Perls was one of the first models in NLP. In fact of his language patterns are the basis for the Meta-Model and was written up in the Structure of Magic, Volume I. It's kind of interesting to watch the man in action that was the model that helped start the field.
0 Comments
Most people understand hypnosis as being something that a hypnotist does to someone. When Milton Erickson was around hypnosis at least the way he did it was you knocked out the conscious mind and made use of the rich amount of learning that were stored within the unconscious mind. The type of hypnosis that Stephen Gilligan does is what he calls generative trance. This type of work from what I have heard him say is when the subject internalizes the hypnotist and creates a relationship within himself where he holds constant and intention that he wants to accomplish while they allow their 'creative unconscious' to generate the solutions as to how. Gilligan's work is really very interesting and in my opinion he is the leading authority on Ericksonian Hypnosis. The life blood of the field of NLP is Modeling. Though there does not seem to be very much of this taking place. I'm guilty of this sin as well. To my knowledge are there only a few well known trainers that teach the skill in depth. There is a distinction that is drawn in the field between NLP Modeling and Analytical Modeling. With the exception of John Grinder all of the well known trainers in NLP teach Analytical Modeling they include Steve Andreas, Robert Dilts, David Gordon and Jonathan Altfeld. Each Modeling strategy has it's strengths and it's weakness and naturally some people are going to be better modelers with certain strategies than others. Steve Andreas' style of modeling from my estimation seems to make great use of Contrastive Analysis he has written articles on Modeling and NLP Modeling which are on his website. Robert Dilts has written an entire book on Modeling in which he stress people focus on features and pattern detection. A feature would be something like what metaprograms are being used, what body movements, submodalities, language patterns, etc... once features have been identified the modelers is to use Mill's methods in order to discern patterns. David Gordon utilizes his experiential array in which all the features that one would search for are already given in a single easy to use format. They are simple to compare and contrast from multiple patterns in order to create their resultant model. Jonathan Altfeld who came to the field of NLP from the field of Artificial Intelligence. He was able to map over some distinctions from his work in Knowledge Engineering along with some of Robert Dilts work in Sleight of Mouth in order to create a very interesting and useful method for Modeling people's thinking processes. It's a very interesting and useful method of modeling indeed. Grinder's method which is by far my favorite from what I can tell or at least what I have attempted to do when I've worked to model people. What you do is identify your model. Have them engage in their competency that you are there to model as they do that you are to simply remain open and to absorb what they are doing until the point where you build up intuitions about what they are doing. You then attempt to replicate what they are doing without any judgment other than did you replicate similar results in a similar context. Once you have done this you then identify an intuition without judgment once again eliminate it from your performance to see if it makes a difference if it does add it again and notice what occurs to make sure it is in deed essential to the process. You continue through this subtraction process until you have cycled through all the pattern necessary in order to reproduce the models competence. Final step is coding of the patterning into a model. Modeling is really an exciting skill. In my opinion the reason it isn't done more is that requires time and effort to accomplish. It's not always a project that can be completed in a short period of time. But it's worth it. Most of the field of self development is filled with hyperbolic crap. Nothing sums this up better than authors putting out books teaching people how they can build their own cults or how to control the minds of others. But in a day and an age where conspiracy theories reign supreme that's the price pay for being able to distribute information out to all corners of the world in a blink of an eye. I wonder how many people that have actually purchased these books have actually been able to to build their own cults or control the minds of others. It makes perfect sense that for the cost of a 12 pack of beer that a person can learn the secrets of world domination. This makes total sense. Politicians, Business People, Therapists, Marketers, etc... spend every year billions of dollars learning to become more influential. And for the cost of a 12 pack of beer you will learn how to build a cult and control the minds of others. I'm all for positive thinking and seeing the glass as half full and all that sometimes I think some people just go to far with what they are peddling to people. I know my views might be offensive to others however I think that not enough people in the field of self development have gone out of their way hold the feet to the fire of all the gurus out in the world that telling people all they have to do