NLP Master Prac
NLP Master Prac
NLP Comprehensive
PO.Box 648
Indian Hills, CO 80454
303-987-2224 800-233-1657
www.nlpco.com
Copyright © 2004-2006 NLP Comprehensive. All rights reserved.
Section 1: Modeling
David Gordon
Section 3: Meta-Programs
Charles Faulkner
•
Section 4: Beliefs
Adam Reynolds
•
Section 8: Appendix A
Appendix B
Appendix C
Section 1 - Modeling
Experiential Array 1
Experiential Array Elicitations 1
Belief Template Elicitation (Bridget) 1
Modeling Gang 1
Elicitation Protocol 1
Lenny Array 1
Acquisition Protocol 1
Acquisition Hindrances 1
Stepping In Array 1
Blank Array (4 copies) 2
Blank Belief Elicitation Template (4 copies) 2
Experiential Array
Modeling Gang
Elicitation Protocol
Lenny Array
Acquisition Protocol
Acquisition Hindrances
Stepping In Array
This not only helps ensure that what they have to offer is what you
want, but will help them orient their experience to the class of
experiences from which you want them to draw examples.
Then, ask him/her to: "Tell me about [that example] as an example of [the ability]."
Then, go right to the other two examples to find the Criterion operating in them, and
compare those with the one you found in the "home" example.
This will quickly either confirm that you have already identified the
correct Criterion or, if not, reveal what it actually is as you and
your exemplar compare across examples.
5. Move on through the rest of the elements in the Array in this same way, that is, by
eliciting the element from the "home" example, and then comparing that across the
exemplar's other examples.
You will find that your exemplar quickly gets the hang of the
patterning you are doing, and will start searching for the patterns
in the elements across examples even before you ask for them.
© 2003 David Gordon and Graham Dawes
NLP Comprehensive Master Practitioner Participant Notes Section 1 p 5
NLP Comprehensive Master Practitioner Participant Notes Section 1 p 6
Lenny Array
Acquisition Protocol
(If hindrances arise, deal with them during acquisition)
Access It
1. Assess the ecology of having the Ability by asking: "When/where do you want this
ability, and how will it affect your life?"
2. Make a connection between having the Ability and satisfying one of the person's
Prime Motivators by iteratively asking: "Why is it important to be able to
[ability]?" until you get the point of redundancy or "it just is."
3. Set the "foundation" for the Array by having the person access reference
experiences for Supporting Beliefs.
4. Establish an actual context within which to try out the elements of the Array by
having the person identify a PAST SITUATION in which s/he really needed the Ability.
6. Help the person recognize how in satisfying the Criterion s/he is also satisfying
his/her Prime Motivator.
7. Have the person step into the PAST SITUATION and guide him/her through
"running" the Primary Strategy and External Behaviors. (Sometimes the person
may already have part or all of the strategy operating in another context; if so, you
can "map" it over from there.)
* have the person rehearse this in other past situations until it is "working"
8. Help the person relate the Enabling Cause-Effect to the Strategy, and notice how
it is "true" (that it does help make it possible to satisfy the Criterion).
10. Bring to the person's attention any real-world difficulties that could arise
(difficulties that could stop them from manifesting the Ability), and help him/her
rehearse overcoming them by using the Secondary Strategies.
Future Pace It
11. Have the person identify the next time s/he will be in a context in which the Ability
is needed, and then rehearse manifesting it until s/he feels confident doing it.
© 2003b David Gordon and Graham Dawes
NLP Comprehensive Master Practitioner Participant Notes Section 1 p. 7
NLP Comprehensive Master Practitioner Participant Notes Section 1 p 8
Hindrances
V.
Basic Submodalities
Submodality Distinctions
The list below is not complete, and the order of listing is irrelevant. Some of the
distinctions listed are actually combinations of more basic distinctions: for instance,
"sparkle" is made up of brightness, location, and duration. What distinctions do you
make that you can add to this list?
Visual.
Brightness, size, magnification, color/black and white, saturation (vividness), hue or color
balance, shape, location, distance, contrast, clarity, focus, duration, movement (slide/movie),
speed, direction of movement, 3- dimensional/flat, perspective or point of view, associated or
dissociated, foreground / background (self/context), frequency or number (simultaneous and/or
sequential) (split screen or multiple images), frame /panorama (lens angle), aspect ratio (height to
width), orientation (tilt, spin, etc.), density ("graininess" or "pixels"), transparent/opaque, strobe,
direction of lighting, symmetry, horizontal or vertical hold, digital (words), sparkle, bulge,...
Auditory.
Pitch, tempo (speed), volume, rhythm, continuous or interrupted, timbre or tonality, digital,
associated/dissociated, duration, location, distance, contrast (harmony/dissonance), figure/ground,
clarity, number, symmetry, resonance with context, external/internal source, monaural/stereo,...
Kinesthetic.
Pressure, location, extent, texture, temperature, movement, duration,
intensity, shape, frequency (tempo), number,... One useful way to
subdivide kinesthetic sensations is the following:
1. Tactile: touch; the skin senses.
2. Proprioceptive: the muscle senses and other internal sensations of posture, breathing, etc.
Change only one submodality at a time to find out how it changes the impact of the experience.
Be alert to ecology! This is only exploration. If a shift is unpleasant or brings up objections,
respect that and explore something else. Notice the following:
a. Do any other submodalities shift along with it? b. Does your feeling change, in either
intensity or quality?
b. Ask yourself, "In what context might this submodality shift be useful?" "How could I
use this to make my life better?"
c. Be sure to try some Auditory and Kinesthetic (tactile and proprioceptive) distinctions
as well as visual ones.
b) sequentially, by first associating into the problem state and getting some of the
submodalities, and then associating into the resource state and finding out if these
submodalities are the same or different in the resource state.
"Put yourself into the problem state for a moment. What are you most aware of?" (This
way you find out what is salient to them about the experience, without prejudicing them.)
Check for both internal and external experience—"How do you see things on the outside?
How do you see things on the inside?"
3. Map Across: "Now put yourself back into the problem state context. Keeping the
same content, I'm going to ask you to change the way you experience that content." Have
the client change visual and auditory submodalities (and kinesthetic ones, only if you're
pretty sure they are not part of a meta response), one at a time. Use hypnotic language to
make it easy. "You can allow your narrow focus to broaden until you have a panoramic
field of vision, etc."
4. Test: "Do you now feel resourceful in this context?" If either non-verbally or verbally
they indicate that they don't yet have the resource fully available, ask them to now
compare the "almost resource state" to the "resource state" and identify any
submodalities that are still different. Map across with these submodalities, until the state
is fully resourceful (still keeping the same "problem" content).
5. Test/Future-Pace: "What is it like now when you put yourself in that context?"
"When is the next time you will be in that context?" (Calibrate to nonverbal response.)
Wait a few minutes while talking about something else, and then test again by asking
about problem content or context.
a. Attempt to disprove the pattern. Once you have a hypothesis about what creates
the response, hold that variable constant while changing other variables to try to get
the response in some other way. Example: if you think number of pictures is crucial,
hold number of pictures constant and change brightness, size, etc. to extremes to see
if that significantly affects the response.
b. Disproving the converse of the pattern. This doesn't prove your conjecture, but
indicates a possibility that the pattern exists.
Example: if you think large size causes the response, try making the picture tiny and
see if you can still get the response by varying other submodalities.
d. Shift context or content. Test to see if the pattern still holds. Most (but not all)
submodality patterns will hold across contexts (possibly with some exceptions).
3. Adding elements: Expand experience by adding distinctions that were not made
before (color, movement, depth, number of examples, etc.) to increase response
and/or resourcefulness.
Since most people punctuate problem contexts in this way: External Cues —> Internal
Response, running the context slower than self results in the responses occurring before
the cues that are perceived to be causing them. This disrupts the cause-effect perception.
7. Separating your Internal state from your own External behavior: Use any
submodality to make a distinction between your External Behavior and your Internal
State. Do this in whatever way seems most appropriate to you. Now go through the
procedure in #6 above, but do all steps associated.
9. The context drop: Think of a resourceful context. Have a picture of this context
come spinning toward you like a frisbee, getting larger and larger as it approaches
you until it falls on you and becomes fully three-dimensional and you're in it.
10. "In a hundred years who will know the difference:" Explore with someone (or
yourself) for whom saying or hearing this makes a useful difference (some people
only become annoyed or depressed). What does she do inside to change state in a
useful way (See Using Your Brain, p. 38). Contrast this with someone who gets
annoyed, depressed, etc.
11. Above it all: Think of a memory that still bothers you, and you'd like to be
"above it all." First run a movie of that event as you recall it now....Now make
yourself "bigger than life" until you're literally above it all, and rerun the movie of
that event associated....Now simply recall that event again and notice if your response
to it is different.
12. Kinesthetic Wave: Think of a pleasant experience that is localized in your body,
and that you'd like to experience much more of. Allow that feeling to spread rapidly
over and through your entire body like a wave. When that wave reaches your skin
(the edges of your body) it will bounce back, like a wave off the shore. It can spread
through your body again, and again,...until you've had enough for now.
1. Think of an experience that was difficult at the time, but now you can "look back
and laugh at it."
4. Test each difference, one at a time, to find out how powerful it is in transforming
#2 into #1.
5. Map Across. Transform experience #2 into something that you can laugh at.
After you have each completed this process, "compare notes" to find
similarities in how this transformation occurred.
What elements were common to the three of you and which were different? Did any of
the different elements have the same kind of effect?
If you can do this without content, it will make it much easier. If you get stuck
doing it without content, ask for only enough content for you to be able to get
going again.
2. Gather information: Use the frame of "Let's say I had to fill in for you for a
day. To do a complete job, I would have to do your limitation. Teach me how to
do it." Find out how this achievement works: when to do it (cues), and how to do
it (process). In particular, you need to know which submodalities change in order
to create the problem.
3. Testing: When you think you know how to do this, test in two ways:
a) Ask B to take the desired self-image picture or some other pleasant
content and find out if the same process changes B's response in the same
way. An amplifier amplifies anything. By switching content you can find
out if you have found a mechanism to amplify, irrespective of content.
When you change content, the quality of the response may be different,
but the intensity will probably vary in the same way (or possibly in an
inverse way).
b) Try it out yourself. If you do what B does, is your response similar?
(B may be doing something else that you don't know about yet.) Or they
may be organized differently from you, so it will not work for you in the
same way unless you take on the same submodality change relationship
that your partner has.
5. Plan: Next we want you to design a swish for this person, using the
information that you have gathered. You will use the key submodalities to make
the cue representation begin intense and become not intense at the same time as
the self-image picture starts not intense and becomes intense.
2. Swish.
The cue changes from high to low intensity as Desired Self representation changes
from low to high intensity.
Repeat five times, with an interruption at the end of each repetition.
3. TEST.
a. Make the cue representation. Notice response.
b. Test behaviorally by putting the client into the context in which the limitation
occurred previously.
c. Ask a question about the context in which the limitation previously occurred,
and notice whether s/he refers to the limitation in the past tense.
2. Swish this.
1. Use the swish pattern to chain from the first state on the list below to the last. The
context will stay the same throughout the chain.
2. First see what you see (associated) in a situation (context) in which you now hesitate.
3. In a corner, see yourself being bored, have that picture get big and bright, and step in.
4. See yourself in the corner being impatient, have that picture get big and bright, and
step in.
5. See yourself in the corner with wanton desire, have that picture get big and bright and
step in.
6. See yourself in the corner "going for it" Have that picture get big and bright, but keep
this last picture dissociated. Now open your eyes.
1. Hesitation
2. Boredom
3. Impatience
4. Wanton desire
5. Go for it!
7. Testing: Think of the original situation in which you used to hesitate. States should
chain through to "go for it." Or use a future-pace as a test: "When is the next time you
will encounter one of those situations in which you used to hesitate?"
2. Notice Location. Where in your personal space do you imagine each of these
events? Next, you can get a sense of where the remainder of your timeline, is. Let the
rest of your past, present, and future fill in where it belongs, making a continuous (but
not usually straight) line from birth to the present.
For more detail and examples of utilizing Timelines, see Change Your Mind—and Keep
the CHANGE, Chapter 1, and Heart of the Mind, Chapter 19.
There is no "ideal timeline." Every way of coding time will have advantages and
disadvantages, and with a little experience you can predict them by knowing a person's
timeline. Each of us can find our own best arrangement, and shift how we arrange time in
different contexts.
This means that when you do timeline work, it is important to make any changes with
respect to your (or your client's) outcomes. Ask: "What outcome do you want to have by
changing your timeline?"
Having different ways to code time in different contexts can give you more flexibility.
You may decide you want to keep your current timeline coding in some contexts, and add
another method in other contexts. For instance, if you have arranged your timeline in a
typical "V," you may benefit from putting your past behind you and your future straight
in front of you in some contexts. If you have done the latter, you may benefit from a "V"
arrangement in some contexts. Each has predictable advantages and disadvantages.
b) Try out new timeline arrangements, making adjustments, making full use of hypnotic
language patterns that presuppose that the change will occur spontaneously: "Allow it to
move to the side," etc.
c) Explore how to best accomplish all outcomes: You can use different timeline codings
in different contexts. Or, find a way to achieve the positive outcomes of the old timeline
on the new timeline arrangement.
3. Future Pacing:
When you have identified a new timeline arrangement that fully satisfies yourself (your
client), have the person future-pace thoroughly: throughout the day, waking up the next
morning with the same timeline, throughout the week, etc. Be sensitive to any objections,
using them to adjust the timeline, or to redefine the context.
4. Program Future Adjustments:
Suggest that they may find themselves making additional modifications in the future, as
they notice how this new arrangements works, and what might work even better. By
saying this, the person knows how to continue this process when future events bring
additional information and/or objections to what you have done.
Since timelines are the basis of our experience of what is real, changing timelines can
have profound and far-reaching effects. Carefully future-pace and check for ecology. If
you do not find a timeline arrangement that is fully satisfactory to your client, put their
timeline arrangement back the way it was when you started.
2. Elicit timeline. Quickly elicit the client's timeline. Be sure to check for location
and association/dissociation.
3. Put the change into the past. Using that person's submodalities for the past,
have him take the change he's just made and put it into the past, so that he
experiences the change as having happened some time ago. This makes the
change more powerful and convincing because it becomes a past reference
experience. Be sure to put at least one example in the past of behaving in the new
way. Often it's safer to put at least three examples into different times in the past.
4. Test/Check. Does the client experience this as subjectively real? If not, check for
additional submodalities to shift to make it like other past experiences, and/or put
several examples into the past.
5. Timeline Future-pace. Put the change into the future as well: Think of
something you know you will do, or will happen in the future. Make a
representation of whatever will be different due to the change you've made, and
code it in submodalities to match what you know will happen. Place this on your
future timeline, in the right context (make sure you have it occur in response to
the appropriate cues).
Notice which makes more difference for you; putting the change in the past, or putting
the change in the future. If you do both, you help to "lock in" the change with a wider
range of people.
2. Ecology Check: does any part of me have any objections to this shift? Check
thoroughly for ecology. You may need to contextualize the shift in order to make it
ecological. If you encounter objections, recycle to 1 above and redefine the change.
4. Apply the submodality distinctions that you discovered in step 3 (the submodalities
that rank your clients' criteria on a continuum) and use these submodalities to change
the criterion in the direction you want it to go.
NOTE: Be very alert to ecology concerns when you do this, particularly incongruence or
unconscious signals. You are adjusting key distinctions in this person's life. Do it gently
and respectfully.
2. A thinks of something that is neutral to them not important in any way. Pick
something here in the room so you can use it later.
Note: B should also be calibrating to A's non-verbal behavior when they talk about what
is important to them. This will be used later.
4. B's task is to use the submodalities of "importance" discovered above and make the
"neutral" item of lasting importance to A.
5. A's task now is to "blow out" the importance of the item by using the submodalities
of importance and carrying them over a threshold. B assists A as necessary.
4. Test these differences on the representation that creates the compulsion to discover:
a. which analogue submodality can be used to increase the feeling of compulsion
5. Using the analogue submodality that is the most powerful "driver" of the feeling of
compulsion:
a. Quickly increase this submodality to it's maximum and then pause for a moment
before checking to find out if the feeling of compulsion has "popped"
b. If the feeling of compulsion can still be generated, use the ratchet method to
quickly increase the submodality to its' limit, and then repeat this quickly until it
pops. Pause for a moment then test for the compulsion.
After the compulsion is gone, check to see if the client can get it back in any other
representational system. If so, identify the driver in that rep. system and repeat the
process.
