A book by Robert Dilts, with 3 volumes, where with the help of Neuro-linguistic Programming Dilts study the writings that 4 great genius left behind to discover their thought process at the moment when they were eliciting the state of creation, so it can be copy by others, if not at the same level of greatness at least at some degree hence some good benefits may be reaped out of it. Here is my little summary of the first author in the first volume of the series:

In the first volume Robert Dilts analized 4 geniuses in their thought process of how they created the amazing works that they left, which enrich the life of thousands people at their time and afterward for so many years. Among these 4 characters there's a fictional one, Sherlock Holmes, since Robert Dilts focus on different manifestation of the genius of a person, the creators he studied on the first volume goes from the fields of investigative (Aristotle), deductive (Sherlock Holmes), creativity (Walt Disney) and intuitive (Mozart). Before going further lets look a description of what is Neuro-Linguistic Programming according to Robert Dilts:

"NLP could be described as an extension of linguistics, neurology, or psychology; separations that although may in fact be fictitious in nature are in fact expedient for human learning and the development of knowledge that is practical and impactful on our lives... NLP is not just useful models and patterns formalized from various activities, but an extension of how those patterns and models came into being, thus a field both informative and practical, but most significant...unique in its purpose and methodology."

And then he goes on to saying: "By identifying mental sequences that lead to specific outcomes we can, in essence, replicate (or 'clone') any behaviour, whether that of a businessperson, scientist, healer, athlete, musician or anyone that does something well. With the tools provided by NLP, we believe anyone can be transformed into a modern 'reinassance' person."

With those descriptions of the field of NLP and the explanation of what Robert Dilts proposed with his studies, let's get into my summary of what he described as being the thought process to create for the first genius of his first volume, Aristotle:

Aristotle (385-322 BC).

The greek philosopher, considered to be the "father of modern science", Aristotle is undoubtedly one of the most influential geniuses of Western civilization. His scope of thought covered an incredible variety of subjects including physics, logic, ethics, politics, rhetoric, biology, poetics, metaphysics and psychology. In most cases Aristotle's discoveries and contributions were so fundamental that they stood as the definitve works in each of these fields for centuries. Clearly, there was something very special about Aristotle's strategy for organizing his observations of the world around him that allowed him to accomplish such a tremendous intellectual feat. Aristotle's mental processes allowed him to creatively explore and usefully organize information from many diverse areas of life (Plato referred to him as "the mind"). It was the rediscovery of Aristotle's way of thinking that is credited with bringing Western civilization out of the dark ages into the renaissance.

From the NLP point of view, Aristotle had his own very effective strategy for modeling. He was in fact a "modeler". He looked into the most essential areas of human experience and made very powerful models of them. He wasn't a "specialist" in any area; and yet he was able to reach a deep level of knowledge about the different aspects of the world he examined. What is of greatest interest to us as "meta" modelers of Aristotle, is the way in which he thought about his experiences. By applying the modeling procedures of NLP to Aristotle's writings, we can map out some of the specific elements of Aristotle's strategy in a way that may contribute some new and practical insight into his impressive genius and how we can apply it to our lives today.

Getting to first Principles asking basic questions.

Perhaps the most important part of Aristotle's genius was his ability to discover basic and fundamental patterns or "laws" in whatever field of experience he chose to explore. According to Aristotle, the discovery of these basic elements and principles "become known" through the analysis of our perceptions. In his book Posterior Analytics Aristotle gives some specific descriptions of his analytical approach. Aristotle's process of analysis began by asking basic questions.

"The kinds of question we ask are as many as the kinds of things which we know, they are in fact four: (1) whether the connection of an attribute with a thing is a fact, (2) what is the reason of the connection, (3) whether a thing exists, (4) what is the nature of the thing.

Aristotle's purpose in asking these four questions was not really to end up with four different answers, but rather to converge upon a single answer, a "first principle". According to Aristotle

"To know a thing's nature is to know the reason why it is"

This implies a powerful relationship between knowledge and application in Aristotle's system. It indicates that there is an equivalence between "attributes" and "reasons". In other words, knowing the right questions to ask is the reason for genius, a true first principle, then, is one that has this dual ability; not only is it instructive it is also instrumental. That is, not only does such a principle allow us to understand something, it also informs us how it is brought about and influenced. These basic elements that were both attributes and reasons for something were what Aristotle called the "middle". Something in between general knowledge and specific instances. According to Aristotle,

"All questions are a search for a 'middle' which connects the universal to a particular."