is believe that they are going to get what and that no action is responsible on their part at all. I used to know a co-worker who had a child at home along with another one on the way and a husband that sat around in bars all day thinking happy thoughts. He was a big proponent of the secret in fact he wanted to be a motivational speaker. His wife would tell him to go get a job and he would say that no he didn't need to do that because so long as he put out what he wanted into the universe it would provide whatever they needed. He cited the example of him not needing to get a job as the time when he was once drinking with one of his buddies and someone just offered him a position. That was his proof that the universe would bring to him what he wanted in life as long as he put out there what he wanted and believed that he was going to get it. By the way they were in dire financial straits given that she was the only one working. He stated that she was the reason that things weren't working and he attributed it to her negative mentality (or realism however you want to put it). The self help industry has done so much to self helpless individuals. It's totally ludicrous to think that you can get everything you ever wanted in life without having to put forth effort. While there are exceptions to the rules I can say with a large degree of certainty that not everyone made it into the 'lucky sperm club'. Whether you like him or hate him President Obama is an extraordinary speaker. One of the things that I've identified in charismatic speakers is their ability to make use of repetition in order to get their points across. President Obama uses repetition in an interesting way. In NLP there are what are called 'Digital' and 'Analog' distinctions. A digital distinction would be like a light switch it's either on or off. An analog distinction would be like a light switch that allows the use to vary the amount of light from dim to bright. In Hypnosis they would refer to this analog distinction as 'fractionation'. This is when a trance is induce and the hypnotist assists the client to go further into trance and then brings them out at varying degrees (seeing the analog distinction?). This allows the hypnotist to train the client to be more responsive during their session. President Obama unconsciously does this same thing. When he's repeating a phrase multiple times notice the volume and intensity. At first it starts out and a fairly calm tone. Then the next time that he repeats himself he turns up the intensity and does so with each successive utterance. What he's doing unconsciously is training people to respond to his vocal qualities. He does this really well because after he's take the audience into more of a fervor and then brings them back down with a particular. He has now essentially trained everyone he is speaking to to response to the vocal qualities of his voice. Now later on in his speech he can make a point and in order to elicit a greater response from the audience all he has to do his turn hype his enthusiasm in his voice much like a person would turn a light from dim to bright. The Little Albert Experiments were conducted back in 1920 by Behaviorism's John Watson. Essentially what they did was take a small child introduce it to all sorts of things such as dogs, rats, all sorts of different types of stimulus'. Turns out this kid was pretty fearless he would play with everything that was shown to him. This kid didn't appear to have any fear at all. What they then did was have someone behind the child make a loud noise something that would startle him. They did this as they would introduce a white rat that previously Albert tried to play with. What the scientists then did again was to continue doing this up until the point where they found that just introducing the rat without the noise made him cry. They then introduced a white rabbit to him and found that the rabbit made him cry as well. The fear was generalizing to the whiteness of the rabbit. What the scientists continued to do was introduce stimulus' that were in some form or fashion similar to the white rat every time they found it elicited a similar response from him. We live in the age of technology within our life times we will see more progress made in Science, Advertising, Medicine, just about any endeavor than all of the history of humankind. As much as things change is as much as they stay the same. Since biblical times there have been people interested in controlling the minds of others. Forcing people to do things that they don't want to do or for that matter convincing people to do things to do things that they didn't previously want to do. In recent times, certainly as recent as World Wars I & II nations have perfected their abilities to influence the masses. With the advent of Mass Media and the Internet people have only perfected this ability. We've been able to do research to learn about the brain. We've been able to examine structures in the brain such as the neocortex, basal ganglia and the limbic system. All this knowledge has increased our abilities to influence the thoughts of others in efforts to push our agendas. Sometimes these agendas are benevolent and other times they have been for neferious purposes. I managed to find a 1976 Swine Flu commercial put out by the U.S. Government that was encouraging people to run out and get their