2.) Always check to be sure the person can now access / think of the previous
compulsion comfortably. If they cannot, then do a Repulsion blowout, by simply
repeating the Compulsion Blowout on the thing they are now repulsed by. If the
person cannot comfortably think of or be in the presence of the previous compulsion
trigger, than they are still lacking choice and that's what we want them to have -
"Choice is better than no choice. "
2. Spatially locate this experience somewhere outside yourself and then stand with it to
your left.
3. Begin with your chin over your right shoulder and coordinate the following:
External Behavior:
1. Exhale deeply and slowly as you move your head from right to left. Your chin will be
over your left shoulder at the end of this exhalation.
2. Then, inhale deeply and slowly as you move your head from left to right. Your chin
will again be over your right shoulder at the end of this inhalation.
2. As you inhale, visualize the "hooks" (or inappropriate extension of energy) that you
have attached to the other person or the experience being drawn back into your body.
Allow your unconscious to participate. This energy may be seen as a color or shape
and felt as moving into any part of your body. It's reception will tend to subtly shift
your awareness of the experience.
NOTE: The time needed to experience a definite sensation of "disconnect" will vary
with the intensity of attachment. Repetition of this pattern can be important depending on
the degree of inappropriate "attachment" to the person or experience.
"Epistemology, like art and morality, begins with drawing a line somewhere."
Charles Faulkner
• Colloquially - the filters through which we perceive the world; perceptual filters
• Technically - The level above (meta) Strategies (programs) in the study of the structure of subjective experience.
Each is a different set of distinctions that are independent of all other distinctions.
Each has a neuro-linguistic form: an internal representational form, physiology, and language and/or grammatical evidence.
Meta-Programs Elicitation
All Meta-Programs are"operating" all the time. At any given time, in any given context, some of them are more in the
foreground of experience and awareness, while others are more in the background. Meta-Programs are the "woof and warp"
in the weave of our experience. Elicitation questions will net the questioner the Meta-Programs for the context in which the
questions were asked. When the questioner sets the context specifically enough, the answers are usually accurate for the
purpose of determining role bound responses: such as for a specific job or type of career. Care needs to be taken to character-
ize the person's behavior as exhibiting certain Meta-Program leanings and not the person. While the person does act consis-
tently with a Meta-Program distinction across a variety of contexts, the person could learn an alternative behavior at any time.
The elicitation of Meta-Programs from language consists of asking certain questions of a pre-determined context. The
answers may be interpreted in each of the following ways:
• Number of utterances/words. If the person uses five separate words consistent with a particular Meta-Porgram
distinction, this would be counted as five separate times the Meta-Program distinction was made.
• Intensity of expression of the utterance. While several words are used, human beings will often emphasize what
they believe or care about by a different tonality, and/ or change in volume, or cadence.
• Ranking as a sequence of utterances. When words are spoken, some will come first and others later. The first few
can often be taken as being more in the foreground, that is, more important, more on the mind of their speaker.
Types of Strategies
Name Decision Motivation Conviction Memory Creativity Learning Reality
Function Selection Engage/Act Verify Reference Generate Incorporate External/Int.
Attention Choice Energy Congruence Experience Alternatives Responsiveness "Real"
Info Type Digital Analog Reflexive Access Meta / all Re-contextualize Distinctive
T.O.T.E./G.E.O.
Context
(when & where)
META-PROGRAMS
CONTENT-People, Things, Activities, Information, Place
DIRECTION - Away From, Toward
AUTHORITY - External, Internal
PERCEPTUAL POSITION - Self, Other, Observer
DECISION FACTORS - Same, Comparison, Difference
Elicitation Question: Tell me about a significant (set context: work, relationship, etc.) decision.
People [and animals]- Who - emphasis on others, relating, and / or their feelings
Things - What - emphasis on objects [nouns], verbs of acquisition/possession with concrete nouns
Activities - How - emphasis on actions/ behaviors [verbs], also verbs with physical descriptions
Information - How/Why - emphasis on knowing [nominalizations], also verbs with abstract nouns
PERCEPTUAL The quantification of association or dissociation of self with self, others and observation of self.
POSITION Elicitation Question: Tel me about a (set context: work, relationship, etc.) that gave you trouble.
Self- seeing, hearing, and feeling the world from within one's body
Other - seeing, hearing, and feeling the world from within another's body
Observer - seeing, hearing, and feeling the world from within a disinterested observer's body
ATTENTION The direction in which the ability to see, hear and feel are directed
DIRECTION No elicitation question. Notice how often the individual refers self, others or observers.
Self - attention to one's own concerns, feelings, and experience; self referencing
SCOPE The chunk size of experience preferred in processing. Also the order of chunk size preference.
General - large, big picture," whole" object, state, experience
Proactive: Active
Language: "Do it, get;" short sentences, action verbs, etc.
Similarity
Language: "same"
Comparison
Language: " more, less, improve, better, -er words; bigger, richer, etc."
Difference
Language: "different, unique, unusual, one-of-a-kind, change"
REASON The first steps of action: Either the order or generating options for beginning
Ask why s/he choose _?
Procedures
Sequential, Numbered
Options
Random, Criteria
Self - Internal
Language: "I decide, I know"
CRITERIAL EVIDENCE
A see, hear, and feel description of what will fulfill the CRITERIA
Elicitation Question: How do you know this product is/has (CRITERIA) ?
REPRESENTATIONAL SYSTEMS
Kinesthetic - Does it, "How it feels, getting touch, gut instinct," etc.
EVIDENCE PATTERNING In what way are enough examples collected in order to satisfy conviction?
Elicitation Question: How many times do you have to (SEE. HEAR. DO IT)
to be convinced?
Frequency
Language: "3 times, 3 or 4 times," etc.
Duration
Language: "at least 6 months," etc.
Automatic
Language: "1 time"
Never
Language: "never convinced, have to check continually," etc.
2. PERCEPTUAL POSITION
Tell me about a (set context: work, relationship, etc.) decision that gave you trouble.
Self
Other
Observer
3. ATTENTION DIRECTION
Self
Other
Observer
4. TIME FRAME
How did you go about making that decision?
Past
Present
Future
5. SCOPE
General
Natural
Specific
7. DIRECTION
What will having that do for you?
Towards Goals
Away From Problems
8. LEVEL
Reactive
Proactive
9. DECISION FACTORS
What's the relationship between the last time you (set frame: purchased, decided, used, etc.) and this time?
Comparison
Difference
Similarity
Polarity Responder
TIME FRAME
PERCEPTUAL
POSITION
What you do
3. Identify a person in your life with the requisite skills you desire.
The skills you desire may have been in a person you simply didn't identify with; a neighbor, a teacher,
shopkeeper, etc., may not have appeared until later in your life. For instance, after you left your small town. Find
a specific and real person in a specific situation that exemplifies the skills you desire. Make sure the situation is
one you personally witnessed. Determine the ecology of gaining these skills. How would they affect your life,
your family, your future? If you have concerns, pick another, more appropriate model. Test this model by step-
ping into this person's experience and trying it on. When you have selected a model and tested it to your satisfac-
tion, step out to an observing position in which you can see what you have done.
4. Transfer your identification from your source context to your skilled model and bring these learnings up
through your past to your present.
Associate back into your original 'source context' just the way you did it. If you are in your role model,
first go into your younger self and begin from there. As you are your younger self in this situation, re-experience
the thoughts, feelings, and actions you learned from your role model in that situation. Experience them, memorize
them, and exhale, physically stepping out of your younger you and taking them completely back to your role
model. Experience them one last time in your role model and exhale, physically stepping out of them and leaving
them there. You are now in a neutral space.
Walk over to where you experienced your skilled role model and step in, inhaling it into you.
Experience your skilled role model's thoughts, feelings and actions fully. Memorize them and bring them with
you into your younger you in the source context. Take the time to let that younger you drink in deeply these
important ways of moving through the world. Then take these experience through your past moments right up to
your present moment, and then project them on into your future.
5. Now and notice how you think and feel about your new skill.
For many people the process is complete. Others may want simply to repeat the pattern in order to deep-
ening the learnings, while other sometimes want to add additions skills that have come to their attention.
Beliefs 1
What Is A Belief? 1
Forms of Belief 2
Defining Beliefs 5
Robert Dilts' description of Beliefs: 6
The NLP Submodality Belief Change Process 8
Conversational Belief Change 9
The Walking Belief Change Process 10
The Walking Belief Change Pattern 11
Reimprinting 12
Beliefs
What Is A Belief?
Beliefs enable us to operate in the world in many useful ways. Most of our
beliefs are helpful. Upon spying a doorknob, most of us will operate on a
generalization based on years of similar experiences: we guess that turning
the thing will open the door, unless it's locked. If so, we resort to a series
of generalizations about how to open a locked door, or perhaps how to
interpret the fact that the door is locked. In the case of the Men's Room
door, we might assume it was occupied. We wait. Arriving at an office
building to find it locked, we might make the opposite assumption - that
it's unoccupied. Growing up is in part a process of learning to generalize in
this way.
• Direct experience
• Modelling others' experiences
• Indirect experience.
Some people build a belief based on one compelling experience - Steve Andreas
talks about "the guy who knew that all Indians walk single file, because he saw
one once." Others have much more rigorous requirements for building a belief,
needing multiple examples or repeated experiences over time in order to believe.
It is common for children to build beliefs based on what they are told by parents,
siblings, or teachers. Beliefs can also be formed by reading about something.
Most people also have beliefs which conflict with one another.
Beliefs are perceptual filters - they are the lenses through which we view the
environment. A person's beliefs and values determine much of their personality
structure. Beliefs are expressed in every choice you make - from your career to
your clothes, from your lunch to your lover.
Forms of Belief
How soon will the sun rise? (The sun will rise)
We must leave earlier than usual if we are to make it on time.
{Traffic will slow down at rush hour)
You will look great in that outfit. (The clothes will fit)
How often do you get your hair cut? (Hair grows)
Will you carry the baby? (Babies can't walk)
You can't think of anything else. (Men want only one thing)
My feelings come second don't they? {Business people care more
about money than relationships)
© 2000, NLP Comprehensive Section 4 - Page 2
PO Box 648 NLP Comprehensive Master Practitioner Participant Notes
Indian Hills, CO 80454
Without presuppositions, we would be unable to function.
All beliefs are presupposed to some extent. The more deeply presupposed,
the more unconscious they are.
Values and Criteria: All Values are Criteria, but not all Criteria are
Values. A Value is a criterion that is applied across contexts or, if you
wish, to "life," or " myself," or some such over-arching context. Values
are desirable principles and qualities. What we value will determine what
kinds of experiences we seek and repeat in our lives, and what we avoid.
Criteria are the standards of evaluation being applied within a particular
context. Criteria are used to gauge the extent to which our values are met
in a particular experience.
In the end, the only thing that really counts is shareholder value.
"Nothing is at last sacred but the integrity of our own mind. "
Emerson.
You can't be too rich or too thin.
"Only passions, great passions, can elevate the soul to great
things." Diderot.
He who dies with the most toys wins.
"Hold a true friend with both your hands." Nigerian proverb.
"Is life so dear or peace so sweet, as to be purchased at the price of
chains and slavery? I know not what course others may take, but as
for me, give me liberty or give me death. " Patrick Henry
Limiting beliefs can be changed. This section of the training presents many
ways to detect and change limiting beliefs into empowering convictions.
In what areas of your life could you expand the choices in terms of what's
possible and worthwhile?
Consider the following content areas when examining your beliefs for
limitations:
Health Work Change: pain vs. gain
Prosperity Fun Spiritual life
Relationships Creativity Aging
3. Ecological Concerns: Do more than usual to secure ecological soundness. Beliefs are
very powerful and have widespread impact. Be very careful.
Demonstration of eliciting a surface belief and a core belief:
a. How to uncover a Surface Belief:
• "What do you believe about yourself that limits you in some way?"
There is an old story about a patient who was being treated by a psychiatrist. The patient wouldn't
eat or take care of himself, claiming that he was a corpse. The psychiatrist spent many hours
arguing with the patient trying to convince him he wasn't a corpse. Finally, the psychiatrist asked
the patient if corpses bleed.
The patient replied, "Of course corpses don't bleed, all of their body functions have stopped."
The psychiatrist then convinced the patient to try an experience. The psychiatrist would carefully
prick the patient with a pin, and they would see if he started to bleed. The patient agreed. After
all, he was a corpse.
The psychiatrist gently pricked the patient's skin with a needle, and sure enough, he started to
bleed. With a look of shock and amazement, the patient gasped, "I'll be darned ... corpses DO
bleed!"
Our beliefs are a very powerful force in our behavior. It is common wisdom that if someone
really believes he can do something he will do it, and if he believes something is impossible, no
amount of effort will convince him that it can be accomplished. What is unfortunate is that many
sick people, such as those with cancer or heart disease, will often present their doctors and friends
with the same belief mentioned in the story above.
Beliefs like "It's too late now," "There's nothing I can do anyway," "I'm a victim.. .my number
came up." Can often limit the full resources of the patient. Our beliefs about ourselves and what
is possible in the world around us greatly impact our day-to-day effectiveness.
All of us have beliefs that serve as resources as well as beliefs that limit us. The power of beliefs
was demonstrated in an enlightening study in which a group of children were tested to have
average intelligence was divided at random into two equal groups. One of the groups was
assigned to a teacher who was told that the children were "gifted." The other group was given to a
teacher who was told that the children were "slow learners." A year later, the two groups were re-
tested for intelligence. Not surprisingly, the majority of the group that was arbitrarily identified as
"gifted" scored higher than they had previously, while the majority of the group that was labeled
"slow" scored lower! The teacher's beliefs about the students affected their ability to learn.
In another study, 100 cancer "survivors" (patients who had reversed their symptoms for over 10
years) were interviewed about what they had done to achieve success. The interviews showed that
not one treatment method stood out as being more effective than any other. Some had taken the
standard medical treatment of chemotherapy and/or radiation, some had used a nutritional
approach, others had followed a spiritual path, while others concentrated on a psychological
approach, and some did nothing at all. The only thing that was characteristic of the entire group
was that they all believed that the approach they took would work.
Certainly, these examples seem to demonstrate that our beliefs can shape, affect, or even
determine our degree of intelligence, health, relationships, creativity, even our degree of
happiness and personal success. Yet, if indeed our beliefs are such a powerful force in our lives,
how do we get control of them so they don't control us?
Neuro-Linguistic Programming (NLP) provides perhaps the most powerful and exciting model of
the mind and set of behavioral tools in existence. Through the processes of NLP, beliefs and
belief strategies may be explicitly mapped and directed.
The three most common areas of limiting beliefs center around issues of hopelessness,
helplessness and worthlessness. These three areas of belief can exert a great deal of influence
with respect to a person's mental and physical health. Hopelessness occurs when someone does
not believe a particular desired goal is even possible. It is characterized by a sense that, "No
matter what I do it won't make a difference." What I want is not possible to get. It's out of my
control. I'm a victim."
Helplessness occurs when, even though he or she believes that the outcome exists and is possible
to achieve, a person does not believe that he or she is capable of attaining it. It produces a sense
that, "It's possible for others to achieve this goal but not for me. I'm not good enough or capable
enough to accomplish it."
Worthlessness occurs when, even though a person may believe that the desired goal is possible
and that he or she even has the capability to accomplish it, that individual believes that he or she
doesn't deserve to get what he/she wants. It is often characterized by a sense that, "I am a fake. I
don't belong. I don't deserve to be happy or healthy. There is something basically and
fundamentally wrong with me as a person, and I deserve the pain and suffering that I am
experiencing."
NLP offers specific techniques to elegantly and effectively help people to shift these types of
limiting beliefs to beliefs involving hope for the future, a sense of capability and responsibility,
and a sense of self-worth and belonging.
Break state.
2. Doubt or uncertainty: Now think of something that you doubt. It might be true or it
might not be true; you are not sure. List the submodalities of the experience of doubt.
Break state.
Break state.
4. Unwanted Belief: Think of a belief you have about yourself that you wish you didn't
have, because it limits you in some way or it has undesirable consequences. List the
submodalities of this belief.
5. New belief: What new belief would you like to have in place of the unwanted belief?
Notice the content of this preferred belief.
Break state.
6. Unwanted Belief into Doubt: Keeping the content constant, change the
submodalities of the unwanted belief into the submodalities of doubt by first using the
most powerful submodality differences: association/dissociation and location. Then
change the rest of the submodalities of belief into the submodalities of doubt.
7. Change Content of Old Belief into Content of New Belief: Send the old belief
picture (which is now doubted) into the distance until it is out of sight. Then see a picture
coming back from the distance and containing the content of the new belief (in Doubt
submodalities).
8. Doubt into Belief: Keeping the new belief content, change the submodalities of
doubt into the submodalities of belief (that is, the same submodalities as #1 above).