The strategy for finding the 'middle'

In Posterior Analytics Aristotle provides a specific description of his strategy for going up from particulars to find more universal attributes.

"We must start by observing a set of similar specifically identical individuals, and consider what element they have in common."

Aristotle's strategy for analysis involves an inductive process made up of the following steps:

1. Collecting together a group of similar examples of something that each share the quality to be analyzed;
2. Comparing the examples and looking for some quality that they all have in common;
3. A second group of different examples that also share the quality is then collected together and compared in the same manner;
4. The quality that unified the first group is compared with the quality that unified the second group in order to find what quality, if any, they might share.

If the unifying quality of group 1 has something in common with the unifying quality of group 2 we have gotten another step closer to a "first principle".

The S.O.A.R. model

S.O.A.R. stands for State-Operator-And-Result. It defines the basic steps involved in the process of change in any system. A "state" is defined in relationship to some larger "problem space". "Operators" stimulate change in the state by altering some aspect of it resulting in a new state. The desired state is reached through a path of "transition states" which culminate in the goal.

Once the relevant parameters have been defined the problem solver must formulate a guidance strategy in order to find the sequence of operators that will lead from the starting state to the goal state. This takes place through a set of prioritized condition-action rules in the form of "IF you perceive a certain state, THEN apply a certain sequence of operators." If an impasse is reached such that progress is not able to be made to the goals state, the problem is "chunked" down into sub-goals and sub-operations until a new path is found. These new "chunks" are then remembered as other condition-action rules.

The S.O.A.R. structure lies at the core of the NLP modeling process. The S.O.A.R. distinctions give us the meta strategy or meta model from which to identify and define effective macro and micro strategies. The S.O.A.R. provides a very basic framework with which to model effective performance in many diverse areas of activity.

Basic types of causes

The common "elements", "middle terms" and "causes" Aristotle was constantly seeking are essentially the "operators" of the S.O.A.R. model. A basic issue for this study, then relates to the types of operations or causes that might be relevant. According to Aristotle (Posterior Analytics) there were four basic types of causes:

1. Formal causes,
2. Antecedent, necessitating or precipitating causes,
3. Efficient or constraining causes and
4. Final causes.

Formal Causes

Essentially relate to fundamental definitions and perceptions of something. The "formal cause" of a phenomenon is that which gives the definition of its essential character. Formal causes actually say more about the perceiver thant the phenomenon being perceived. This type of cause is related to what Aristotle called "intuition".

Antecedent Causes

Or precipitating causes relate to past events, actions or decisions that influence the present state of a thing or event through a linear chain of "action and reaction". This is probably the most common form of causal explanation that we use to describe things.

Constraining Causes

Involves ongoing relationships, presupositions and boundary conditions (or lack of boundaries) within a system which maintain it's state (regardless of the chain of events that brought it there). Constraining causes tend to be more "systemic" in nature, and may be defined in terms of potential constraints which were not present as well as those which were.

Final Causes

Relate to future objectives, goals or visions which guide or influence the present state of the system giving current actions meaning, relevance or purpose. Final causes involve the motives or "ends" for which something exists. In this sense, final causes often relate to a thing's role or identity with respect to the larger system of which it is a part.

Clearly, any one of these causes taken to be the whole explanation by itself is likely to lead to an incomplete picture. In today's science we look mostly for mechanical causes, or what Aristotle referred to as "antecedent" causes. When we study a phenomenon scientifically we tend to look for the linear cause-and-effect chain which brought it about. These understandings are certainly important and useful but do not necessarily tell us the whole story of these phenomena.

Identifying constraining causes would involve examining what holds a particular phenomenon's current structure in place, regardless of what brought it there.

Searching for final causes, would involve exploring the potential aims or ends of these phenomena with respect to the rest of nature.