vaccinations. It is interesting the use of the creepy music that is being played right at the time that some sort of dialogue takes place. Quite often it seems to be when someone is stating something to the effect of, 'I don't need to get a vaccination'. Humans are very well versed at something in NLP we call Anchoring. Meaning we have the ability to associate emotional states with outside stimulus'. In psychology they call this a conditioned response which typically takes place over multiple exposures to a stimulus (though in NLP we can do this with just one exposure). Make note of the, 'What if...' patterning in this footage. This clip does a very good job of illustrating 'universal' hypothetical scenarios that people are likely to engage in. In NLP we would call this a 'state elicitation'. See in order for you to make sense of anything that a person has to say you have to search through your memories for something similar so that you know what i'm talking about. Say i'm talking about my dog. In order to make sense of what a dog is you would have to draw on some representation of what a dog looks like from your internal store house of experience. Most likely the dog that you are imagining will look nothing like the one that i'm imagining but that is a subject for another post. There was a famous hypnotist by the name of Milton Erickson that discovered that if he could describe a scenario in great enough detail a person's body would respond in order to make sense of it. For example once Erickson had a child that was brought to him that constantly wet the bed. Nothing his parents could do would get him to stop. They would wake him up to go, he'd still wet the bed. They would try to bribe him, he'd still wet the bed. They would punish him, still no dice. Etc... but you get the point. So they brought the boy into Erickson. He discovered that the boy loved football (I think off the top of my head that was the sport it was). So Erickson began to tell the boy about how in football one has to tense their muscles and release them at the right time. And he continued to expound on this point about 'muscles tensing and releasing at the right time'. This was the extend of the work that Erickson did with the boy. He just told him vivid stories that he could make sense of with the message that he wanted to convey in it. Here's my point when you view this clip take notice of these things. 1.) The responses of the characters PAIRED up with the creepy music in an effort to create an association. 2.) The hypothetical, 'what if...' scenarios designed to elicit universal experiences from the viewers so as to provide for a frame of reference for what they are attempting to do in step 1 along with embedding the message of, 'get a flu shot' just as Erickson did with the boy. You live for any length of time and you're gonna get screwed over by someone and I think if most of us are honest with ourselves we'll all screwed someone else over as well. However there are people who make their entire living screwing people over. Earlier I posted by an individual named Jonathan Lebid in my opinion he's one of these people. Jonathan promotes stocks that pay him to do so. What he does is legal so long as he puts a disclosure stating that he has been paid to say nice things about the company he is promoting. Problem is a lot of people either don't know about, see or they just plain believe him so they still get screwed over. When I first got into the field of personal development I came across some very unsavory individuals. I was young at the time and I wanted to believe that they were good people and that they wouldn't screw myself nor anyone else over. I was wrong. I was very wrong. I was so wrong that I would rationalize what they were doing so that it made sense to me within the frame work that I wanted to think of them as. Given that a lot of people in the personal development are searching for answers many are susceptible to 'gurus' who all the answers for them. Unfortunately many times whether you’re the person searching for knowledge from one of these 'enlightened souls' or you are someone trying to warn a friend or loved one often times red flags go unheeded. Studies have shown that people have a truth bias. Meaning when it comes to believing what others say people in general have the tendency to believe what they are told which in turn creates blinders. Just as a horse can't see certain things when they are wearing neither can people when they are wearing theirs. It doesn't matter who you are we all have things that we over look or don't pay attention to because we want to believe better. Sometimes the truth seems too overwhelming. And sometimes when what had to come to pass does. There's a saying that I heard the other day on TV. It goes something like, 'no matter how deep you bury the truth in time it will be discovered.' We have fraudsters in the financial industry, personal development field, religion, every walk of life. I was told the other day by someone that they think I take frauds and fraudsters too personally. I think everyone should take them personally. The people that try to do good (and understand we are all fallible and human) in my opinion to call out when the emperor has no clothes. If you see a blind person about to walk into a man hole and you allow it. What does that say about you? |
Archives
September 2021
Categories
All
|