Break State.
10. Future pace: Think of a time in the future when having this new belief will make a
difference. What is it like?
2. Contrast the belief and the doubt to discover differences in how they are represented.
3. Test each of these differences to determine which are the most powerful in changing
belief into doubt. (Be sure to test for this difference, since some of the differences
may be coded to other things, for example, whether the person likes this belief.)
6. Elicit Doubt: As you do, use spatial anchor and tonality to shift location.
8. "As you let go of old certainties, making room for new learning, notice....
(advantages, etc.)" Introduce new belief using hypnotic language.
9. Test.
2. Place the labels on the floor in a clockwise direction around an imaginary dinner table, as
though they were place settings.
3. Identify a Current Belief about yourself that limits you in some way.
5. Now establish a "location anchor" for each of the six labels. That is, physically step into each
location of change and think of an experience which fits its description. It's often most
effective to use personal experiences and beliefs rather than philosophy. Notice where in your
body each experience resides, and notice what movement your body makes in each location
of change. Break state between each location of change. (It's also interesting to notice the
visual, auditory and kinesthetic submodalities of each experience.)
Examples:
a. Current Belief: The belief that limits you in some way.
b. Open to Doubt: "Maybe I'm not repulsive." "Maybe the moon doesn't follow our car."
c. Museum of Old Beliefs: "I'm stupid." "Money grows on trees." The Tooth Fairy.
d. Preferred Belief: the belief you'd rather have.
e. Open to Belief: "Maybe I am attractive." "Maybe the Cold War is really over."
f. The Sacred Place: "Children must be protected from brutalization."
Part II
6. Now start at the beginning again. Step into the Current Belief location and access your
limiting belief. This time, slowly and gently walk the limiting belief directly into the Open to
Doubt location (allowing the limiting belief to be transformed into doubt.) Then walk the now
doubted belief into the Museum of Old Beliefs, and physically place that former limiting
belief near the other former beliefs in the Museum of Old Beliefs.
7. Now step into the Preferred Belief location and access what you want to believe. Slowly and
gently walk your preferred belief directly into the Open to Belief location (allowing it to be
strengthened) and then walk your preferred belief into the Sacred Place (allowing it to
become very strong).
8. Finish by feeling the now sacred preferred belief in your body and stepping directly into the
Current Belief location (allowing it to be transformed). Feel your preferred belief as
something you currently believe. Repeatedly step between the Sacred Place and Current
Belief locations several times.
9. Now, think of what you currently believe. How is it different than it was?
1. Identify the specific images, sounds and/or feelings associated with the impasse.
Anchor them and use them to remember the earliest experience of the feeling
associated with the impasse.
While still in the feeling, identify the generalizations or beliefs formed from that
experience.
2. Step out of the experience and watch it as if it were a film. Identify any other
generalizations or beliefs formed as a result of the imprint experience, particularly
those that might have formed after the fact.
3. Determine the positive intent or secondary gain of the feeling of impasse. What
did/does this feeling accomplish for you? Determine the positive intent of the
significant others involved in the memory.
4. Identify and anchor the resources needed by all significant parties in the event
individually.
5. For each significant person in the imprint experience, replay the film seeing how the
experience would have changed if the necessary resources had been available to that
person. Repeat for each person making sure that the added resources are sufficient to
change the experience.
6. Associate with each significant person in the event and relive the imprint experience
from their point of view (one at a time). End by stepping into the younger self and
experiencing it from that point of view. Repeat until this new experience is as strong
as the original imprint.
7. Maintaining the resources used throughout this process, move through time forward
to the present, changing other experiences in light of this new experience. Look into
the future noticing how these new resources will impact future situations, decisions,
and patterns.
8. Now go back and remember the impasse as you had previously. What is different
now?
SLEIGHT OF MOUTH 1
A. SOM: Model of the World 1
B. SOM: Prior Cause, Consequences, Intent 2
Prior Cause 2
Consequences 2
Intent 2
Standard SOM Exercise Format 2
C. SOM: Counter-example, Switch Referential Index 3
Counter-Example 3
Switch Referential Index 3
D. SOM: Redefine, Change Frame 3
E. SOM: Criteria Utilization 4
F. SOM: Meta & Apply to Self 5
Meta 5
Apply to Self 5
Apply to Self Worksheet 6
G. SOM: Reversing Presuppositions 6
General Formula for Reversing the Presupposition: 7
H. SOM: Integration Exercise 8
SLEIGHT O F M O U T H P A T T E R N S - E X A M P L E S 9
First example: "Your being late shows me that you don't care about me." 9
Second Example: "Not knowing makes me feel foolish." 14
SOM Worksheet 18
META MODEL III 20
Meta Model III Exercise 20
Verb relaxes 21
Exercise 1: Backtracking 21
Exercise 2: Changing Time Frame 22
APPLYING PRESUPPOSITIONAL FORMS TO AN OUTCOME 23
Applying Presuppositional Forms Exercise 27
Comparisons Exercise 27
Possible components to change in a comparison: 28
Language Pattern Flow Chart 29
Sleight of Mouth
Exercise
1. A states a limiting belief. (Use your own or someone else's.) A notices how he represents this
belief internally.
2. B makes a simple "backtrack" pacing statement.
3. C makes a model-of-the-world statement (a pace and a lead). Both B and C notice A's external
response(s).
4. A notices any internal experiential shifts when he hears C's statement. A briefly reports these to
B and C.
5. Rotate positions.
Note: Are you (B&C) maintaining rapport with A? If not, get feedback from A about how you can change
your delivery to maintain rapport.
Stretches
1. When you are C, change which model of the world categories you use to be sure you use
each at least once.
2. C uses two (or more) categories of "model of the world" in the same sentence.
3. A gets more bizarre or "psychotic" with his original problem statement.
Prior Cause
Consequences
Key Question: "What happens afterward, as a result?"
Purpose: This expands the frame in the other direction. Adding in future consequences can
make something perceived as positive become negative, or vice versa. (Remember the story of
the old farmer and his horse.) It can also add intensity to an already-perceived positive or
negative perception.
Intent
Key Question: "What was intended?"
Purpose: (usually positive intent) Shifting from negative behaviors to a positive intent
creates agreement and appreciation—the basis for new, more positive behavior.
1. A states a limiting belief. B and C use the Meta-Model if necessary to get this into the
form of a cause-effect or a complex equivalence.
2. B points to one of the SOM categories you are exploring. C makes a SOM reply using
that category. B confirms that C's reply is an example of that category.
A notices what shifts in his experience.
Repeat steps 2 and 3 as long as it's useful. Then rotate positions and begin with a new
limiting belief. Write down the belief statements and replies that are particularly
useful.
Stretch:
You can make replies to just the A side of the equation, just the B side of the
equation, and both A and B, for each SOM category.
Counter-Example
Key Question: "When is this not true?"
Purpose: Finding exceptions to limiting beliefs creates a doorway to a new more-useful belief.
Be sure you gain use of all four kinds of counter-example.
The four kinds of counter-example:
Not A.
Not B.
A, but not B.
Not A, yet B.
Exercise: Use Standard SOM Exercise Format Given Under "B" Above.
Change Frame
Key Question: "What do I want to pay attention to? What do I want to include / exclude?"
Purpose: The scope of what we experience impacts our response. Making it larger or
smaller or moving it somewhere else creates a different experience.
The frame can be changed to include / exclude different contexts, time, resources,
numbers of people, or criteria.
Exercise: Use Standard SOM Exercise Format Given Under "B" Above.
Meta
Talk about the belief as a thing. Step outside the belief & talk about it.
Purpose: Help the person dissociate from their belief. Also, this is an important
component of the following pattern, Apply to Self.
Apply to Self
Key Question: How can the criteria in the belief be used against the belief?
Purpose: Utilize criteria within belief to blow it out.
Three Components Generally Required:
1. Go Meta
2. Utilize Criterion
3. Blow Out Belief
To utilize"away-from" criteria:
1. Restate belief as "I don't like x."
2. Say, "This belief is x."
Example: "I don't like absolutes." Response: "Is that an absolute?"
To utilize situations in which their having the belief contradicts the belief.
1. Say, "The fact that you have this belief proves it's not true."
Example: "I can't learn." Response: "You learned that really well, didn't you?"
Example 1: A woman complained that she couldn't have a relationship with a man,
because she had personal flaws, and these flaws would always cause her relationship to
© 2003 NLP Comprehensive Section 5 - Page 6
PO Box 648 NLP Comprehensive Master Practitioner Participant Notes
Indian Hills, CO 80454
fall apart anyway, so there was no hope. Her Belief was "The fact that I have personal
flaws will always cause any relationship with a man to fail."
Reverse Presupposition: "In what way, now that you think about it, will the fact that
you have personal flaws and you know it, actually support your developing a better
relationship (than if you had no personal flaws at all)?"
Example 2: Another client wasn't getting what she wanted sexually. She didn't tell her
boyfriend what she wanted, because that would be limiting him, and taking away his
choice. Connirae said, "Have you ever had the pleasure of giving someone a gift that you
know they wanted to receive?" Client (Yes). "Did you realize that you've been taking
that choice away from your boyfriend? You haven't told him clearly what you want, so
you're limiting him from giving it to you, even if he wants to.... If you tell him what you
want, then at least he has the choice of giving it to you if he wants to."
Notes:
1. Reversing the Presupposition differs from Redefining in that it results in a new belief
that is opposite to the old one. Essentially you are asking, "How is your belief the
opposite of what's true?" "How is the opposite of what you thought, really true?" It
differs from counter-example in that we're going for how the belief is untrue across
the board, rather than just in certain contexts.
2. The question form in the General Formula above enables the client to generate the
evidence for the new belief.
Purpose: Increase your facility with SOM patterns. Learn more about how different
SOM patterns shift beliefs.
Note: We do not intend to do this exercise in class, but include it for your use afterward
as you continue to study on your own.
Round 1:
1. A thinks of a limiting belief and states it in the form of a complex equivalence or a cause-
effect statement. A notices how he/she represents this belief (in submodalities and
content), and notes this on a slip of paper, while B and C go on to step 2.
2. C is meta-person. C specifies a pattern for B to use (and makes sure B uses it). C also
acts as secretary, briefly writing down each statement, pattern, and response.
3. B uses the pattern to make an intervention. Notice if (and how) this response changes
A's state (non-verbal shifts, etc.).
Before responding verbally, A notices any changes in his/her experience of the belief
(submodalities or content), and writes them down.
Round 2:
1. A replies to B's intervention. (C writes this down.) This reply may only be a
restatement of the original belief, but more likely it will include other information
(often in the form of presuppositions) about criteria, distinctions, comparisons, etc.,
that were not obvious in the original belief statement, and can be utilized in the next
intervention. It may reveal a new, more important C—>E or CEq to utilize for this
round. Whether A accepts or rejects the intervention (it does or doesn't permanently
change A's experience), A's reply will contain useful information.
3. C composes an intervention responding to A's reply. (Although A's reply may only
relate to one half of the CEq or CE, the other half is still there connected to it; C
always has the option of responding to the entire belief.) C delivers the intervention
and notices if (and how) it has an impact on A.
4. Before responding verbally, A again notices any change in the belief and writes them
down.
When a belief shifts, how is that shift related to the kind of intervention? If you know
what the different kinds of intervention do, you can be precise about choosing what kind
of intervention will be most useful in getting the change you want to accomplish.
Larger:
A. "I know I'm often a little late, but I always come."
B. "I do care about you; I also care about keeping other commitments I've made."
A/B. "Promptness and caring are both important to me, too. You can't imagine how busy
I've been lately trying to keep all your bills paid on time."
Smaller:
A. "I guess I was exactly five minutes late today."
B. "On my way home I was thinking about two of the different ways I care about you."
A/B. "I didn't think my being five minutes late today would mean that I was uncaring."
6. Redefine: Changing the meaning. (Since A is the definition of B, you can't redefine B without
dealing with A also.)
A. "My intent in being late was to try to get you to realize the value of our relationship."
A. "Do you want me to be prompt so that we can enjoy more time together?"
A. "I'm late because I always want to give my full attention to the person I'm with and
make sure I don't leave them hanging. That's what I'd like to do with you now."
B. "My intent in not caring was to try to protect myself from being hurt if you leave me."
B. "Are you concerned about whether I care because you want to be sure I really want to
marry you?"
B. "What would it do for you if you knew I cared about you?"
A/B. "Your intent in thinking that if I'm late I don't care is to have some way of knowing
my feelings for you."
A/B. "I wanted to demonstrate my lack of caring this way so that you'd be forced to stand up
for yourself."
10. Model of the World: Indicate that the belief isn't reality, only the speaker's belief.
11. Switch Referential Index: Switch who the belief refers to.
12. Apply to Self: Apply criteria in the statement to the statement itself. In order to do
this, you also have to switch referential index and go meta.
13. Hierarchy of Criteria: Use another more highly-valued criterion to change the belief. (This
always enlarges the frame.)
A. "Is promptness really more important to you than my taking the time to look nice for
you?"
B "Which do you think should be more important, showing my caring for you, or my
staying alive?"
A/B. "I agree with that, but it's more important for me to not to have a fatal accident."
You can also pit one of the stated criteria against the other, forcing the person to change
the equivalence or cause-effect into a hierarchy.
14. Meta-frame: Go meta to the original belief (other than Intent, Model of the World,
Apply to Self, and Chunking Up which are also meta-frames).
15. Analogy/Metaphor: Lateral chunking that uses a very different content and/or
context that is "isomorphic" (has the same form) as a vehicle for accomplishing any of
the patterns listed above. Which of the patterns above are contained in the following
mini-metaphors?
"The water held captive behind a dam still yearns for the sea."
"A friend of mine always complained about her husband being late, but when he died,
lateness took on a new meaning."
© 2003 NLP Comprehensive Section 5 -Page 13
PO Box 648 NLP Comprehensive Master Practitioner Participant Notes
Indian Hills, CO 80454
16. Internal State (IS), Internal Computation (IC), or External Behavior (EB): All
the 14 patterns can be varied by directing your response to one of these three aspects.
1. "I care about you too much to try to be prompt when I'm not ready."
2. "I wanted to take the time to look really nice for you, to show you how much I
care."
3. "Do you care more about my promptness than you care about our relationship?"
4 "You must not care about me or you wouldn't say that to me."
5. "It's not my being late that should let you know I don't care; it's the way I dress
so poorly."
6. "I know our relationship is strong enough to deal with difficulties like this once in
a while."
7. "Are you concerned about my caring because you're not sure about your feelings
forme?"
8. "My being prompt is only one of the many ways you can know if I care about
you."
9. "Since you know I don't care about you, why do you bother to tell me?"
10. "Your concern for my promptness is causing me not to care about you."
11. "Your being concerned about my promptness is not very caring."
12. "Your telling me this makes me care about you less."
13. "How could you tell me such an uncaring thing so late in our relationship!"
14. "Hearing that tells me that caring is something that is possible in our
relationship."
15. "I know I'm late; I had a lot of other very important things to do."
16. "Then your best friend Sally must not care about her husband; she's always late to
meet him."
17. "I'm glad that my caring about you is important enough for you to tell me about
it."
2. Chunk Size:
Up:
A. "Self-evaluation is important to you."
B. "Unpleasant feelings need to be attended to."
A/B. "You feel strongly about how you think about yourself."
Down:
A. "What specifically do you not know?"
B. "How foolish do you feel?"
A/B. "How specifically does not knowing make you feel foolish?"
Lateral:
A. "What else didn't you know?"
B. "Do you feel foolish not knowing about open-heart surgery?"
A/B. "Do you feel foolish about what you don't know at this moment?"
3. Frame Size:
Larger:
A. "What else don't you know that you're not noticing?"
B. "How many other people felt foolish with you?"
A/B. "Feeling foolish is only one of many possible feelings to have about not knowing."
Smaller:
A. "What part of it don't you know?"
B. "What does your left arm feel like when you feel foolish?"
A/B. "How foolish did you feel about the first part you didn't know?"
Different (but keeping the same criteria): Since this statement is already completely
general, you can't shift frame using the same criteria, unless you shift referential index or
do some other intervention first.
Different (totally: A, B, A/B irrelevant): '
"I'll bet you were stunning in that suit."
"How much did you learn about that situation?"
4. Consequences:
15. Analogy/Metaphor:
A. "A rock rolls without knowing the ways of moss."
B. "How foolish a twig must seem to a raindrop."
A/B. "How would a wind blow if it felt foolish about what it doesn't know about the soaring
birds?"
means
Limiting Belief: causes
Notice the shifts in your internal representations with the following verb forms:
I danced. I dance. I will dance.
Compare these with the preceding forms, paying special attention to the submodality
distinction of slide vs. movie.
