have the biggest impact has been when they stay away from archetypes and fixed concepts and lean in the direction of unfolding / walking the path, like with the Revelation series, HeO, and to some extent parts of KB

Well, again it depends on the person. There are times in my own life, for example, where I would prefer a more inner, subjective, spiritual experience like the Revelation titles. Then, there are times – like now – when I would prefer something more structured, with a bit more clear direction than “let life be life, and learn.” Since we’ve already achieved this with Limitless and Quantum Limitless, then climbed the ladder of abstractness with Limitless: Mind’s Eye, stands to reason that “Beyond Limitless,” would climb that ladder even more, and then provide scripting to help the user practically express their insights.

In this manner, we give more options to different types of people with different types of mind. While you may not experience as much insight from Limitless, something like Beyond Limitless would be a game changer. The biggest issue for me is differentiating deeply between Singularity and Into the Wonder. From a positioning standpoint, I think it’s on point.

@emperor_obewan

So while I’m not quite sure how to interpret the tease on “beauty and horrors”, the more effective or transformative ZP subs I’ve run seem to have come where the idea is taken far enough “into the wonder” to allow the user to orient properly with the concepts that form the structure of the sub without a rigid structure preventing them from meshing with it, and that seems to have happened more on these more ambitious projects. So I’d say, go all out.

Exactly. And with the beauty and horrors comment, that was a poetic reference to exactly what you intuited: yin yang, the unity of the opposites, understanding and transcending, etc.

[emperor_obewan]

@SaintSovereign

The biggest issue for me is differentiating deeply between Singularity and Into the Wonder. From a positioning standpoint, I think it’s on point.

For sure, and by reflecting here and on my journal about what has worked for me in the past and what hasn’t, I’ve been more thinking in terms of what lessons can be learned from the subs that have their own particular modus operandi, including the use of the unfolding / exploration / journey concept and the “effortless becoming” being structured against a specific goal such as skill development.

What I’ve noticed is that when you’re trying to build or integrate a structure, the strength of that structure is going to depend on how well the subconscious understands the components in relation to the concept of the self. For me running HeO for example, because I have a much stronger understanding of the virtues than other people due to my unique past history/studies, there was a lot less recon or confusion generated in manifesting that structure than there was for example when I ran WB. The journey/exploration aspect of Revelation where it was about clarifying a particular set of concepts with relationship to the greater self through this kind of deep process, feels especially relevant to a paradigm in which you’re trying to “push” a certain reality through yourself, in so far as to say if an idea is core to a sub like nonchalance or dress sense, it’s important not to assume that someone has a deep feeling for those qualities and to get them to explore what those ideas mean for them before trying to build them into what is being expressed.

That might not be feasible to be fully scripted, but I remember you mentioning the idea that ZPU would have more detailed listening instructions and ideas about how to approach working with the subs, so it could be worthwhile to mention as a way to approach working with a sub. Being able to visualise or have an internal sense of what balancing neurotransmitters means to you, how to visualise your “optimum state” or whatever the sub is trying to do does help. I’ve noticed that if I don’t have a clear idea of some nebulous thing in the copy, it doesn’t manifest for me. So the more something can be described in the script in enough rich sensory detail to allow the subconscious to get the idea, the better, rather than assuming it knows what something means.

TLDR, when working on something that is “more structured”, including as much detail in the structure as possible without compromising freedom of expression is a good thing; its easier to work within the ZP paradigm when there’s less gaps to fill in in the pattern you’re pushing out into reality. From the perspective of what you said, “a love song for existence”, that’s a good sign, because I’d rather a song for the subconscious than a dry 500 page technical manual

[Sub.Zero]

@emperor_obewan

I’ve noticed that if I don’t have a clear idea of some nebulous thing in the copy, it doesn’t manifest for me.

Or it manifests, but since you don’t have a clear idea of it, this may be beyond your perception. I experience this phenomenon all the time…

@emperor_obewan

So the more something can be described in the script in enough rich sensory detail to allow the subconscious to get the idea, the better, rather than assuming it knows what something means.

and I gain a better understanding (clearer ideas of what’s implemented in the scripting) just by experiencing the results. Of course, these are my unique ideas, but I get them nonetheless—all the time. All of that is achieved by interacting with reality—it can’t be done through the mind alone. Perhaps we truly need more air than we think to let subs breathe more fully…

Anyhow, I believe that one day, there will be no more traditional scripting (suggestion/idea-based). Instead, there will be something that works directly with our inborn subconscious structures (yes, we are not clean slates, as many believe), or even certain centers in our brain. This will yield unimaginable results compared to what we’re getting now.