The T.O.TE. model

Stands for Test-Operate-Test-Exit. It defines the basic feedback loop through which we systematically change states. According to the T.O.T.E. Model, we generally operate on a state to change it in order to reach a goal. We continually test the ongoing state against some evidence or criteria to find out if we have achieved that goal. Depending on the result of this test we adjust our operations accordingly. That is, first you test your relationship to your goal. If you are not reaching your goal, you operate by varying your behaviour in some way. Then you test the result of that movement again, and if you have been successful you exit to the next step. If not, you vary your behaviour again and repeat the process.

Thus in terms of the T.O.T.E. model, intelligent behaviour is organized around the ability to establish:

1. A fixed future goal.
2. The sensory evidence necessary to accurately determine your progress toward the goal.
3. A variable set of means to get to your goal and the behavioral flexibility to implement these choises.

Aristotle's model, behaviour is not stimulus driven, it is goal driven.

Macro Strategies and the T.O.T.E.

The T.O.T.E. provides the basic structure and distinctions for identifying and defining macro strategies for effective performances. Modeling the "macro strategies" of genius, involves identifying the way in which the individuals we are studying used the various elements of the T.O.T.E. :

1. What goals did they strive to achieve?
2. What types of evidence and evidence procedures did they use to get feedback in order to determine their progress toward their goals?
3. What set of means and operations did they employ to reach their goals?

Answering these questions will give us the "macro strategy" of the individual. For example, based on what we have examined so far about Aristotle, we could define his macro strategy in the following way:

1. Aristotle's goal was to find the "first principles" in all aspects of the natural world.
2. Aristotle's evidence involved having premises that were both logical ("convertible" and without obvious counter examples) and "demonstrable".
3. Aristotle's operations involved
   a) exploring a problem space by asking basic questions,
   b) finding the "middle" (basic causes and attributes which connected general principles to specific examples) through an inductive process that involved finding common elements shared by different examples of a particular phenomenon and
   c) forming the results into a syllogism that could be tested and demonstrated.

Micro Strategies and the five senses

Identifying micro strategies involves filling in the cognitive and behavioral details of how, specifically, a particular macro strategy is carried out. In the model of NLP micro strategies relate to the way in which one uses his or her sensory "representational systems", such as mental imagery, internal self talk, emotional reactions, etc., in order to carry out a task or T.O.T.E.

Like NLP, Aristotle identified the basic elements of cognitive process as intimately associated with our sensory experience. In Posterior Analytics, Aristotle outlines the fundamental process of "thinking" as being an inductive process by which:

1. "Sense-perceptions" leave impressions in the "soul";
2. The impressions which persist become "memories";
3. The frequent repetition of memories of a particular phenomenon become systematized or chunked into a "single experience" or "universal";
4. Collections of these universals form the foundation for "skill" and "knowledge".

Our basic mental capacities, then, come from our abilities to use our senses in order to perceive, and then to represent and remember what we have perceived.

In On the soul, Aristotle categorized the senses into the five basic classes of sight, hearing, touch, smell and taste. Aristotle's five senses correspond directly with the five "represantional systems" employed in the NLP modeling process, Visual, Auditory, Kinesthetic, Olfactory and Gustatory. According to Aristotle, the five senses provided the psyche with information about qualities in the outside world that fell into a certain range.

These range are a pair of contraries and correspond to what in NLP are called the "submodalities". Sub-modalities are the particular perceptual qualities that may be registered by each of the five primary sensory modalities. Our visual modality, for instance, can perceive such qualities as color, brightness, shape, depth, etc.; Our kinesthetic system perceives such qualities as pressure, temperature, texture, etc., and so on. Each sub-modality registers qualities that may range between two opposites: color-black and white, bright-dim, loud-quite, high-low, hot-cold, heavy-light, etc.

For Aristotle, it was the relationshiup between these qualities that determined how we responded to the objects or situations we are experiencing.

Sensing, then, is noticing the relationship between these polarities, registering differences and ratios of difference. According to Aristotle it was the ratio between these polarities that determined what was pleasurable and what was painful, and thus what was to be approached or avoided and how much it was to be approached or avoided. If something was too much at either of the the polarity it became uncomfortable. There was a certain range of balance in which one experienced comfort.