I was dancing. I am dancing. I will be dancing.
Notice that each of these forms involves multiple points along the timeline.
I had danced. I have danced. I will have danced.
Exercise 1: Backtracking
1. A states limitation and desired outcome.
2. B backtracks limitation into the past, using verb form only (without using the word
'past').
3. C backtracks outcome into the future, using verb form only (without using the word
'future').
Try out these weird sentences with the actual content of your own:
"If you could make this change for yourself, so that you could STOP, having already
made that change, and see yourself now, do you like the way you look?"
"What will it be like when you have made those changes ... NOW ... in the future ... as
you look back and see what it was like to have had that problem... as you think about it
now, here, sitting in this room?"
"When you will have already gotten (all) the learnings from that problem you had, which
of your new possibilities will please you the most, now that you think about it?"
A - Think of a limitation.
B - Put 1, 2, 3 in boxes on the chart above.
C - Use words to match the sequence of numbers in boxes on the chart.
STRETCH: Do not use the words "past", "present", and "future".
A - Give your partners very brief feedback.
1. Relative Clauses: a noun followed by a phrase beginning with who, which, or that.
A. Are many of the subjects which you can learn interesting to you? (You can learn
subjects.)
B. The results that NLP gets are impressive. (NLP gets results.)
C. Might the confidence that you will experience come as a surprise to you? (You will
experience confidence.)
2. Subordinate Clauses of Time: clauses identified by the cue words before, after,
during, as since, prior, when, while, etc.
A. Before you learn this, do you want to go for a walk? (You will learn this.)
B. After NLP has gotten results, many people are amazed. (NLP has gotten results.)
C. While you are confident, remember to pace the audience. (You will be confident.)
11. Repetitive Verbs and Adverbs: verbs and adverbs beginning with re-; e.g.
repeatedly, return, restore, retell, replace, renew, etc.
A. Are you ready to relearn this material now? (You have learned it in the past.)
B. I've notice that NLP can repeat its results. (NLP gets results.)
C. Do you want a good way to renew your confident feeling now? (You have had a
confident feeling.)
13. Change-of-time Verbs and Adverbs: begin, end, stop, start, continue, proceed,
already, yet, still, anymore, etc.
A. Do you want to continue learning? (You have been learning.)
B. NLP still gets as good results as it used to! (NLP has gotten good results.)
C. When did you begin feeling confident? (You have been feeling confident.)
15. Factive Verbs and Adjectives: odd, aware, know, realize, regret, etc.
A. Are you aware of your learning ability? (You have learning ability.)
B. It's hard to believe some of the results that NLP gets! (NLP gets results.)
C. Are you pleased that you can be confident? (You can be confident.)
Section 5 - Page 25
NLP Comprehensive Master Practitioner Participant Notes
16. Commentary Adjectives and Adverbs: lucky, fortunate, far out, out of sight,
innocently, happily, necessarily, etc.
A. It's fortunate that you can learn, isn't it? (You can learn.)
B. Do you enjoy the good results NLP gets? (NLP gets good results.)
C. Don't you think your confidence is remarkable'} (You have confidence.)
20. Questions:
A. Which part can you learn more easily, verbal or non-verbal skills? (You can learn
verbal and non-verbal skills easily.)
B. What results has NLP gotten? (NLP has gotten results.)
C. How confident are you? (You are confident.)
1. A presents a simple outcome, using few enough words that it can be presupposed in a
longer sentence. For example, "being confident making presentations" or "eating
healthy food."
3. B uses all the presuppositional forms to presuppose the outcome.
4. B&Cnotice:
a. Did B use the intended form?
b. Did B presuppose the outcome with that form?
c. B & C calibrate non-verbally to notice:
Did your presupposition invite processing / re-sorting?
Did A step into her outcome, or experience some other shift?
Did A accept or reject the presupposition?
Comparisons Exercise
B. Get limitation in terms of A=B or A causes B. This means that we want either A
(cause) leads to B (effect) or A (specific evidence) means B (conclusion).
1. Ask "What stops you?
C. Check: Do you have a limiting A=B or A causes B? Is it a belief you want to change?
D. Specify context. "Is [A = or causes B] always true?"
E. Find out about other related limitations. "After we have taken care of [A = or causes
B}, will you have what you want?"
"There is nothing more tentative, nothing more empirical (superficially, at least) than the process of establishing an order
among things; nothing that demands a sharper eye or a surer, better-articulated language; nothing that more insistently
requires that one allow oneself to be carried along by the proliferation of qualities and forms."
- Michel Foucault
The Order of Things
"The sign (the sentence) gets its significance from the system of signs, from the language to which it belongs.
Roughly: understanding a sentence means understanding a language."
- Ludwig Wittgenstein
Philosophical Investigations
Behavior Anchoring
Stimulus - Response
G.E.O. Exercise (from Robert Dilts, Tim Hallbom & Suzi Smith)
1. Think of a specific situation (context) where you aren't getting the results you want. Write down the Goal you have in
mind in that situation, your Evidence for the achievement of that Goal (even if you've never reached it) and what you are cur-
rently doing to achieve it (the Operation).
2. Think of a similar context* where you are getting the results you want. Write down the Goal you have in mind in that situ-
ation, your Evidence for the achievement of that Goal and what you are doing to achieve it (the Operation).
3. Compare/contrast the Goals, Evidence and Operations of the two situations for significant differences.
[Typical Aren't Getting Results difficulties include: An inappropriate Goal, Evidence that is for a different Goal, poorly speci-
fied Evidence, and/or a restricted or inappropriate Operation. Significant differences may be in one, more or all of them]
4. Add the resource(s) from the significant Are Getting Results area into the Aren't Getting Results experience by imagining
fully experiencing the Aren't Getting Results situation with the Goal, Evidence or Operation of the Are Getting Results situa-
tion. (These may need to be adjusted to fully fit the new situation appropriately.)
*Note: A similar context is ideally as much as possible the same as the original. Since this is unlikely, one way of thinking of
this is in terms of similar content, for example; Activities (Doing), Understanding (Knowing), Acquiring (Getting/Having),
Relating (People), Being (Place).
G.E.O. Worksheet
Aren't Getting Results Context Are Getting Results Context
(when & where) (when & where)
Context
(when & where)
Types of Strategies
Name Decision Motivation Conviction Memory Creativity Learning
Reality
Function Selection Engage/Act Verify Reference Generate Incorporate
External/Int.
Attention Choice Energy Congruence Experience Alternatives Responsiveness
"Real"
Info Type Digital Analog Reflexive Access Meta / all Re-contextualize
Distinctive
T.O.T.E. / G.E.O.
Context
(when & where)
META-PROGRAMS
CONTENT- People, Things, Activities, Information, Place
DIRECTION - Away From, Toward
AUTHORITY - External, Internal
PERCEPTUAL POSITION - Self, Other, Observer
DECISION FACTORS - Same, Comparison, Difference
Criteria Spread Vc-0/G-m-K+-Ad-m-K Same as Polarity & include all representational systems
Across Strategy [Buyer's remorse. Left something out.]
Modal Operators Ar-Vc-m-K Find criteria of MON voice/image & change tonality
of Necessity[Have or feel forced to decide.]
* A possible approach to Decision Strategy change is to ask if the client has one of the above difficulties.
If yes, make the change(s) in a specific decision experience (context) and then generalize.
1. Having elicited a specific decision difficulty for which this technique is appropriate, find out the criteria for each and all of
the "parts/conflicts". Use exactly the same criteria words the client uses. Be thorough.
2. In the left hand (for clients with "normal" representational system organization) have the client state each of the criteria,
anchoring them to different fingers and places in his/her palm. Go through this anchoring process several times.*
3. Having the client close his/her palm, say "Holding all those Criteria in mind, think of making that decision now." [If you
have been thorough, the client will got through the decision process and make a new congruent decision. If conflict is still
present, find out what criteria have not been accounted for and add/anchor it/them to the client's hand. If the client objects
that s/he can't remember all the criteria, say, "That's consciously. Of course, you know what you want, even if you don't
articulate it." Then re-view/anchor the criteria in the client's hand and proceed through the process.
4. Generalize by repeating steps 1 through 3 with a very different area in which the client experiences similar decision mak-
ing conflict.
*In business, this can be done with by having the client write all the criteria on a single piece of paper and then look at it
carefully before making the decision.
1. Having determined the representational system organization of the client ("normal" or "unique") and elicited a specific
decision difficulty for which this techniques is appropriate, find out if the client looks at old pictures (Vr) and/or old voices
(Ar) in an attempt to develop options.
2. Guide the client through his/her decision strategy to the V or Ar and then say, "And having looked at it (listened to it) that
way, imagine (while you guide his/her eyes into his/her Vc and hold them their) it changing in some new way, any new way
at all. And (guiding his or her eyes to his/her kinesthetic) how do you feel about that?
3. Repeat step 2 at least three times (Requisite Variety) for multiple options.
4. If there is no Meta-Strategy in place to choose among the new options proceed to install one as well.
1. Having elicited a specific decision difficulty for which this technique is appropriate, have the client think of the first option
and image living the experience of having that option (associated fantasy).
2. On completing the fantasy, have the client evaluate how much s/he liked or disliked this option.
3. Repeat steps 1 and 2 until all options have been vircariously experienced and evaluated.
4. Have the client select which option s/he liked best. [It does not matter if any option was "outstanding or the one" as the
client is learning to experience options and then select one.]
5. Have the client Future Pace the option s/he likes best.
1. Having elicited a specific decision difficulty for which this technique is appropriate, have the client associate back into the
decision and notice the internal voice(s). Note its/their location in mental space.
2. Noting the voice's location, have it move down one of the client's arms and into his/her palm. As the voice moves, have it
change its tonality so that by the time it's in the client's palm, it sounds like a cartoon character. Draw the client's attention to
how this changes the previous relationship and the client's feelings. [Most often positively.]
3. Let the voice know that you realize how important it is to the client's decision strategy. Respectfully ask it to tell you (and
therefore your client) what so important about what it has been doing speaking in the manner it has been. [This is a request
for criteria. NLPers will note this question also includes the essential reframing skill of separating behavior (in this case,
Modal Operators of Necessity language and tonality) from intent (in this case, expressed as criteria). This is usually sufficient
to reveal criteria/intents such as; "Motivating you," "Keeping you safe," "Keeping you on track," etc. If the voice is still re-
luctant to communicate with the client, siding with it and encouraging the client to reconsider its importance is often helpful.
Keep requesting criteria until you have some stated in the positive and which your client also values. Have the voice notice
the positive response of your client to the voice's criteria.]
4. Have the voice notice that there are positive and attractive voice tones your client finds irresistible and compelling. Voice
tones s/he will listen to. Since this voice wants to be listened to, have it move back up your client's arm toward his/her head
and as it does so, have it take on attractive and compelling tones. Have it settle into a location that is comfortable for both of
you.
Note: If, in addition to a voice speaking in Modal Operators of Necessity, your client's decision strategy has a polarity and/or
the criteria spread across the strategy, this is the first intervention. That way you will have the criteria fully represented before
you move them to the front of the strategy.
• Shorter than the estimated time to the goal/outcome, but still more than half
• Shorter than the estimated time to the goal/outcome by less than half.
Well-formedness:
Exercise: Using Your Preferred Career/Life Roles to Discover Your Themes of Fulfillment
1. Write down all the careers/jobs/roles you want or have wanted, whether you attained them or not.
2a. Write down what you like(d) about each of these roles (Criteria) and
2b. then what is important to you about them (more Criteria).Do this for all the roles.
4. What's so Important to me about: (Themes of Fulfillment)? The meta-criteria of fulfillment. Note: If your themes
include money, power, fame, or sex, this is not surprising as these are the socially sanctioned rewards of our time.
And also, for you, personally, what is important?
2. Meta Model the belief: "What do you mean by maintain?" and "What do you mean by relationship?"
4. 'Firing' the Explorer's anchor, have the Explorer search his/her personal history for other specific examples of when the
client acted in the way he/she doesn't (yet) believe.
Ask the Explorer, "What are other examples of when you maintained a relationship?"
Generate a number of examples (that is in excess of the client's Convincer Strategy).
[This was elicited in the Meta-Programs section of their Master Practitioner Training]
Elicit some Criteria for each example.
The experience of the Explorer should be that the person feels that it is progressively more possible.
5. The Guide assists the Explorer in laying out the Explorer's timeline on the floor, as well as accessing the Submodalities of
Belief [from the previous days Submodalities Belief Change Pattern Exercise].
6. The Explorer returns him/herself on his/her timeline to the first example elicited (in terms of occurence).
7. The Guide guides the Explorer to put this example experience into the Submodalities of Belief and then encourage him/her
to walk forward in time into and through the other example experiences, repeating their names and the Criteria being fulfilled,
such the Explorer 'runs' his/her Convincer Strategy on these experiences creating a new belief, all the way up to the present
and seen by the Explorer going into the future.
Criteria are the standards by which we measure every experience. Was the restaurant wonderful? Is the idea terrific?
Is the project worth your time? Can you live without it? Whenever you make a decision, get motivated, and even when you
think you don't decide it's not worth your time, you are applying your criteria, your standards of what is important. You have
criteria for everything from the taste of pizza to the love of your life, from your clothes to your spiritual path. When we speak
of Criteria in NLP, we are most often referring to the higher values of our lives; success, relationship, satisfaction, challenge,
fulfillment and many more. A criterion can be context specific, and it can permeate our entire life experience.
2. Ask yourself, '"What do I like about this?" Starting at the bottom of a blank piece of paper, write down all of the words
and/or phrases you use along the bottom allowing some space between each one. These words are criteria.
3. Taking each of the previous criteria words or phrases in turn, ask, "What is important about ________. Your answer
will be higher criteria of the previous one. There may be one or several of them. Write down each one on the line above the
previous criteria and on the same level with each other. Connect the previous criteria with these new ones.
4. Recycle through step 3 until you have no higher level Criteria. This can noticed by the repetition of higher level criteria or
just finding there isn't anything higher.
Convincer Strategy Belief Change
1. Ask the Explorer, "What is some simple thing you believe is true about yourself that you wish wasn't?"
2. Meta Model the belief: "What do you mean by maintain?" and "What do you mean by relationship?"
4. 'Firing' the Explorer's anchor, have the Explorer search his/her personal history for other specific examples of when the
client acted in the way he/she doesn't (yet) believe.
Ask the Explorer, "What are other examples of when you maintained a relationship?"
Generate a number of examples (that is in excess of the client's Convincer Strategy).
[This was elicited in the Meta-Programs section of their Master Practitioner Training]
Elicit some Criteria for each example.
The experience of the Explorer should be that the person feels that it is progressively more possible.
5. The Guide assists the Explorer in laying out the Explorer's timeline on the floor, as well as accessing the Submodalities of
Belief [from the previous days Submodalities Belief Change Pattern Exercise].
6. The Explorer returns him/herself on his/her timeline to the first example elicited (in terms of occurence).
7. The Guide guides the Explorer to put this example experience into the Submodalities of Belief and then encourage him/her
to walk forward in time into and through the other example experiences, repeating their names and the Criteria being fulfilled,
such the Explorer 'runs' his/her Convincer Strategy on these experiences creating a new belief, all the way up to the present
and seen by the Explorer going into the future.
General Framing
Our self-concepts are beliefs or generalizations about ourselves. Every generalization is
the imposition of our limited minds on an infinitely complex and changing world. The
usefulness of a generalization lies in the fact that it can be applied to a wide variety of
different situations. The danger in generalizing is that we accomplish this by deleting
detail, and ignoring differences. As Aldous Huxley once said, "A concept is like a funnel.
When you put an elephant through a funnel, it doesn't end up looking very much like an
elephant." Furthermore, from a given set of experiences, we can generate an infinite
number of different generalizations by selecting different sets of data and ignoring others.
We would all be completely lost without generalizations. However, we can also get lost
within them.
Self-concept is a generalization from experience that gives you a sense of who you you
are, (or more accurately, how you think of yourself), and is composed of a
multitude of different qualities.
Something that goes through time and across contexts, (like your name) so that
changes in it tend to generalize very widely in time and space;
Criteria
When I began modeling self-concept, I had a list of criteria for a useful self-concept. I
a. Resilient, durable and lasting (there when you most need it).
b. Accurate (a good predictor of your attitudes and behavior for both yourself
and others).
c. Self-correcting and responsive to feedback.
d. Unconscious (as in peak performance).
e. Connecting with others, rather than separating.
f. Free of self-importance, arrogance, and all the other signs of egotism.
Again I want you to start by silently exploring your own experience for about five
minutes, guided by these questions, and then share and discuss what you found with the
others, and help each other find out what you do by observing nonverbal gestures and
asking good questions.