When it comes to the unfolding vs. tool-based approach, I don’t see why they should be separated, as every artist needs both: inspiration and the tools to express their own unique vision through their abilities.

[praisetheurdtree]

There are a lot of interesting tidbits in here.

@emperor_obewan

What I’ve noticed is that when you’re trying to build or integrate a structure, the strength of that structure is going to depend on how well the subconscious understands the components in relation to the concept of the self

That’s interesting…very interesting.

@emperor_obewan

it’s important not to assume that someone has a deep feeling for those qualities and to get them to explore what those ideas mean for them before trying to build them into what is being expressed.

[emperor_obewan]

@Sub.Zero

Or it manifests, but since you don’t have a clear idea of it, this may be beyond your perception. I experience this phenomenon all the time…

I get that you’re trying to play devil’s advocate here, but no, that’s not the case. I’ve been watching the way these things work for a long time and even gotten a pretty good intuitive read on what the scripting is doing. The thing is, scripting is made of words, and words have ambiguity and the subconscious may not always understand complex ideas it has not spent the time to fully grok. I have actually gained insight into how the subs work as a result of my time working with HeO especially, but also casting my mind back over the experience of other subs like GLMC or WB, RoS/RoM and Alchemist. Whether I’ve been successful in putting them into a format that is useful for others to derive benefit from remains to be seen; in either case the insights are solid enough that I can apply them to my current cycle once I’ve had a chance to review what’s outstanding on the manifestation bucket list.

Also, it’s unsurprising given that we are currently in a Mercury retrograde period, but your response about what I was saying regarding the unfolding concept shows that you completely missed the point about what I was saying and misinterpreted it. This mistaken idea that I’m advocating for one or another approach needs to stop, I’m actually saying the lessons learned from the one can be applied towards making better progress in the other. I don’t expect anyone will get what I mean there sadly, at least for a while, because of the retrograde, but that ain’t gonna stop me from saying it.

[Sub.Zero]

@emperor_obewan

The thing is, scripting is made of words, and words have ambiguity and the subconscious may not always understand complex ideas it has not spent the time to fully grok.

I’m afraid that, by definition, scripting is bound to be made of words, and they will always be ambiguous unless you are the one creating them—and even then…

@emperor_obewan

the more something can be described in the script in enough rich sensory detail to allow the subconscious to get the idea, the better, rather than assuming it knows what something means.

I think a better approach than giving the subconscious mind a detailed manual composed of thousands of pages would be to implement the most common ideas that are strongly anchored in reality—that is, deeply connected to real-world experiences and practical actions. That’s exactly the direction SC is heading toward. No worries, mate.

@emperor_obewan

because of the retrograde

Oh really? I haven’t noticed that. Thanks.

[emperor_obewan]

thanks for missing the point again and confirming my suspicions.

[Sub.Zero]

@emperor_obewan

thanks for missing the point again and confirming my suspicions.

No worries. SC won’t miss it, mate.

Cheers.

[Malkuth]

@Sub.Zero, you wrote:

@Sub.Zero

I think a better approach than giving the subconscious mind a detailed manual composed of thousands of pages would be to implement the most common ideas that are strongly anchored in reality—that is, deeply connected to real-world experiences and practical actions. That’s exactly the direction SC is heading toward.

And just a bit earlier, @emperor_obewan had written:

@emperor_obewan

I’d rather a song for the subconscious than a dry 500 page technical manual

Sounds a bit similar.

It’s possible that you do not actually disagree as much as you might have thought.

[Malkuth]

@emperor_obewan

The thing is, scripting is made of words, and words have ambiguity and the subconscious may not always understand complex ideas it has not spent the time to fully grok.

Okay. I’m biting.

I’m wondering how much what you’re describing has to do with ‘Flexibility of Interpretation’.

Archetypes and subconscious symbolism in general are characterized precisely by their simultaneous potency and ambiguity.

A cross

An old powerful suspicious looking man brooding upon a throne

A golden diamond pattern

We see them. We remember them. We absorb them.

…and then we integrate them in ways that are idiosyncratic to our habits, our dispositions, our surroundings, and our pre-existing architecture.