When two experiences occur together in a close enough time frame they can become linked or "anchored" together, so that one of the experiences will become a trigger for the other. As Aristotle mentions, an association may, and often does, take place in a single trial. When a series of sensory representations become associated with each other in a particular sequence it forms the basis of a cognitive "strategy". Clearly, the ability to remember and form associations will be a fundamental influence on the pehnomena of genius.

In the NLP view it is believed that, while certain individuals may possess genetic proclivities, these abilities can be enhanced via particular skills and techniques. It is therefore relevant to explore, if possible, the micro processes by which geniuses facilitate their ability to remember and associate sensory experiences together. For instance, in the model of NLP, there are certain micro behavioral cues that are generally overlooked in the study of genius, which serve as "accessing cues". "Accessing cues" serve to help people recall experiences and make associations. An accessing cue may range from idiosyncratic cues like snapping ones fingers, mumbling "hmmm" or scratching one's head, to deeper and more universal cues like unconscious lateral eye movements and breathing patterns.

Observing and tracking these subtle cues can provide clues to how an individual is thinking, and can be used to help facilitate associative processes.

Common Sensibles

According to Aristotle the process of inductively identifying universals from particular sense-perceptions took place through the "common sense", the place in the "psyche" where all of the senses met. One of the functions of the "common sense" was to register something which repeated in a number of experiences, a pattern. Patterns or "universals" were perceived in terms of a set of content-free qualities that Aristotle called the "common sensibles", which were the discriminations that were shared by all the senses.

"Common sensibles are movement, rest, number, figure, magnitude, unity; these are not peculiar to any one sense but are common to all."

The "common sensibles" identified relationships between the perceptions and impressions left by the senses. For example, "intensity" is something you can register in any sense. You can have intensity of color, sound, taste, smell or touch. The same with "number"; you can see three things, hear three things, feel three things, etc. Location and movement are also perceptible via all the senses. You can see, hear, feel or smell that something coming from a particular location or moving in a particular direction. These qualities are not a function of only one sense. They are something that can be shared by all the senses and facilitate the transfer of information between the senses. According to Aristotle, common sensibles allowed us to do our higher level mental processing.

Modeling Micro Strategies - The R.O.L.E. model

The R.O.L.E. model is a micro modeling structure in NLP which summarizes and incorporates Aristotle's basic distinctions relating to the mind or "psyche". R.O.L.E. stands for Representational System Orientation-Link-Effect. It may be used to define the micro level cognitive structure of a particular T.O.T.E. Each step in the T.O.T.E. involves the representation of some information which will be oriented to a certain part of the problem space and linked to other representations. The way in which information is represented, oriented and linked will produce a particular effect in terms of the overall process.

The goal of the R.O.L.E. modeling process is to identify the essential elements of thinking and behaviour used to produce a particular response or outcome. This involves identifying the critical steps of the mental strategy and the role each step plays in the overall neurological "program". This role is determined by the four factors which are indicated by the letters which make up the name of the R.O.L.E. model.

1. Representational Systems have to do with which of the five senses are most dominant for the particular mental step in the strategy: Visual (sight), Auditory (sound, Ad for words versus At for music and other non-verbal sound, the "d" stands for "digital" and the "t" indicates "tonal"), Kinesthetic (feeling), Olfactory (smell), Gustatory (taste). As we have established, each representational system is designed to perceive certain basic qualities of the experiences it senses. These include characteristics such as color, brightness, tone, loudness, temperature, pressure, etc. As we have mentioned earlier, these qualities are called "sub-modalities" in NLP since they are subcomponents of each of the representational systems.

2.Orientation has to do with whether a particular sensory representation is focused (e)xternally toward the outside world or (i)nternally toward either (r)emembered or (c)onstructed experiences. For instance, one may "see" something in the outside world, in memory or in one's imagination.

The habitual orientation of a representational system will influence a person's cognitive performance and that person's areas of strength. An individual who primarily orients his or her senses internally might be strong in theoretical processes. A person who is more externally oriented will most likely be a good observer.