This time I want you to start experimenting with changing elements of your
database, and noticing how that changes your experience of it.
One thing you can do is to go down the checklist, changing each of the variables that I
have listed. Try adding or subtracting examples in your database. Whatever number you
have, try making it considerably more or less. If your database is sequential, try making
it simultaneous, and vice versa. Try adding or subtracting modalities. Find out what
difference it makes to associate into an example as if you were there, and then dissociate
by stepping back out of it and seeing it as if it were a still picture or a movie on a TV set.
Play with changing the submodalities that you use in the database, making the pictures or
sounds more or less intense, making them closer or farther away, larger or smaller, etc.
Another way to explore is to try on the ways that the others in your trio use. If
you have about five large examples spread out right in front of you, and one of your
partners has thirty smaller ones off to her left, try doing it her way. Make only one
change at a time, so that you can notice how each change affects your experience. First
you might add in twenty-five examples to the five you already have, and see what
difference that makes. Then change back to the five you started with, and just make then
smaller. Then change them back to your original five again, and move them off to your
left. Finally, try making all these changes at once, so that you can experience the same
thing that she does.
As you experiment, the main thing I want you to notice is how each change
affects your feeling of certainty or solidity about your self-concept. In the example I
gave, you can compare the difference between having five examples and having thirty.
Which one feels stronger-more real or true? This feeling is a good indication of it's
durability or strength. Remember to start with about five minutes of silently using the
checklist to examine your own experience, before sharing and experimenting with the
others in your trio.
Now I want you to return to your trios for another fifteen minutes to experiment
with some of the things we've been talking about in regard to the checklist. Try out
different ways to represent your examples, and use your felt sense of its stability or
strength as a guide to how you can make that aspect of your self-concept even stronger
and more durable. Anything you do to make it stronger will also tend to make it more
sensitive to the discrepancies that provide feedback about how well your behavior is
aligned with your self-concept. Again I suggest that you start by silently experimenting
in your own mind, and then share and assist each other in playing with this.
Using the same quality that you chose earlier, I want you to start by silently
exploring these time variables in your database for about five minutes, and then take
another ten minutes to share and discuss what you found with the others. Assist each
other in finding out what you do by asking questions and observing nonverbal gestures.
After you have shared with the others in your trio, I want you to experiment with
changing the variables that I have listed, and notice how that changes your experience of
your quality.
Try adding or subtracting examples in different time frames, and compare your
experience of your database with them and without them, paying particular attention to
the impact of future examples, and the effect of having a period of time with no
examples.
Take some time to examine the span of time in your examples, and then
experiment with varying this. What is the impact of having only examples with a very
short span of time, compared to examples with a long span?
Examine a span of time in which you exhibited the quality you are exploring, to
find out which parts of it actually represented that quality, and then experiment with
spreading that quality over a longer or shorter span of time and notice the impact.
As before, I want you to notice how each change affects your feeling of certainty
or solidity about this quality of your self-concept, and I also want you to consider how
these elements you are experimenting with will affect the responsiveness of your self-
concept to feedback.
Now I want you to examine the examples in your database in the ways I have just
discussed, and experiment with changing them. Which perceptual positions do you
include? Try adding or subtracting examples of one or more of the three positions, and
compare this with having a balance of all three positions. Try adding or subtracting
detail, making some of your examples more or less metaphoric or realistic. Notice any
other people that are included in your database, and whether any of your examples
include behaviors that you don't want to identify with. Notice what major life contexts
are fully included, and which are absent or underrepresented, and try adding or
subtracting examples of those. Examine your images of yourself for any other content
distortions and biases, and find out whether any distortion serves you well, or whether a
more realistic image might serve you better.
Again I want you to begin with five minutes of silent exploration. Then take
another ten minutes to share experiences, and try changing these aspects of the quality
you are exploring. Notice how any changes affect your feeling of the stability and
durability of your self-concept, and also think about how these elements you are
experimenting with will likely influence the responsiveness of your quality to ongoing
feedback.
Next I want you to practice what you have learned so far with one or two people
who aren't in the workshop. Start a conversation with a family member, or a waitress, or
call up a friend. Then at some point I want you to ask them about a quality that is
important to them, and ask the kind of questions that we have been asking, in order to
find out how they know this quality is true of them. Here I have asked you to do this
without content, so as not to distract you while you were learning about structure, but
now you will need to use content.
You can just tell them, "I'm learning about how people think of themselves, and
what is important to them, and I wonder if you'd be willing to help me for a few
minutes." Rather than a long explanation about what a quality is, it will usually be easier
to give a few examples. "A lot of my friends think of themselves as honest, or kind, or
intelligent, or sociable, and other qualities like that. Can you tell me something about
yourself that is true of you, and that you like?"
When they answer you, you can ask about their summary representation. "I'm
curious how you know that. Do you have a mental picture of , or a feeling or
internal voice that lets you know that you're ?"
Then you can go on to ask about their database. "It's great that you have that
quick way of knowing that's true of you. I'll bet you also have lots of other examples of
being . One of my friends sees lots of pictures of kindness, sort of like a big
collage in his mind, while I have sort of a rolodex file, where pictures come up one after
the other. How do you do it, and how many examples do you have?"
As you gradually find out how they have this quality, I want you to ask the kinds
of questions we have been asking, and offer them alternatives that you think might be
useful. "What would it be like if you had more examples? Can you step into one of
those images and feel what it would be like to be there in that experience again? Do you
have examples of being in the future? Do you know what it feels like to be
someone else receiving your ? Do you have examples of at work as well as
at home?"
In order to remind you of all the elements we have explored, I have a checklist
outlining them, in the same order in which we have explored them.
Number of Examples
Location
Simultaneous and/or Sequential
Modalities (visual, auditory, kinesthetic)
Association
Submodalities
Perceptual Positions
Specific Detail vs. Metaphoric
Other People
Major Contexts
Other Content Distortions and Biases
Counterexamples will be most useful if they are integrated into the database This requires
that they be in the same representational system(s). Change the representational system(s)
first, and then cautiously integrate.
Negotiating with inner parts is a method that has been a part of most NLP trainings for
many years, so we won't take time for an exercise, but I recommend that you make a note
to practice doing this on your own, because it is very useful.
The first step is to group your counterexamples and then examine them carefully for
what is common to all of them (or a group of them). For instance, let's say you think of
yourself as being kind and considerate, but sometimes you have been rude, or angry, or
impatient instead. When you examine your counterexamples for what they have in
common, you may find that in all of them you were overtired (or rushed, or preoccupied
by many urgent things on your mind, or you were in a public situation, or in the presence
of a man/woman, or a particular person, etc.).
For instance, I have found that when I need all my resources for an unfamiliar
task, I have difficulty if there is too much auditory stimulation—talk, music, noise or other
sounds. In those kinds of situations, I literally start to have symptoms of "attention
deficit disorder."
Get into trios again, but with different people this time, and experiment with examining
your counterexamples, and changing the scope of the quality you have been using. Start
by grouping your counterexamples, being cautious not to group too many at once, since
that can sometimes be overwhelming and unpleasant. After grouping counterexamples,
examine them to find out what they have in common. When they are grouped, often you
can immediately see how they are similar—it usually just pops out, without any effort..
Then experiment with redefining this aspect of yourself by narrowing or widening
its scope in space, or time (or both), or by thinking of a larger overarching category that
integrates the two. If you find that some "counterexamples" are actually examples of a
quality that is more important to you, you can separate those and put them in the
appropriate category. Do as much as you can on your own, assisting each other in your
trio as needed, and then share experiences.
Return to your trios again, and take about 15 minutes to transform several
counterexamples into examples. Take one counterexample out of your database and
move it to your mental "work station" or wherever you review and process experiences.
Then use your skills to transform it into an example by representing what you wish you
had done in that past situation, and what you would like to do in the future, if that kind of
situation ever happens again. Then return the transformed example to your database. I
want you to compare the experience of having only the transformed counterexample in
your database, with having the counterexample linked to the transformed example, to find
out which way feels best to you. Then do several more counterexamples, one at a time.
Work by yourself as much as possible, assisting each other as necessary, and then share
your experience.
(trios, 20 minutes)
Get into trios again, working silently by yourself, assisting each other as needed, and then
share experiences.
1. Grouping. Examine your counterexamples, and determine what a group of them have
in common.
2. Worst. Use these common elements as a basis for selecting the worst one.
4. Check generalization. Think of several other counterexamples from this group, and
find out if they have already been transformed. If so, you are done; if not, cycle back
to step 1 and transform another one—perhaps using a different resource~and again
check for full generalization.
NOTE: If you have more than one group of counterexamples, repeat this process with
each group.
1. Counterexamples Checklist
Where and how are they represented?
Obvious or hidden?
Modalities and submodalities
Integrated or separate?
Same Modality, same location
Same Modality, different location
Different Modality, different location
2. Integrating Counterexamples
Integrate one counterexample at a time
Control size and other submodalities to prevent overwhelm of database
Limit number of counterexamples to approximately 5-10%
3. Utilizing Counterexamples
Exclude counterexamples from peak performance by negotiation
Grouping Counterexamples and finding similarities
Adjusting the scope of a quality in Space and/or Time
Narrowing
Widening
Integrating with an overarching quality
4. Transforming Counterexamples
Grouping Counterexamples
Finding similarities
Re-categorizing the group as a different and separate quality
Identifying the worst counterexample of a group
Transforming the worst one
Checking others in the group for generalization
1. Content. Identify what quality you would like to have as a stable part of your identity.
This pattern will work best with a capability or quality of intermediate chunk size:
tenacity, loyalty, dependability, intelligence, etc.
2. Congruence check. Do you have any objection to having this quality? Check
carefully in all modalities, and satisfy any objections carefully, usually by modifying
your definition of the quality.
3. Testing. Be very sure that you don't already have a database for having this quality.
Proceed only when you are sure that you don't already have a negative or ambivalent
self-concept that would conflict with the positive quality that you would like to have.
4. Positive template. Elicit the structure that you use to represent a strong positive
quality that you like. This will include both a summary representation that serves as
quick reference, and also the database of specific examples that support the
generalization. The database will most often be primarily in the visual system, but
may include any (or all) of the other systems. If the database is primarily kinesthetic,
be sure that it is composed of the tactile and proprioceptive kinesthetics, and not just
the evaluative kinesthetic emotions and feelings. (This is what you have already been
doing)
5. Tune-up. Use all that you have learned to improve what you already do, to make your
representation of this quality even better, by adding future examples, other perceptual
positions, integrating or processing counterexamples, etc. (Again, you have already
been doing this.)
6. Build the new quality. Using the positive template as a model, find appropriate
memories to use as examples in a database for the desired new quality, and assemble
them into the form of the tuned-up positive template. When you are done, create a
summary representation of the quality.
7. Testing. Imagine someone asking you, "Are you ?" and notice your response, with
particular attention to the nonverbal. If your response is ambivalent or ambiguous,
back up a few steps, and gather information. The most likely difficulty is that your
testing in step 2 did not detect a preexisting negative or ambiguous representation.
While there are effective ways to deal with this situation, you haven't yet learned the
skills you need for this.
8. Congruence check. Do you have any objection to having this new quality? Again,
check carefully to be sure that this new quality fits with all your other qualities.
Satisfy any objections
©2002 Steve Andreas
NLP Comprehensive Section 7 - Page 17
PO Box 648
Indian Hills, CO 80454 NLP Comprehensive Participant Notes
Exercise 10: Transforming an Ambiguous Quality into a
Positive One, (pairs, 20 minutes each)
1. Positive template. Elicit the structure/process that you use to represent a positive
quality that you like. (What you have already been doing.)
2. Tune-up. Use all that you have learned to improve what you already do to make your
representation of this quality even better, by adding modalities, future examples, other
perceptual positions, processing counterexamples, etc. (Again, you have already been
doing this.)
3. Elicit the structure/process of the ambiguous quality. How do you represent the
examples and counterexamples of this quality?
4. Congruence check. "Does any part of you have any objection to having this quality as
an unambiguous positive part of your self-concept?" Satisfy any/all objections, through
reframing, redefining the quality, accessing resources, building behavioral competence,
etc. before proceeding.
5. Represent examples in the form of the positive template. If your positive examples
are not already in the form of the positive template, shift them into that form.
7. Group and transform any remaining counterexamples into examples of the quality,
and place them into the database with the other examples.
8. Check summary. Review your name for this quality to be sure it is appropriate for the
modified database.
9. Looking back. Looking back at your previous experience, what differences do you
notice between what you are experiencing now and what you experienced before?
Think of an aspect of yourself that you don't like. You know you're "X" and you'd like
to be the opposite—your values are clear.
1. -Positive template. Elicit the structure/process that the person uses to represent a
positive quality that they like. (What you have already been doing.)
2. Tune-up. Use all that you have learned to improve what they already do to make their
representation of this quality even better, by adding modalities, future examples, other
perceptual positions, processing counterexamples, etc. (Again, you have already been
doing this.)
3. Elicit the structure/process of the negative quality. How does this person represent
the negatively-valued quality?
4. Congruence check. "Does any part of you have any objection to having the opposite
of this quality as a positive part of your self-concept?" Satisfy any/all objections, through
reframing, accessing resources, building behavioral competence, etc., before proceeding.
5. Examine representations in the database (or a group of them), to find if they actually
represent a different quality that can be named appropriately, and separated from the
original negative quality.
6. New positive quality. Take any positive examples and start assembling them into the
same form as the tuned-up positive template. Then elicit additional examples, no matter
how small or inconsequential they seem to the person: "When in your life were you even
a little bit kind?"
8. Create a summary for the new quality. Review the database and carefully choose a
summary for it that is appropriate for this new database.
9. Looking back. Looking back at your previous experience, what differences do you
notice between your experience now and what you experienced before?
What do you allow to pass through this boundary and what not?
How does the boundary change in different contexts?
What is the positive function of the boundary?
Generally speaking, boundaries protect you from something. What, specifically, does it
protect you from, how does it do it, and how well does it work?
Are there any ways in which this boundary causes problems for you—are there any
consequences that you don't like?
Return to your trios, and again begin by taking about 5 minutes to experiment with
changing your boundaries, particularly in situations that are difficult for you, or in which
you would like to have additional choices. How could you change your boundaries in
ways that would make those situations easier to deal with resourcefully?
Keep in mind the importance of preserving the positive protective function of the
boundary, while you experiment with changing the ways that you represent a boundary,
with a view toward improving how it works, and removing any undesirable consequences
or side-effects.
When you find changes that are useful, future-pace them by imagining being in
the kinds of contexts where you want to have them. That is both a test of how well they
©2002 Steve Andreas
NLP Comprehensive Section 7 - Page 20
PO Box 648
Indian Hills, CO 80454 NLP Comprehensive Participant Notes
work, as well as a way to connect any new change that works well into the contexts
where you want it, so that it becomes an automatic response.
Begin by exploring your own internal experience silently for 5 minutes, using the same
list of questions about boundaries that I offered you earlier. "If I had an internal
boundary, where would it be, and what would it be like?" After you have learned about
an internal boundary, notice what it protects you from, and any possible consequences,
both positive or negative, that this might have for your psychological or physiological
functioning and health.
Then share and compare experiences with the others in your trio, feeling free to
keep to yourself anything that you consider too personal to share. Keeping in mind the
protective function of your boundary, experiment with changing it to make it more
effective, and to lessen any negative consequences. Try varying the submodality
distinctions that you use to delineate boundaries, and try on each other's boundaries, to
find out what might work better for you.
Return to your trios, and again begin by taking about 5 minutes to experiment with your
internal boundaries even further, particularly in situations that are difficult or challenging
for you, and in which you would like to have additional choices about how to respond.
Keep in mind the importance of preserving the positive function of an internal
boundary, while you experiment with changing the ways that you represent the boundary.
Find what you can do to improve how it works by preserving the positive function while
removing any unpleasant or unuseful limitations, consequences or side-effects. When
you find changes that you like, future-pace them by imagining having them in the kinds
of contexts where you want them. That is both a test of how well the change works, as
well as a rehearsal that connects any new boundary that works well to the kinds of
situation where you want to have it.
Then share and discuss what you have found with the others in your trio, and try
out what others do, in order to broaden your range of experience of internal boundaries.
It can be particularly interesting to compare connection and disconnection with the same
person—at one time you felt very connected with them, while at another time you felt
very disconnected.
Begin by taking about 5 minutes to silently compare how you represent these two
different experiences, and then make a written list of the submodality differences
between them. There will be lots of similarities, but what we are interested in are the
differences. Make sure that you include submodalities in all three modalities (visual,
auditory and kinesthetic).
