'the parameters of belief'
remember 'spontaneous combustion'?
the belief that SCARLETT had wanted to instil into his SP team?
imagine a group of school children....for example i can remember what 4U boys were like at langley juniors....the teacher sets them a puzzle....they love puzzles....they are given very limited information to solve it....they enjoy doing so...playing by the rules of the game....and the game begins with having to take the given statements as 'fact'....or else the game doesn't work....
now transfer the above idea to SCARLETT showing SP a photo of supposed 'spontaneous combustion'....all you can see is an armchair by an empty grate in a living room....the room is neat and tidy....apart from the armchair which has a pile of ashes upon the seat and two lines of ashes down the arm rests.....you are then told that there were no burns on the chair or on the carpet....it was a case of 'spontaneous combustion'....work out what 'spontaneous combustion is and how it had occurred'.....
well greenie's son wasn't having any of it...the PREMISE to begin with - was 'faulty'....he suggested that somebody had transferred the ashes from elsewhere to that room....and put them upon the armchair.....
his friend then backed him up along the lines of 'well, can we take a sample of the ashes from the arm rests'....meaning:
if we can prove that the ashes on the arm-rests contained dna from the skull and feet....and weren't just from the arms of the incinerated victim....well then we could prove that it wasn't spontaneous combustion....
SCARLETT then told the team that the ashes were long gone....it wasn't possible to test in that way...they had to play by the rules of the game.....the rest of the team were then to tell greenie's son and his friend that they were spoiling the game....they were like 4U school kids.....you have to accept the original premise as true...even if it is 'silly' in order to play the game....
what had scarlett been up to?
he had been trying to train this team into:
thinking INSIDE of the box - rather than outside of it.
why?
'the parameters of belief' - the cat in the box....unable to think outside of it in order to escape....
remember that MI5 'critical thinking paper' - how dumb that was?
it was all about giving you a statement which you had to accept as a 'given' even though if in some cases it was obviously as highly disputable as 'spontaneous combustion'....and you then had to work from a series of so-called 'facts' relayed on afterwards...in order to 'work the puzzle out'....
this is obvious nonsense.....it is 'cat in the box' time....forcing you to 'think inside of the box'....in order to come up with an unreal solution....