3.Links have to do with how a particular step or sensory representation is linked to other representations in a person's micro strategy. For example, an appreciation of art tends to involve a linking of external images or sounds to internal emotional responses; i.e. people speak of being "moved" by a painting or a piece of music. Similarly, the "expression" of emotions through painting, music, poetry, dance and sculpture indicate a link in the direction starting with feelings and connecting to other representational systems.

There are two basic ways that representations can be linked together: sequentially and simultaneously. Sequential links act as anchors or triggers such that one representation follows another in a linear chain of events.

Simultaneous links occur in what are called synesthesias (meaning "a synthesis of the senses"). Synesthesia links have to do with the overlap between sensory representations through what Aristotle called "common sensibles".

Both of these types of links are essential to thinking, learning, creativity and the general organization of our experiences. A key issue in defining a particular micro strategy is "What type of links between the senses are being utilized?" If there is a sequential pattern, what is the necessary order of the associations between the senses? If there are simultaneous links, which qualities of one sense are linked to which qualities of the other sense?

4.Effect has to do with the result or purpose of each particular step in the thought process. Effects relate to the role of a particular cognitive micro process with respect to the macro strategy or T.O.T.E. in which that micro strategy is functioning. For instance, the function of the step could be to
a) generate or input a sensory representation,
b) test or evaluate a particular state with respect to some criterion or
c) operate to change some part of an experience or behaviour.

That is, depending on it's orientation and type of link, a feeling could be
a) information about what is happening in one's environment (that an object is hot or cold, for example),
b) part of a judgment or evaluation about one's environment (such as feeling that one likes or dislikes something) or
c) an attempt to change or adjust one's behaviour (like an athlete recalling a feeling of excitement in order to "get up" for a contest).

The effect a particular representation produces in a micro strategy is a significant element of genius. In NLP there is a distinction made betwwen an individual's most highly developed, most highly valued and most conscious representational system. This distinction reflects the typical effect of a particular representational system.

A person's most highly "develop" system is the sense with which that person is able to make the greatest number of distinctions. A person's most highly "valued" representational system is the one that person tends to use to evaluate the meaning of an experience and make decisions. A person's most "conscious" system is the one in which that person has the most intentional ability to change and utilize. If someone has specialized strongly in the visual modality then the most highly developed, highly valued and conscious representational system may all be visual. Some people may have developed one of their senses to a high degree, but not value it as much as another one of their senses. For example, some people may highly value their feelings, but not be very aware of feelings or able to control them. Some people have a highly developed ability to visualize, but are not conscious of making visual images. A key issue in modeling the strategies of geniuses involves determining the degree to which the various senses are developed, valued and consciously utilized.

Language as a Tool of Thinking and Modeling

One way to determine the influence of a particular representational system in an individual's micro strategy is to examine how it is reflected in a person's language patterns. Language is clearly an important indicator of a person's internal cognitive processes.

In the model of NLP, certain key verbs, or "predicates" provide a strong indication of how a person is thinking. Words such as "see", "clearly", "show", "image", for instance, are indicative of visual processes. Words like "says", "sounds", "heard", "rings a bell", "tell", etc. indicate auditory or verbal experiences. Language patterns such as "feel", "rough", "be in touch with", "painful", "cold", etc. imply kinesthetic processes, and so on.

Modeling the Micro Structure of Aristotle's Thinking Strategy

By filtering for these types of words in a person's language, we can uncover important information about that individual's mental processes and strategies. For example, consider the following statement by Aristotle:

(1) No one can learn or understand anything in the abscence of sense, and (2) when the mind is actively aware of anything it is necessarily aware of it along with an image..... To the thinking soul images serve as if they were contents of perception...just as if it were seeing, it calculates and deliberates what is to come by reference to what is present; and when it makes a pronouncement, as in the case of sensation it pronounces the object to be pleasant or painful, in this case it avoids or pursues".