2. Mapping Across. Using the list of submodality differences that you made, transform
the submodalities of your experience of disconnection to connection. Change dark to
bright, dissociated to associated, etc. until the content of disconnection is completely
represented in the submodalities of connection. When you start changing submodalities,
you may find that a particular change is difficult or uncomfortable. If so, simply back up,
and move on to the next submodality shift. Usually another sequence will be much easier,
and a change that was previously uncomfortable becomes comfortable later, after other
changes have already been made.
Accessing Cues - Behaviors that are correlated with the use of a particular
representational system; e.g. eye movements, voice tones, postures, breathing, etc. (see
Representational Systems.)
Analog - All aspects of the communication which are not words: voice tone, tempo, body
posture, etc.
Analog Change - A change which varies along a spectrum; e.g. a volume control,
dimmer control for lights or a shift in body position. (contrast with "Digital Change.")
Break State - To change a person's state dramatically. Usually used to pull someone out
of an unpleasant state.
Behavioral Flexibility - The ability to vary one's behavior in order to elicit a desired
response from another person (in contrast to repeating a behavior that hasn't worked).
Calibrate - To "read" another person's verbal and nonverbal responses and associate
specific behaviors with specific internal processes or states.
Chunk Size - The size of the object, situation or experience being considered. This can
be altered by chunking up to a more general category, chunking down to a more specific
category, or chunking sideways or laterally to others of the same type of class. For
example, beginning with "car," you could chunk down to a Ford or to a carburetor, chunk
up to a "means of transportation," and chunk sideways to a plane or train.
Complex Equivalence - The complex set of experiences that equal a certain meaning in
a person's map of reality; e.g. the specific set of behaviors that indicate that someone
loves you.
Congruent - When all of a person's internal strategies, behaviors and parts are in
agreement and working together coherently.
Conversational Postulates - Questions which only ask for a yes/no answer but which
typically elicit a behavioral response; e.g. "Can you shut the door?" The person shuts the
door.
Criteria - Standards for evaluation; qualities that can be applied to a wide range of
specific behaviors or events. Examples: fun, exciting, inexpensive, interesting, high-
quality, bold, practical, new, etc.
Cross-over Mirroring - Matching a person but with a different type of behavior; e.g.
pacing breathing with hand movement.
Dissociated - Experiencing an event or memory from any perspective other than seeing
out of your own eyes (e.g. outside one's body).
Ecology - Considering the effects of a change on the larger system instead of on just one
isolated behavior, part, or person.
Eye Accessing Cues - Movements of a person's eyes that indicate the representational
system being used. (See "Accessing Cues.")
Firing an Anchor - Repeating the overt behavior—touch, gesture, voice tone, etc.—that
triggers a certain response.
First Position ("Self) - Experiencing the world from your own perspective; being
associated into yourself and your body.
Guided Search - The process of searching back through one's memories to find
experiences that are similar in some way—usually in feeling response. Often used to
identify important early formative experiences that continue to affect the person.
Hallucination - An internal representation of, or about, the world that has no basis in
present sensory experience.
Kinesthetic - The sense of feeling. May be subdivided into tactile feelings (Kt = skin
sensing physically feeling the outside world), proprioceptive feelings (Kp = movement,
internal body sensations such as muscle tension or relaxation), and meta feelings (Km =
"emotional" responses about some object, situation or experience). (See
"Representational Systems.")
Lead System - The representational system initially used to access stored information;
e.g. making a visual image of a friend in order to get the feeling of liking him/her.
Lost Performative - A linguistic pattern in which the person performing the action or
judgment is missing from the sentence; e.g. "It's important to know this."
Meta-model - A set of language patterns that focuses attention on how people delete,
distort, generalize, limit or specify their realities. It provides a series of outcome
specification questions useful for making communication more specific, recovering lost
or unspecified information, and for loosening rigid patterns of thinking.
Meta-outcome - The outcome of the outcome: one that is more general and basic than
the stated one; e.g. "getting my self-respect back" might be the meta-outcome of
"insulting that person."
Milton-model - A set of language patterns useful for communicating directly with the
unconscious, influencing and delivering messages in such a way that others readily
accept and respond to them. Usually vague and therefore inclusive language.
Modal Operators - Literally "Mode of operating." A linguistic term for one or more of
four broad categories of acting: desire, possibility, necessity, choice.
Modeling - Observing and specifying how something happens, or how someone thinks or
behaves, and then mapping or demonstrating the process for others so that they can learn
to do it.
Negative Command - An embedded command that is marked out with analog behavior,
although it is grammatically stated in the negative; e.g. "Don't READ THIS TOO
QUICKLY!" (A subcategory of "Embedded Command.")
Nest - To fit one thing (outcome, story, etc.) within another. (See "Dovetail.")
New Behavior Generator - A step-by-step process for electing and installing specific
new responses and behaviors for use in contexts that have been problematic in the past.
Nominalization - A linguistic term for the words which result from the process of taking
actions (verbs) and converting them into things (nouns), which actually have no existence
as things; e.g. you can't put them in a wheelbarrow. Examples of nominalizations are
"love," "freedom," "happiness," "respect," "frustration," etc. (See "Complex
Equivalence.")
Parts - A metaphoric term for different aspects of a person's experience. Parts are
distinct from the specific behaviors adopted by the "parts" in order to get their positive
outcomes.
Polarity Response - A response which reverses, negates, or takes the opposite position
of a previous statement.
Predicates - Process words: words that express action or relationship with respect to a
subject (verbs, adverbs and adjectives). The words may reflect the representational
system being used or they may be non-specific; e.g. "That looks good," "Sounds right to"
me," "That feels fine" or "I agree."
Quotes - A method used to express a message as if someone else said it; e.g. "And then
Fred said to me 'Read on!'" (A variety of "Embedded Command.")
Second Position ("Other") - To "become" someone else fully by taking both the
perspective and the criteria and history, etc. of someone else.
Secondary Gain - The positive intention or desired outcome (often obscure or unknown)
of an undesired or problem behavior.
Self Position/Index - Experiencing the world from your own perspective; being
associated into yourself and your body.
Separator State - Eliciting a neutral state between two other states to prevent them from
combining or connecting with each other.
Shift Referential Index - To take only the perspective of someone else, while keeping
your own criteria with which to evaluate and respond to events. "If I were you..."
Stacking Anchors - Using the same anchor for a number of resources, integrating them.
(See "Integrating Anchors.")
Switch Referential Index - To "become" someone else fully by taking both the
perspective and the criteria and history, etc. of someone else. (Contrast with "Shift
Referential Index.")
Synesthesia - A very close and quick overlap between a sequence of two or more
representational systems such as "see/feel" (feelings overlap with what is seen) or
"hear/feel" (feelings overlap with what is heard).
Tag Questions - Negative questions tagged onto the end of a sentence in order to diffuse
polarity responses; e.g. "don't you?" "can't you?" "aren't you?" etc.
Tape-editing - A process of reviewing past behavior and then selecting and rehearsing
future-pacing new behavior and responses in order to alter future responses in similar
situations. (See "New Behavior Generator.")
Third Position ("Observer") - A dissociated meta-position from which you can observe
or review events, seeing yourself and others interact.
Translating - The process of rephrasing words from one representational system into
another, useful in bridging understanding between two people.
Universal Quantifier - A linguistic term for words which are applied to all cases and all
situations without exception; e.g. "all," "every," "always," and negations such as "never,"
"none," etc.
FORGIVENESS 1
Elements Of Forgiveness 3
An Experiment 3
Transcript 5
Other Objections 8
Self—Forgiveness 10
Summary 11
The Forgiveness Pattern 13
RESOLVING GRIEF 16
REIMPRINTING WITH DIVINE INTERVENTION 20
Robert Dilts' description of Beliefs: 21
YOUR STRUCTURE OF THOUGHT 23
THE DECISION DESTROYER 24
Forgiveness
by Steve Andreas
A great deal of therapeutic effort goes into struggling with anger and
resentment, because this "unfinished business" causes so much difficulty— both for
the person who has it and for other family members, friends, and associates. All of
us can think of people who spend much of their time preoccupied with old hurts and
injuries, interfering with their ongoing relationships and preventing them from
getting on with their lives. How often have you wished that there were a quick and
easy way to help a someone give up this preoccupation with the dead past and
refocus on present and future living?
Some might be tempted to dismiss this as only a single case, that it was
a result of Virginia's consummate skill, impossible for ordinary therapists to
emulate, or that Virginia got lucky, and that Linda was an easy client. But although
Linda was cooperative, she was a very tough client, as a careful review of the
videotape or the verbatim transcript (1) will show. At one point Virginia says to
Linda, "One of the things I sense about you is you have a highly-developed ability
to stand firm on things." (How's that for a reframe of being "stubborn"?)
Another way to think about this session is that Virginia showed us that
it is possible to deal with a client's long-standing resentment in a very short time,
and then go on to wonder, "What are the crucial elements in her work that could be
discovered, tested, and taught to others?"
About nine years ago, my wife Connirae and I, along with participants in
an advanced seminar, discovered the essential components in the process of
reaching forgiveness, and developed a pattern, or experiential recipe, for teaching
clients how to do this.
Firstly, until recently, many approaches in the field of psychotherapy have typically
maintained that one recipe can be used for all sorts of human problems. That is like saying
that a given recipe will work equally well for a beef roast, a chocolate cake, or a tossed
salad.
Others make the mistake of confusing the recipe with the result of using the recipe. You can't
get much nourishment from the recipe itself, any more than you can find much shelter
under the architectural plans for a comfortable home.
A recipe is only a set of instructions that tells you what to do in order to get a given result.
If a recipe is followed carefully (and the appropriate ingredients are available) the result is
dependable. Our world is filled with the satisfying results of recipes that work dependably,
from cookbooks to computer manuals. All of science and technology consists of detailed
recipes that get specific results in specified contexts.
"The term science should not be given to anything but the aggregate of the recipes that are always
successful. All the rest is literature." Paul Valery (7, p.41)
I am grateful to Paul Watzlawick for pointing out the crucial difference between
descriptive language and injunctive language. Descriptive language is exemplified by
psychiatry's DSM IV diagnostic manual. Over 700 pages describe the different kinds of
disorders that people have, but not a single page tells what to do to resolve them! In
contrast, injunctive language tells you what to do in order to have a particular experience.
George Spencer Brown said it well:
"The taste of a cake, although literally indescribable, can be conveyed to a reader in the
form of a set of injunctions called a recipe. Music is a similar art form; the composer does
not even attempt to describe the set of sounds he has in mind, much less the set of feelings
occasioned through them, but writes down a set of commands which, if they are obeyed by
the reader, can result in a reproduction, to the reader, of the composer's original
experience. " (4, p. 77)
Frieda Fromm—Reichman once said, "People don't come to therapy for explanation; they
come for experience." A recipe is only a dependable way to create a specific experience.
2. The second part of the process usually takes somewhat longer: dealing with the
objections that a client has to going ahead with reaching forgiveness. These
objections often have to do with wanting protection against the expected
consequences of forgiveness: "If I forgave him, then something bad would
happen"—I'd be tempted to reconcile with him, he could hurt me again, etc.
Objections about consequences need to be met by eliciting or teaching specific
protective coping skills. "If you forgave him, how could you still maintain your
resolve to stay separate and be protected against future hurt?"
Other objections have to do with the meaning of forgiveness to the client. "If I
forgave her, that would mean something about me—that I'm a wimp, that I condone
what she did to me, etc." Objections about meaning need to be met by changing the
client's meaning through some kind of reframing. "Can you see that far from being
a wimp, your forgiving her would mean that you have accomplished a change that
takes great courage, compassion and understanding—one that only a few human
beings are capable of?"
An Experiment
A short mind-experiment can provide you with a very compact experience of these
elements in the forgiveness process:
a. First look at your images. One image is probably larger than the other one,
farther away than the other, one brighter or more colorful than the other,
one more to your left than the other, one higher or lower than the other, etc.
b. Next notice your auditory experience of these two people. Is there a voice
with one image and not with the other, or are there differences in the volume
tonality, or tempo of the two voices, etc?
4. Now comes the really interesting part. Try exchanging the locations of the
images of the two people in your mind, and notice how your feelings change in
response to this little experiment. For instance, I represented the disliked person
small, far away, dim, on my right and silent. The image of the liked person was
large, close, bright, on my left, with a clear voice. If I exchange the two, the
disliked person is on my left, large and bright, with a clear voice.
Many people simply refuse to do this experiment. Those who are willing to try this,
at least for a few moments just to see what it is like, typically feel uncomfortable
and unsafe, and want to quickly put the images back where they started.
There are four main points that I'd like to draw from this little experiment:
1. The location and other process characteristics of internal images are vitally
important in determining our responses to them.
3. When you tried the experiment of exchanging the images, you found that it was
relatively easy to move them around and change how you represent them.
4. Before you would be willing to make such a change permanent, we would have
to find some way to satisfy your felt objections to making the change—you would
need to be able to feel completely comfortable and safe with the new arrangement
© 2003, NLP Comprehensive Appendix B - Page 4
PO Box 927 NLP Comprehensive Participant Notes
Evergreen, CO 80437
These four main points are true of all therapeutic work. In the following, they are
illustrated by an edited transcript of an audio taped demonstration (2) of the
forgiveness pattern with a woman who was angry with an ex-boyfriend.
Transcript
Steve: Ann, you have someone you're still angry with, and you also have in mind
someone you have forgiven. Think of those two experiences; how are they different?
Ann: (briskly:) The anger is here on the right; it's close, larger than life. (softly
and more slowly:) Forgiveness is pretty far out in front of me, 10 or 12 feet, perhaps
three or four inches high. (rapidly:) Anger is in really bright, stark, angry colors.
(softly:) The forgiveness one is pastel, softly lit from the back. I feel soft and warm
and connected with that person. Forgiveness is real quiet. (quickly) The angry one
has lots of dialogue, with "Yeah, buts" and rationalizations; it's argumentative.
Steve: OK, now what objection do you have to transforming anger into forgiveness?
Ann: (thoughtfully) It feels like leverage, a way that I can get the change that is
needed.
Steve: So, you have some outcome, and by remaining angry you think that will help
you get it. What is it about remaining angry that helps you make progress toward
the outcome?
Ann: By remaining angry, that creates, literally, distance between us, and he doesn't
want the distance; so as long as I'm angry, then he needs to do something.
Steve: You strike me as a fairly resourceful woman. How could you maintain
distance without having to be angry, so that you could enjoy it even more?
Ann: The objecting part is saying, "If I let go of this anger, then I'll let him come
back, and he won't have made the requisite changes. And then we'll be right back
where we were before.
Steve: It sounds like that part doesn't believe that you, Ann, have the strength of
mind or character, or whatever, to maintain a particular outcome and go for it.
Ann: It just seems like there's such a discrepancy in our value systems.
Steve: Given that you recognize this discrepancy in value systems, it sounds like
you've made a fairly congruent decision that distance is the best thing, at least for
now. And you said something about leverage—that this person wants to be back
with you, and that as long as you can say "not now " you have a way to create some
motivation for him to maybe make changes.
Ann: Right.
Steve: Now given that's a decision you've made, what do you need the anger for? It
seems to me it would be even easier to do all that without anger. It would give you
even more of a feeling of power and upholding your own values. Ann: It appears
easier with anger.
Steve: Try traveling into the future. Imagine that over the next week, you have no
anger, and that you're very clear, and your mind is set on this goal, and you could
be even more comfortable in just simply saying "No," to any possible
encroachment, or whatever... Do you have any objections to that? (No.) Does any
part have any objection? (No.) OK, are there any other objections? (No.)
It sounds like you still have some connection with this person, that there are some
valuable parts of this person that you also respect and have warm feelings toward
as well. A lot of people think that if you feel warmly toward someone, that means
you can't feel angry at them, or you can't deny them something. To me, it's even
more respectful of them as a whole person if you can say, "Look, this part of you
fits for me beautifully; this part over here doesn't fit for me and I don't want it. "
And just be really clear about that. It's not that you're bad or that I'm good. It's
just, "This fits for me and that doesn't."
It can be even easier for you to say what doesn't fit if you acknowledge the parts
that do fit, so that you're not rejecting him as a whole. That has got to be hard for
him; he's going to be defensive, and then you 're going to have to be defensive, and
so on. But if you can say, "Gosh, the way you do this is wonderful, and this over
here doesn't fit for me, and I refuse to do it. " Does that make sense to you? (Yes.)
Ann: (softly, thoughtfully) I feel a loss of power; the powerlessness of not being
able to say "No."
Steve: And what is it that prevents you from saying "No " to future harm?
Ann: (happily) I just fixed it. I brought him closer, so he's life-size, so then we're
equal. When he was smaller than life-size, then I felt pity and I couldn't say "No."