At 16 years old, I had an ‘out of body experience’, and I was convinced that I must have been ‘born again’. (‘This is it! It’s finally happening!’)

I proceeded to pull out my bible (Judaeo-Christian) and to begin (at 5 o’clock in the morning, I think) attempting to read the entire thing from cover to cover.

Now at 51, I have a number of alternate conceptual frameworks with which to approach the same phenomenological elements.

That same experience. The awe. The spaciousness. The feeling of floating/being pulled upwards and backwards.

It could be understood in so many ways. For my psychedelics-using brothers and sisters, it might be ‘just another Tuesday’.

Yet, there’s a core content there, somewhat independent of how we integrate it into identity and ‘make sense of it’.

I wonder how this relates to the points you are making.

[Sub.Zero]

@Malkuth

An old powerful suspicious looking man brooding upon a throne

This is exactly where the whole reasoning below fails:

@emperor_obewan

the more something can be described in the script in enough rich sensory detail to allow the subconscious to get the idea, the better, rather than assuming it knows what something means.

since upon that sensory desciption of yours, only this guy comes to my mind:

(Who came to yours, btw?)

@Malkuth

A cross

[EDIT] Those symbols are a bit intrinsically disruptive. Not a comment on you, however.

Not only are words ambiguous, but so is this:

@Malkuth

‘Flexibility of Interpretation’

[Malkuth]

@Sub.Zero

This is exactly where the whole reasoning below fails:

@emperor_obewan

the more something can be described in the script in enough rich sensory detail to allow the subconscious to get the idea, the better, rather than assuming it knows what something means.

It does not fail because I believe that you and @emperor_obewan are talking about different levels of description.

I don’t think he’s talking about pigeon-holing the final expression of the subliminal. I think he’s talking about vivid, sensorily-rich, evocative description that gives the the mind a clear, substantive foundation from which to create. I think.

It’s the difference between

A:
A red-haired man sits in a quiet inn.

and

B:

In both cases, the words are subject to interpretation and your mind is free to complete the picture and fill in the specifics. But we can clearly see the difference in artistry and richness of description 1 and description 2.

@Sub.Zero

(Who came to yours, btw?)

When I first typed it, an image of a paranoid King Lear-esque Zeus or Poseidon was in my mind.

Then it morphed into Old One-Eye.

Less paranoid, more cannily piercing.

[Sub.Zero]

@Malkuth

I don’t think he’s talking about pigeon-holing the final expression of the subliminal.

That would be going back to the old Q. We don’t want that. Although there may be still fans of it lurking around. lol

@Malkuth

In both cases, the words are subject to interpretation and your mind is free to complete the picture and fill in the specifics. But we can clearly see the difference in artistry and richness of description 1 and description 2.

Yes, the latter description is much more appealing. We love stories and we hate being told what to do, and especially, what to think. So it makes sense to me.

I spoke about seducing (instead of persuading) the subconscious mind into scripting execution once. That would be something of this sort.

@Malkuth

Then it morphed into Old One-Eye.

Not a nice dude to look at, ineed. lol

[TheGreenMan]

(More sorting through my thoughts than really answering.)

IIRC correctly @SaintSovereign was a bit disappointed by hypnotic language (patterns) in regards to subliminals and that they don’t really bring much of an effect.

And it does make sense. Good hypnotic language is the most intimate personal possible dialect: Describing for you main sense(s), using your most fitting symbols and metaphors, mirroring your experienced world.

Subliminals in general and ZP in particular are the opposite, written for a broad global audience with different first languages and cultural backgrounds.

The archetypes I suspect are mostly used for copy, a shorthand using the few more or less universal ones we got. (And in the copy there is something like an hypnotic effect, the specific style we recognize, a certain kind of scripting we might associate with certain descriptions we read.)

But the sub scripting IMO has to be different. It’s is probably the concepts behind the archetype broken down into the smallest indivisible, prime aspects and formulated in short, straight sentences, so everyone with a basic grasp of english can understand it, just presenting the subconscious with a problem/friendly nudge/open ended question to engage with.

When I feel certain metaphors blooming in my mind after listening to a corresponding sub, these metaphors are probably not mentioned in the sub, but have been rooted in my mind for a while.

In a way as hypnosis is suggestion, a subliminal is a suggestion to autosuggest.

Regarding the sub scripting, I am not really sure there is difference between a great song and a 500 page technical manual.

In a way music is just math.