In the NLP view, Aristotle's description of the general functioning of "the mind" is probably a projection of his own general mental strategy. Judging by his choice of words, it would seem that this strategy has a particular sequence which begins with the association of external sensory input to internal visual representations (Vi), the mind then "calculates and deliberates" by "seeing" or constructing mental "images" (Vc) of "what is to come by reference to what is present" (most likely through internal patterns of association). These images are evaluated via a verbal process. The mind makes a "pronouncement" (Ad i) from which physical actions are initiated. The "pronouncement" is most likely derived through the process of applying some kind of syllogism.

The abilities to "calculate" and "deliberate what is to come by reference to what is present" just as if one "were seeing" presupposes that one is consciously aware of one's internal imagery, is able to perceive distinctions and relationships between images and can manipulate those images to a certain degree. Aristotle's statement that the mind makes a "pronouncement" about an experience would imply that the output of the verbal representational system is most highly valued. That is, while mental images provide the input and operations for the mental strategy, language evaluates these visual contents and provides the basis for behavioral action. Of course, Aristotle's description that the object is determined to be "pleasant or painful" implies some kind of internal feeling response (Ki), but his language does not make it clear whether or not the pain or pleasure are directly experienced.

In another statement, however, Aristotle indicates that the experience of internal feelings does indeed play an important role in this overall strategy in the form that he called "appetites" and "desires". Appetites and desires were feelings formed relative to some goal or end, which was provided for them by the contents of ongoing perception, memory or imagination.

"Mind is never found producing movement without appetite... but appetite can originate movement contrary to calculation...It is the object of appetite which originates movement, this object may be either the real or the apparent good... Appetites run counter to one another, which happens when a principle of reason and desire are contrary and is possible only in beings with a sense of time (for while mind bids us hold back because of what is future, desire is influenced by what is just at hand: a pleasant object which is just at hand presents itself as both pleasant and good, without condition in either case, because want of foresight into what is farther away in time)".

Synthesizing Aristotle's comments together as a reflection of his own internal mental processes and considering them in the light of his other comments about the "psyche" and his own analytical process, we can begin to form a picture representing the cognitive micro structure of his thinking strategy:

1. Sensory experience serves as both the input ("no one can learn or understand anything in the absence of sense") and ultimate confirmation of internal mental processes ("credit must be given to observation rather than to theories, and to theories only insofar as they are confirmed by the observed facts").

2. As input, sensory experience has two influences:
   a) the ratios of the "submodalities" associated with the sensory experience produce an inmediate sensation ("the sense itself is a 'mean' between any two opposite qualities which determine the field of that sense") which may be perceived as either pleasurable or painful;
   b) the sensory experience becomes associated with an internal "image" or representation related to the external input ("out of sense-perception comes to be what we call memory, and out of frequently repeated memories of the same thing develops experience; for a number of memories constitutes a single experience") such as an "incidental object of sense". This "image" or map can produce a sense of "desirability" through ratios of internal submodality qualities.

3. Calculations and deliberations are made through a train of cause and effect associations connecting the present experience to projections of perceived future consequences (just as if the mind were seeing, it calculates and deliberates what is to come by reference to what is present).

4. Some kind of verbal evaluation is made about the future consequences (most likely in the "if-then" format of the syllogism) which "pronounces" something "good" and approachable or as something to be avoided ("it pronounces the object to be pleasant or painful, in this case it avoids or pursues").

5. The three influences from the present (inmediate sensation), past (the "image" derived from memories) and the future (calculations of consequences) converse on the internal feelings associated with "Appetite". If the three evaluations (pleasure, desire and goodness) overlap, the choice of external behavioral action is obvious; if not, a conflict ensues in which presumably the strronger of the three prevails.

While it seems clear that Aristotle's strategies were responsible for producing some of the greatest advances in human thought (both in his own time and in later ages), modern society and education have tended to focus more on the discoveries resulting from these strategies than on the mental processes through which those discoveries were made.

The S.C.O.R.E. Model: Implementing Aristotle's Strategies for Defining "Problem Space"

One simple but powerful way to apply Aristotle's strategies for identifying a "problem space" is to matrix them with the S.C.O.R.E. model in NLP. The S.C.O.R.E. model is essentially a problem solving model that identifies the primary components necessary for effectively organizing information about the problem space related to a particular goal or process of change. The letters stand for Symptoms, Causes, Outcome, Resources, and Effects. These elements represent the minimum amount of information that needs to be gathered to effectively address that problem space.