Steve: And now, what's your feeling toward him? Do you have that warmth, and
sense of connection?
Ann: Yeah, and I can have a conversation with him as equals, rather than having to
play top dog or underdog.
Steve: Great. Now close your eyes for a minute, and jump into next week or
whenever you might have an interaction with him and see how that goes. .. . (Ann is
smiling and relaxed.) That looks pretty good from here!
Ann: Yes. (quietly) I feel softness, and tenderness, and understanding, and a real
connection that wasn't there before. When you used the word "fit" earlier, that was
absolutely perfect for me, because the objection part was being judgmental, making
him wrong, and those things he did be bad, whereas just to see it as not a fit makes a
big difference.
In a follow-up interview ten weeks later, Ann said, "At the time of our session, he
was in Vermont, and as far as I was concerned, he could stay there. Now he's back
here and we're setting a wedding date! How's that for results! There are two other
things that I'm specifically aware of. One is that there's no bitterness on my part,
and there's no reservation. I find it easy to have the same level of intimacy and trust
as I did before. . . . And I've also used the forgiveness process in my own practice
with couples, and it works."
2. "I need to get even first." What would getting even do for you? Often people
say that they feel personally diminished by the harm that was done to them, and that
getting even would help them feel powerful and good about themselves again. I
want you to feel powerful and good about yourself, and I'd like to offer you other
ways of doing this. For instance, I'd like you to learn how to cope effectively with
possible repetitions of this kind of behavior, so that you feel safe and strong in
knowing what you can do to prevent a recurrence.
3. "Anger makes me feel powerful; I don't want to give it up." Yes, there is a
certain feeling of power in feeling angry, in being courageous and willing to stand
up for yourself and your values. But usually there is also a sense of lack of choice in
having to be angry and having to be preoccupied with thoughts of that person who
harmed you. When someone says, "He made me angry," what they are really saying
is, "He can control my feelings; I have no choice but to get angry." I'd like to offer
you more choices, so that you can be the one in control of your feelings and
behavior, and really stand up for yourself even more powerfully.
4. "I refuse to forgive and forget." I agree with you completely. I don't want you
to forgive and forget. If you forgot, then you'd be completely vulnerable to a
repetition of the harm that was done to you. I want you to forgive and remember. I
want you to remember so that you are protected against possible recurrences, and to
remember in a way that provides you with feelings of strength, choice, and
resourcefulness, instead of being provoked into choiceless anger.
1. The presupposition that everyone always does the best they can is basic to all our
work, and is best illustrated by a brief experiment. Think of a time when you
harmed someone else, and you now regret it. Looking back on that situation, think
about your motives, your knowledge, your perceptions, capabilities, fears,
limitations etc. at that time. Considering all this, at that time could you have done
anything different?
Now, with the benefit of hindsight, and subsequent learnings, etc. you may be able
to do something different next time, but at that time you did the best you could.
Understanding this can also be a very useful part of being able to forgive others, but
it is an absolutely essential part of forgiving yourself.
One of the results of Virginia Satir's "Family Reconstruction" process3 (in which
the client directs and observes a vivid re-enactment of the parents' childhoods) was
to be able to see the parents' harmful behavior as the best that they could do in the
context of the limitations and difficulties of their own upbringing.
2. Atonement4 can also be spelled "at one ment," becoming "at one" with, rejoining
with what has been alienated. Anything that can be done to compensate for the harm
that you did to others helps the healing, because it transforms regret into positive
action. This can range from a simple heart-felt apology to taking steps to make up
for the harm that was done. If the actual person who was harmed is dead, or
otherwise unavailable, one can do good to others who are in the same kind of
situation. Many Vietnam veterans have said that going back to Vietnam and helping
the people there in some way has been a very healing experience for them.
The healing power of forgiveness is a very ancient teaching, but typically this
teaching has been to point to a goal and describe it and its value, but without much
information about what to do to get there. Now that we know how to do it, this
ancient teaching can be manifest in the world.
"I had to decide right then whether to let myself hate the soldiers who had done this.
It was an easy decision, really. I was a lawyer. In my practice I has seen too often
what hate could do to people's minds and bodies. Hate had just killed the six people
who mattered most to me in the world. I decided then that I would spend the rest of
my life—whether it was a few days or many years—loving every person I came in
contact with."
—George G. Ritchie (5)
1. The root of the word forgiveness is the Middle English "forgifen" which means
"to give up." The current definition is "to give up resentment against, or the desire
to punish; to stop being angry with; to pardon."
2. I'm indebted to Virginia Satir for this word. When two things—or people—don't
fit, it simply means there is a mismatch. "Fit" is totally non-judgmental, avoiding all
the good/bad evaluation and blaming.
REFERENCES
1. Andreas, S. (1991) Virginia Satir: The Patterns of Her Magic.
Moab, UT: Real People Press.
5. Ritchie, George G. (1978) Return from Tomorrow. Waco, TX: Chosen Books.
Steve Andreas, with his wife Connirae, has been learning, teaching and developing
Neuro-Linguistic Programming (NLP) for over twenty years. They are authors or
editors of a number of NLP books and articles.
Address: NLP Comprehensive, PO Box 927, Evergreen, CO. 80437
www.nlpco.com
General Frames. The goal of this pattern is to bring peace and resolution to the
person feeling anger or resentment. Forgiving others (or yourself) does not mean
condoning the behavior that harmed you (or someone else), or giving up the values
that were violated. An important part of the pattern is to reaffirm your own values
and criteria and use them to develop ways of coping resourcefully. The resolution
and integration that forgiveness brings will make it easier to take effective action to
uphold your values and standards in the future.
1. Resentment/Anger. Identify the person and the incident you are still
angry/resentful about, and with whom you would like to reach a feeling of
forgiveness and resolution. Take a moment to notice how you think of this person
and incident now. (Calibrate to client's nonverbal responses.)
a. You once resented someone, but when you think of that person now it is with a
feeling of forgiveness and compassion.
b. Someone harmed you, and you forgave him/her right away because you
recognized that they harmed you accidentally, or that they were doing the best they
could, etc. For instance, a small child hurt you, and you instantly recognized that he
couldn't possibly do otherwise, or understand the consequences of what she/he did.
(Calibrate to client's nonverbal responses.)
5. Ecology Check. "Does any part of you have any objection to reaching forgiveness
with this person?" The most common objections are of two types:
6. Step into "Other" Position. First take the observer position to observe yourself
and the person who "harmed" you from the out-side, in the context in which are
were harmed. Then step into the other person, noticing what you can learn that is
new to you about this person's experience. What additional information do you get
about how this person sees, hears, feels, and understands events? (This will be much
easier and more effective after aligning perceptual positions.) "Do you realize that
this person (and yourself) was doing the best she/he could in this situation, given
this person's background, limited knowledge or motivation, etc.?" Take time to be
sure this presupposition is in place.
8. Test. "Think of the person you used to feel resentment/anger toward. How do you
feel about him/her now?" Calibrate to the nonverbal responses, comparing with
what you observed previously at steps 1. and 2. Usually the incident of harm will
now be the past, while the person who has been forgiven will be in the present
and/or future, and with a feeling of neutrality or compassion.
The following steps are written as instructions for you to learn this process. We
invite you to try this out with yourself, and/or with a client.
Preliminary Step: Find a "break state" stimulus. If the client is already crying or
depressed, etc., you need to find a way to change this state to a more useful state
before you attempt to do anything else. You also need to be able to interrupt or
"break" this unresourceful state any time it reoccurs. Even if the client starts in a
good state, s/he may plunge into grieving as you go through the early stages of the
pattern, so you may need to be able to break state later. Having the client stand up
and walk around, introducing a startling distraction, or asking the client about an
area of competence, etc. may be sufficient to break state.
a. An actual loss that you are grieving about and feel a sense of emptiness or
absence, or a loss that you haven't fully dealt with yet. Make sure your
representation is of what you valued and didn't want to lose, not the person after he
or she was lost or destroyed. For example, if your child died of cancer, and you
recall that child as emaciated and comatose shortly before death, that is probably not
what you are sorry you no longer have. It's what you valued and now miss that leads
to grieving-the child's laughter and play, special qualities, future promise, etc. If the
client just sees the ill child or a coffin, ask "How do you know something valuable
was lost?" or "How do you know this is worth grieving over?" until the client thinks
of the valued experience, not its negation. This is extremely important; not only will
the grief pattern will not work without it; any attempt to run the pattern will plunge
the client into unpleasantness.
b. Someone you care for who is not actually present: Think of a person that you
typically have available to you in your life but who is not physically present at this
moment as you think about him/her now. For example, you have a loving friend, a
spouse, or a child who is actually far away at the moment. Yet when you think about
this person, you experience him/her with you as a present resource. Most people can
easily think of an example of this, unless they are very socially isolated. If you use
this option, be cautious about presuppositions that may be linked to this experience
that may not be appropriate, such as that the person could always be contacted.
3. Contrastive Analysis:
Compare your two internal experiences (loss and presence). When you think of the
"loss" experience, what do you see/hear/feel (tactilely)? When you think of the
"presence" experience, what do you see/hear/feel (tactilely)? Make a list of all the
submodality differences between the two. For instance, the loss may be a
dissociated, still, black and white photograph, while the presence is an associated
color movie. Especially note differences in movie /slide, association/dissociation,
location in space, distance, and transparency.
5. Ecology check:
Do you have any objections to changing your experience of this loss, so that you
experience that person as being a present resource? Would any of your family
members object if you stopped grieving now? Satisfy any/all objections before
proceeding, primarily through content reframing. For instance, if the client says that
grieving is a way to "honor the dead," you can say, "What better way to honor this
person could there be than to carry him joyfully with you in your heart for the rest of
your days?" or "If you died tomorrow, would you want your loved ones to grieve
and be unhappy, or to remember you with love as they move on with their lives?"
6. Mapping Across:
Starting with the most powerful submodalities you have identified, change the
experience of loss into one of "presence/fullness." Usually the content of the
representation remains the same. However, at times the content may need to be
adjusted in order to match the structure of presence.
7. Testing:
Think of the "loss" experience now. Does it feel like a resource to you in the same
ways as the original "fullness" experience? Is the new representation of the loss not
the same as the presence, in terms of submodalities? If there are still differences,
identify them and use them to complete the change.
Part II
Part I utilizes whatever internal resources and codings the individual already uses, in
order to transform an experience of something lost in the past into a present felt
resource. The degree of effectiveness depends upon how well this person's existing
strategies work.
For some people, the internal strategies they have already developed for getting over
loss don't also program them to seek out appropriate replacement experiences in the
real world. It's possible that they could feel good about their internal resources, and
just sit in a closet for the rest of their lives. Part II is derived from the most effective
strategies for getting over grief, and makes sure that the person will actively seek
out appropriate replacement experiences now and in the future.
3. Transform:
If this kind of experience, with these qualities were to occur in your future, what
form might it take? How could you experience those qualities and satisfy those
outcomes in different ways with other people in the future, considering your present
age and living situation, etc? Preserving these qualities, values, or outcomes, allow
additional representations to form in a third location that are appropriate to who you
are now and into the future. These representations may be somewhat different from
the experience you had in the past, in order to be congruent with who you are now,
and what is realistically available to you in the future. These representations should
be attractive and convincing, like other future representations, but they should not
be too specific; they should be somewhat vague and unclear, allowing for a variety
of possibilities.
4. Ecology check:
Do you have any objections to making these experiences or directions a part of your
future? Would anyone else in your life have any objections to this? Adjust this
representation and/or reframe to satisfy any/all objections before continuing.
Remember the importance of your state as you experience a pattern. Words are only a
guide to eliciting experience.
b. Separate the parent's positive intent from their behavior. "What did
you want for your child by doing this behavior?"
3. Re-experience the situation as modified by the steps above, with the "new,
improved parent.
a. In parent's shoes. (Other perceptual position)
b. As your younger self. (Self perceptual position
The patient replied, "Of course corpses don't bleed, all of their body functions have stopped." The
psychiatrist then convinced the patient to try an experience. The psychiatrist would carefully prick
the patient with a pin, and they would see if he started to bleed. The patient agreed. After all, he
was a corpse.
The psychiatrist gently pricked the patient's skin with a needle, and sure enough, he started to
bleed. With a look of shock and amazement, the patient gasped, "I'll be darned ... corpses DO
bleed!"
Our beliefs are a very powerful force in our behavior. It is common wisdom that if someone really
believes he can do something he will do it, and if he believes something is impossible, no amount
of effort will convince him that it can be accomplished. What is unfortunate is that many sick
people, such as those with cancer or heart disease, will often present their doctors and friends with
the same belief mentioned in the story above.
Beliefs like "It's too late now," "There's nothing I can do anyway," "I'm a victim.. .my number
came up." Can often limit the full resources of the patient. Our beliefs about ourselves and what is
possible in the world around us greatly impact our day-to-day effectiveness.
All of us have beliefs that serve as resources as well as beliefs that limit us. The power of beliefs
was demonstrated in an enlightening study in which a group of children were tested to have average
intelligence was divided at random into two equal groups. One of the groups was assigned to a
teacher who was told that the children were "gifted." The other group was given to a teacher who
was told that the children were "slow learners." A year later, the two groups were re-tested for
intelligence. Not surprisingly, the majority of the group that was arbitrarily identified as "gifted"
scored higher than they had previously, while the majority of the group that was labeled "slow"
scored lower! The teacher's beliefs about the students affected their ability to learn.
In another study, 100 cancer "survivors" (patients who had reversed their symptoms for over 10
years) were interviewed about what they had done to achieve success. The interviews showed that
not one treatment method stood out as being more effective than any other. Some had taken the
standard medical treatment of chemotherapy and/or radiation, some had used a nutritional
approach, others had followed a spiritual path, while others concentrated on a psychological
approach, and some did nothing at all. The only thing that was characteristic of the entire group was
that they all believed that the approach they took would work.
Certainly, these examples seem to demonstrated that our beliefs can shape, affect, or even
determine our degree of intelligence, health, relationships, creativity, even our degree of happiness
and personal success. Yet, if indeed our beliefs are such a powerful force in our lives, how do we
get control of them so they don't control us?
Neuro-Linguistic Programming (NLP) provides perhaps the most powerful and exciting model of
the mind and set of behavioral tools in existence. Through the processes of NLP, beliefs and belief
strategies may be explicitly mapped and directed.
The three most common areas of limiting beliefs center around issues of hopelessness, helplessness
and worthlessness. These three areas of belief can exert a great deal of influence with respect to a
person's mental and physical health. Hopelessness occurs when someone does not believe a
particular desired goal is even possible. It is characterized by a sense that, "No matter what I do it
won't make a difference." What I want is not possible to get. It's out of my control. I'm a victim."
Helplessness occurs when, even though he or she believes that the outcome exists and is possible to
achieve, a person does not believe that he or she is capable of attaining it. It produces a sense that,
"It's possible for others to achieve this goal but not for me. I'm not good enough or cap[able
enough to accomplish it."
Worthlessness occurs when, even though a person may believe that the desired goal is possible and
that he or she even has the capability to accomplish it, that individual believes that he or she doesn't
deserve to get what he/she wants. It is often characterized by a sense that, "I am a fake. I don't
belong. I don't deserve to be happy or healthy. There is something basically and fundamentally
wrong with me as a person, and I deserve the pain and suffering that I am experiencing."
NLP offers specific techniques to elegantly and effectively help people to shift these types of
limiting beliefs to beliefs involving hope for the future, a sense of capability and responsibility, and
a sense of self-worth and belonging.
Groups of Three
"A" is to access an example that is true for him or her of each of the
following categories:
I Wish
Step I:
1. A describes to B and C how each category of experience is distinct and different from
the other paying special attention to the submodality differences in each example. Be
sure to check out auditory and kinesthetic submodalities.
Step II:
1. After checking for ecology, experiment with using submodalities to change a "wish " to
a "want" , a "can't" to a "can" or a "should" to a "will." What do you need to do
internally to make this a lasting change?
1. Think of a "positive" imprint and find the submodalities that make this experience
impactful.
2. Search for a "negative" imprint experience, and the decision that resulted from it,
that now affects your life in a way you don't like. There are at least four ways to do
this:
a. Think of an unpleasant experience that stands out strongly or was a
turning point in your life. Return to it to discover what generalization(s) you
made as a result of it.
b. Think of a generalization or attitude that gets in your way and use the
associated feelings to search back through time to find the imprint
experience that formed it.
d. Float above your timeline and check for dark spots. When you notice a
dark spot, pull up the memory, and notice what it is.