[Malkuth]

@Sub.Zero

@Malkuth

Then it morphed into Old One-Eye.

Not a nice dude to look at, indeed. lol

Once again, it’s in the eye of the beholder.

I happen to be a great fan.

I even wrote a song for him.

A Dirge for Old One-Eye

[Sub.Zero]

There is no lyrics in this “song” and that’s for sure not what @emperor_obewan meant. lol

More sensory-rich language would certainly help the mind grasp more advanced concepts, but a sensuous language would be a blast—especially when combined with “seductive” language.

source

A sensuous language is one that evokes or appeals to the senses, often through vivid imagery, rich descriptions, and emotional resonance. It aims to create a strong sensory experience for the reader or listener, engaging them on a deeper, more visceral level.

Key characteristics of sensuous language include:

1. Imagery: Use of descriptive language that paints a picture in the reader’s mind, appealing to sight, sound, taste, touch, and smell.
2. Figurative Language: Employing metaphors, similes, and personification to create connections and evoke feelings.
3. Emotional Tone: Conveying feelings and moods that resonate with the audience, making the experience more immersive.
4. Rhythm and Sound: Attention to the auditory qualities of words, such as alliteration, assonance, and the overall flow of sentences, enhancing the sensory experience.

Sensuous language is often found in poetry, lyrical prose, and works that aim to evoke strong emotional responses from their audience.

GPT:

Seductive language is a way of speaking or writing that is designed to attract, entice, and persuade someone on an emotional, psychological, or even physical level. It’s often used in flirting, romance, marketing, storytelling, and persuasion.

Key Elements of Seductive Language:

1. Sensory Appeal – Engages the senses by using vivid, descriptive words (e.g., Your touch sends shivers down my spine).
2. Emotional Triggers – Creates desire, curiosity, or intrigue (e.g., I can’t stop thinking about you).
3. Mystery & Teasing – Leaves something unsaid, making the listener want more (e.g., Maybe I’ll tell you… if you ask nicely).
4. Rhythm & Flow – Uses smooth, flowing sentences that sound natural and inviting (e.g., Let’s get lost in this moment).
5. Confidence & Charm – Delivered with an air of assurance and magnetism (e.g., I always get what I want… and right now, that’s you).
6. Playful Challenge – Adds a bit of teasing or daring to keep it exciting (e.g., Think you can handle me?).

[Fractal_Explorer]

@Sub.Zero

More sensory-rich language would certainly help the mind grasp more advanced concepts, but a sensuous language would be a blast—especially when combined with “seductive” language.

From what I recall Saint said they work with linguistic experts to be as neutral as possible. I feel like “seductive” language would be so open for interpretation from the mind it would lose the effect of ZP. I don’t know how these subs are constructed and I’m sure a lot of other people on this forum don’t, but from the pieces of knowledge dropped over time I think it’s different than conventional ideas of the subconscious minds receptivity.

[Malkuth]

@Sub.Zero

I think we’re getting pretty deep into ‘hijack the thread’ territory.

Let’s table it or start a new thread just for the topic.

[RockyHandsome]

Wondering how the new BL will translate to coding, technology and problem solving.

[SaintSovereign]

@Sub.Zero

and I gain a better understanding (clearer ideas of what’s implemented in the scripting) just by experiencing the results. Of course, these are my unique ideas, but I get them nonetheless—all the time. All of that is achieved by interacting with reality—it can’t be done through the mind alone. Perhaps we truly need more air than we think to let subs breathe more fully…

@Sub.Zero

When it comes to the unfolding vs. tool-based approach, I don’t see why they should be separated, as every artist needs both: inspiration and the tools to express their own unique vision through their abilities.

Very insightful.

@emperor_obewan

I don’t expect anyone will get what I mean there sadly, at least for a while, because of the retrograde, but that ain’t gonna stop me from saying it.

I do. Of course, I won’t be able to ever quite completely understand, but I do get your concept. You’re actually working through the same issues and having similar thoughts as we do about the tools-based and unfolding formats.

@Sub.Zero

No worries. SC won’t miss it, mate.

There’s no need to fight or argue. Both of your points are actually very insightful. Just take it as you both have very different minds and different approaches, but are looking at the same exact same issues.

@Malkuth

Sounds a bit similar.

It’s possible that you do not actually disagree as much as you might have thought.

lol, I was responding to each post individually and didn’t realize that our resident sage had already come to the same conclusion.