1. Symptoms are tipically the most noticeable and conscious aspects of the presenting problem or present state. Defining symptoms involves identifying "constraining causes", i.e., the ongoing relationships, presuppositions and boundary conditions (or lack of boundaries) within a system which maintain the present or "symptomatic"state.

2. Causes are the underlying elements responsible for creating and maintaining the symptoms. They are usually less obvious than the symptoms they produce. Defining causes involves identifying the "antecedent" or "precipitating causes" for those symptoms, i.e., past events, actions or decisions that influence the present or "symptomatic" state through a linear chain of "action and reaction".

3. Outcomes are the particular goals or desired states that would take the place of the symptoms. Defining outcomes involves identifying "formal causes" i.e., determining the fundamental form of the outcome and how specifically will one know when one has reached it. Defining outcomes is an important part of establishing the problem space in that it is the gap between the present and desired states that determines the scope of the problem.

4. Resources are the underlying elements responsible for removing the causes of the symptoms and for manifesting and maintaining the desired outcomes. In a sense, defining resources involves finding the "middles"relating to reaching the desired outcomes and transforming the causes of the symptoms.

5. Effects are the longer term results of achieving a particular outcome. Positive effects are typically the reason or motivation for wanting the outcome to begin with (the projected negative effects can create resistance or ecological problems). Specific outcomes are generally stepping stones to get to a longer term effect. Defining effects involves identifying "final causes" i.e., future objectives, goals or ends which guide or influence the system giving current actions meaning, relevance or purpose.

Implementing Aristotle's Strategy for Exploring and Organizing a Problem Space

The following steps summarize one way to apply some of the information we have gathered about Aristotle's strategy for analysis:

1.Choose a topic, subject or phenomenon to analyze or "unravel" and identify several examples to refer to.
e.g. Topic: Genius
Examples: Aristotle, Leonardo Da Vinci, Einstein

2.Consider what is common to all of the examples you have chosen.

3.Make four beginning sentences by answering Aristotle's four fundamental questions:

What is its nature?
X is/are ____________________________________

What are its attributes?
X has/have (many)______________________________________

What causes or makes it?
___________________________________ causes/makes X.

What does it cause or make?
X causes/makes_______________________________________

For example:
"Genius is the ability to discover, create or represent fundamental ideas and relationships."
"Geniuses have the ability to perceive many dimensions and levels of a problem space."
"Special but learnable cognitive strategies cause genius."
"Genius makes it possible to find new ideas and translate them into reality."

4.Check your premises by applying Aristotle's rules of conversion, finding areas where there are potential counter examples and exceptions to the rule.

e.g. Is it possible to discover, create or represent fundamental ideas and relationships and not be a genius?
Is it possible to have the ability to perceive many dimensions and levels of a problem space and not be a genius?
Is it possible to be a genius without special but learnable cognitive strategies?
Would it be possible to find new ideas and translate them into reality if there were no geniuses?

5.Explore the "causes" and "middles" related to your premises by using prompt words such as "because" and writing down the association that comes up for you. Continue to use the prompt after each answer in the manner described earlier in order to draw out your ideas related to the topic.

a) To explore constraining causes you can use the words "while" or "whenever".
b) To explore precipitating causes you may want to use the words "before" or "after".
c) To explore formal causes you can try the words "in the same way that" or "if".
d) To explore final causes you can substitute the phrase "so that".
e) To explore potential counterexamples and constraints in order to check the strength of your cause-effect premises you can substitute the word "although".

You can add sensory oriented terms such as "because I see" or "after he felt", etc. in order to explore different sensory channels and perspectives.

6.Read the sentences/ideas you have written one after the other leaving out the connective words. If what you have written does not adequately represent all of your ideas, you may repeat the process again with a different set of prompts. If you are satisfied with the flow of ideas then you may now refine or add to them to make them into a paragraph and write them down.

7.When you have finished exploring all four beginning sentences, you may want to identify another set of three examples that have the same quality. Determine what is common to these examples. Find the characteristics that are similar between the two sets of common elements from the different sets of examples.