3. Next you will create a new positive imprint that occurred before the negative
imprint that created problems. There are three vital aspects of this experience if it is
to be powerfully impactful.
b. Detail: Now create a scenario with lots of the specific detail that all your
other real experiences have.
The content of the event and the detail that you build in must be appropriate
to the age that you were and the context at the time this new positive imprint
occurred.
© 2003, NLP Comprehensive Appendix B - Page 24
PO Box 927 NLP Comprehensive Participant Notes
Evergreen, CO 80437
Example: "It was early on a Sunday morning when all the rest of the
family was still asleep. He had been up all night working. He looked
tired and there was a white stubble all over his face. The sun was
streaming in the window the way it does in the early fall. He asked
me to come sit by him and he took both my hands in his. I was a
little apprehensive because he had never done that before, and I
stared at his brown, gnarled hands with the blue veins bulging,..."
4. Impactful Submodalities: As you build this experience in your memory, use the
impactful submodalities that you discovered in step 1, to make it robust and
powerful.
5. Taking your new imprint experience with you, float up above your timeline and go
back to a point before the negative imprint occurred, and float down into your
timeline, so that you are associated into the imprint experience at that point in time.
6. Then remain associated in your timeline and travel forward in time, allowing all
your subsequent experiences to shift in the light of this new imprint and decision.
As you pass through the old "negative" imprint experience, this will reevaluate and
"destroy" the old decision you didn't like. You can do this fairly quickly, allowing
your unconscious to shift what happens, coloring your past with the new imprint.
7. When you arrive at the present, stop there and see yourself (dissociated) continuing
on into the future, seeing what you will be doing differently as a result of this new
experience.
Variations:
1. Rather than creating an entirely new imprint, it may be useful to find a positive
imprint that actually happened later, and place it earlier in time, so that it is prior to
the problem imprint.
2. Another alternative is to take the more resourceful you of the present (or future)
back to just prior to the negative imprint.
General Principles
Models
A model is only a more-or-less-sophisticated metaphor for understanding some part of
the world. When physicists describe the behavior of an electron as a "particle," it leads
naturally to some kinds of understanding and predictions, and tends to exclude others.
When physicists describe an electron as a "wave," they discover understandings and
applications that are not available to them when thinking of an electron as a particle.
What is an electron "really"? Undoubtedly neither a "wave" nor a "particle." Hopefully
someday someone will come up with a new metaphor that comes closer to describing
what an electron "really" is, and which yields deeper and more extensive understandings.
Some physicists are now using the metaphor of a "string," which has both particle and
wave qualities, and holds forth the possibility of integrating the understandings that have
been gained from both the particle and wave models. I am not sufficiently educated about
contemporary physics to know how useful this new description has been to date.
Freud's thinking about feelings and emotions was based on a hydraulic or "plumbing"
metaphor (following Descartes theory of how the brain worked). He thought of feelings
as being fluids that were stored, and if they were pushed down in one area of life they
would squirt out somewhere else. Primal therapy, an offshoot, spoke of a "primal pool of
pain" that could be "drained" by screaming.
In contrast, the NLP metaphor is that of an information system that stores information as
recorded memories in one or more representational systems, corresponding to the five
senses. It is only when these records are activated that feelings result from them (if they
are meaningful). If the memory is never activated, no feelings are stimulated. A CD
player has lots of records of music, but it is only when the laser beam reads these records
that there is music. If we used the Freudian metaphor to describe this, we'd say that the
CD is full of music struggling for expression (catharsis). Thinking of a person as an
information system makes it clear why catharsis not only doesn't work but can make
many problems worse, or even create new ones. Although the information system
metaphor has been much more useful than the Freudian plumbing metaphor, yet another
one (not yet discovered) may prove to be even better.
In practice, TA borrowed methods and techniques from other forms of psychotherapy and
adapted them to their descriptive framework.
Psychiatry's "Diagnostic and Statistical Manual" has over 700 pages describing how
people can have problems, but not a word about what to do to resolve them. In contrast,
injunctive language tells you what to do to reach an outcome. A cookbook is injunctive,
because each recipe tells you exactly what to do to get a particular result. A recipe
specifies:
a. an outcome (chocolate cake or a well done roast)
b. a list of required ingredients (flour, sugar, chocolate, etc., or a particular cut of
meat)
c. a sequential process for mixing and processing those ingredients and how to cook
them to get the desired result.
Technology
A cookbook is essentially a list of techniques, and someone can follow the instructions
and get the result without any understanding of the processes involved. A number of
years ago I listened to an audio tape of someone teaching and demonstrating the
Forgiveness Pattern that Connirae and I developed along with the participants in a
modeling seminar in 1990. (An article about this process can be found on the NLP
Comprehensive web site at: http://www.nlpco.com) His theory about how it worked was
very complex, but had no resemblance to our understanding of the process.
Nevertheless, he led the demonstration subject successfully through all the steps of the
technique and into the experience of forgiveness. In one sense, what he did is the highest
compliment one can pay to a technique—that it is sufficiently developed and precise that
someone can use it without any understanding (or even with an inappropriate
understanding) and it will still work.
"The term science should not be given to anything but the aggregate of the recipes that
are always successful"
—Paul Valery
All of us are surrounded by technology that we use, but do not understand, and no human
being lives long enough to understand even a small fraction of it even if s/he spent a
lifetime studying it. When we use a cell phone, an automatic transmission, or an
antibiotic, most of us don't have the vaguest idea of the physics or chemistry involved..
Epistemology
Epistemology is the study of how we know things. Webster's unabridged dictionary
defines epistemology as "The theory or science that investigates the origin, nature,
methods and limits of knowledge" Every model also has an implicit epistemology, at
both the level of technology and methodology.
Some epistemologies are very simple; they rely on some authority—a person, book or
other original source from which the model originates. Most such epistemologies do not
have an independent way to test the validity of the model, and typically such
methodologies do not develop or change significantly over long periods of time.
Astrology, for instance, has not changed much in several thousand years.
The scientific method, in contrast, includes a rigorous way of testing and revising
methodology, an explicit recognition of the inherent uncertainty in all knowledge, and the
testing of this knowledge. As Hans Vaihinger wrote in The Philosophy of "As If," "Truth
is only the most expedient error." This was echoed by Richard Bandler who said,
"Everything we tell you is lies; but they are very useful lies." This aspect of the
epistemology of science essentially says "I don't care if it's 'true;' I only care if it's true
enough to yield predictions about the world that can be used. The following poem says it
even better:
General/Specific
The more general a model is, the more it can be applied to a wide range of situations.
However, the more general it is, the less information it supplies about specific situations.
E=mc2 is understood to apply to the entire universe, but it doesn't tell you how to make a
match or how to build a pump. More limited and specific models can provide more
detailed and useful information. One important element is to know the scope of the
domain that is usefully described by a model. For example, NLP is a wonderful model,
but it is not useful in designing an automobile engine or telling a doctor how to set a
broken bone.
Creation/Application
A new model is created when one realm of experience (e.g. "particle") is used to describe
another (e.g. electron) metaphorically, and then further developed through testing,
statements of how to apply and refine this metaphor through mathematics, etc. The initial
creative leap is followed by a lot of work to develop the detailed recipes and procedures
that make it useful. It took over a hundred and fifty years from Michael Faraday's
discovery of electromagnetic induction to the giant generators in today's power plants.
Once a model has been created it can then be applied to other events within the domain
described by the model, or in some cases applied usefully to other domains. In NLP,
Richard Bandler and John Grinder and others developed a number of models, and
borrowed others), while most of the "modeling" done by others (including ourselves) has
actually been applications of these models. We assume that most modeling tasks will also
be of this nature: applications of NLP models to a specific domain and outcome, rather
than creating a new model. (However, if someone is able to create a new one, that will be
wonderful.)
Of course there are plenty of other models available for understanding human
functioning, healing, and development. Some, like crystal healing or aura balancing, do
not share the epistemology of NLP—the requirement of rigorous testing, etc. Others, like
standard allopathic medicine, share the NLP epistemology (at least theoretically), but
their methodology and primary domain of application is quite different (though there is
some overlap).
B. What to Model
The first step is to define the skill, ability or limitation that you want to model, and the
context in which it occurs. Chunking this down to a reasonable size is very important,
particularly when you have limited time. Even when you have more time it is usually
much more useful to chunk down to components, model each one separately, and then
integrate these components into a larger model. One important distinction is between
modeling a process that is mostly internal, such as shame or feeling bad about being
criticized, in contrast to processes that are interactional, such as negotiation. Negotiation
is inherently more complex, because you have at least two individual worlds and their
interaction to deal with. It can be useful to chunk down to a particular kind of interaction,
or stage in the interaction, or even to one person's process/ response in the particular
interaction. A precise model of a small part of a process is generally much more useful
than an imprecise model of a larger process—and you can build a precise model of a
larger process by modeling small pieces of it and then integrating them.
There are many possibilities for how to choose a starting point.
Following are a few of the possibilities that we have found useful:
1. Think of a particular difficulty and its resolution (for which there is not yet an NLP
pattern). Usually these will be nominalizations ("difficulty," "resolution"), and your
modeling task will be to denominalize it into the processing that the person goes
through, to find out "How, specifically?" the person does it. If you model a
nominalized experience, it will typically be at a sufficiently general level that your
model will be applicable to a wider range of people than if you model a simpler and
more specific skill. However, usually as the level of generalization increases, so does
the complexity of the process you will need to model. You can model the problem
and its resolution separately-or alternately for contrast—and then model a process
that will make the transition from one to the other (more on this later). This is how
Connirae and I modeled the Grief, Guilt, Shame, and Forgiveness patterns.
Remember that your model can only be as good as the experiences that you choose to
model. When modeling grief, for example, we passed over people who said (often
2. Think of a particular skill that you, or your clients, want or need. Find a particularly
good example of someone who has that skill behaviorally, and model what they do.
This is how we modeled how to respond resourcefully to criticism. In selecting a
model, be very cautious about people's self reports. For example, some people say
that they are good at motivating themselves because they are so aware of the hour-
long process they use to get out of bed! Others will say they are not good at
motivating themselves because they can't continue to motivate themselves at the end
of a highly active and productive 18-hour day! Find someone who actually exhibits,
or can demonstrate to you, the skill or quality that you want to model.
3. Explore the structure of anything that you are curious about or fascinated by. This is
how Connirae and I modeled how people represent time and criteria, and how I
modeled the structure of self-concept. This is potentially much more generative, but it
may also be more complex, and the applications, uses, and benefits are usually not
clear in advance.
4. Look and listen around you for someone who is noticeably good at something or
consistently exhibits a pleasant or useful attitude, and model that. This may be a
particularly useful option, Although consistent attitudes typically generalize widely,
they can be fairly simple in structure/process. There are plenty of attitudes the world
could use more of (gratitude, appreciation, tenacity, friendliness, tolerance, love,
respect, connection, equality) and plenty of attitudes the world could use less of
(scorn, hatred, meanness, superiority, inferiority, coercion/manipulation, imposition,
distance, grouchiness, etc.). You can think of people in your life whose attitude you
particularly like or dislike, and model that. I got interested in modeling self-concept
by my dislike of pompous people whose self-esteem was too high!
5. Notice the universal form of an individual solution: When a client presents you with a
difficulty and you find a solution process that works for them, chunk up to a more
generalized form, and apply the solution to others. This is how Connirae modeled a
number of processes: Self Healing, Core Transformation, Parental Timeline
Reimprinting, Timeline Recoding, and Naturally Slender Eating.
C. How to Proceed
1. Contrast
Some kind of contrast will be extremely useful in helping you zero in on the crucial
distinctions operating. Whenever possible make everything the same except the
presence or absence of what you are modeling.
a. You can compare the same person before and after they made a change
whether spontaneous or deliberate.
b. You can compare two recent experiences in the same person when they did,
and didn't, have the skill or quality you are modeling.
c. You can compare two people, one of whom has it and the other doesn't.
2. Selecting a counterexample
If you are modeling a problem state, for example, you don't want to select any
counterexample. You need a counterexample that has all the features described for
the problem state except that the person's response is useful and life-affirming. This
will be an immense help in disregarding all the elements in the two experiences that
are the same, and are irrelevant to success/failure. However, later you may need to go
back and identify other supporting elements that are necessary, but not sufficient, and
since they were present in both experiences you disregarded them.
5. Designing a Transition
When you have characterized the differences between the problem state and the
desired state, this will usually suggest what changes are required to get from the
problem state to the desired state. How can you design a sequence of changes to make
the transition smooth, efficient, and effective? Keep in mind that a given set of
changes may be very difficult when made in one sequence, and very easy when done
in a different order. If there are a number of shifts to be made, decide which will
probably be easier or more comfortable to make first, and then experiment to find out
the best sequence of these shifts. Modeling someone who spontaneously went through
a transition successfully will provide one effective sequence, but there is no guarantee
that it is an optimal sequence.
At this point you should have an outline of a model of how to achieve the desired
outcome. It is probably missing some distinctions and there will be certain contexts
where it won't work, but it will work in at least some cases.
c. Amplifying. How can you add to the process to make it more robust and
enduring? This is best discovered by noticing exactly where the process fails
with specific clients, and what you have to change to make it work. By
building this into the process you can extend the range of successful
applications. For instance, the phobia cure will not work well with some
people because of postural anchors that prevent full dissociation. Perceptual
position misalignment can also interfere. Adding these elements in, either as
an earlier step in the process, or as "troubleshooting" followups can make the
phobia cure work successfully with a much wider range of people. Sometimes
the process can be amplified by changing the sequence of states, or by
changing the tempo of the sequence.
c. Special cases. Some clients will need more than a small adjustment to deal
with objections, concerns, problems, or unique aspects. Often you can simply
add a "standard" step that checks for ecology or reframes common objections,
so that the model can be successfully applied to a wider range of clients
without further modification. Refining could theoretically go on forever.
Typically when you have experience with 20 or 30 clients, you will have
encountered most of the variations that exist.
Modeling, is the basis for the continuing development and progress in any field. Physics
began over 250 years ago; NLP only 25. It's a nice beginning, but so much more must lie
ahead.
Preparation
The first step in your modeling project will be to target a skill/proficiency/useful
response/past change to model. Many people choose to model someone who has
experienced a profound change in their past, spontaneously. We suggest that you choose
your topic with certain criteria in mind:
• Passion
Think of your personal mission. What attributes, qualities or characteristics will
assist you to live your mission more fully?
What characteristics attract you in others? Examples: the ability to put people at
ease, "mechanical mind" - a skill in taking things apart and putting them back
together, hanging onto a vision in the face of obstacles, the ability to laugh at
oneself, or feeling comfortable with young children.
You might model something that would accelerate your personal growth in some
way. A "Type A" hard-driving personality might choose to model "stopping to
smell the flowers."
Make sure that when you think of your selected topic, your response is a
congruent and compelling "Yes!"
• Clarity
Be precise in stating your objective. Your project goal should be:
stated in the positive,
supported with sensory-specific evidence,
- behaviorally demonstrable to yourself and others,
narrow in scope, and
independent of content, for the most part, or based on content with which
you are familiar.
Laughing at Myself
Evidence - I would see a humorous side of my own behavior and responses at least once
a day.
EXTERNAL EVIDENCE
• other people would notice and comment on my "lightening up" at least twice
within a one-week period,
• others would invite me to participate in a social activity at least once each
weekend of this training (person initiating the invitation must be outside the group
of those who know I'm using the invitation for evidence).
• I would invite others to laugh with me about myself two or three times a day, and
they would do so at least 2 out of 3 times I try.
Five participants will be chosen at random and invited to participate in the survey.
"Before" Interviews will take p l a c e within the first two weekends of the training, and
"After" interviews will take place before the last w e e k e n d of the training.
We should notice significant measurable differences (at least 2 pts. on the 5-pt. scale
moving in the direction of my outcome) before and after the modeling project. The
adjectives used to describe me in the "before" and "after" surveys will demonstrate that I
seem "lighter". We will evaluate them subjectively to determine whether I met my goal.
Notice how much longer and more detailed the evidence list is for the more internal
ability. To make it testable, we need external as well as internal evidence for your skill.
There should be little or no ambiguity about whether you succeeded at the end of your
project. And, by the way, whether or not you succeed in terms of the objective criteria
you specify, you will almost surely have succeeded at the goal of the Modeling Project -
learning.
You will work with your Assistant to design the outcome and evidence for your project.
You may only start on the Modeling process when your Assistant is satisfied that you
have a well-formed objective.
2. Describe your project goal and the evidence you will use to evaluate your
success.
Build the framework for your project by getting input from your Model:
"Do you agree that you are a Model for the skill I chosen to model?"
If not, you may still choose to use that person for your Model, if in your judgment
they meet your criteria. The Model's perspective on this may contain useful
information
(beliefs, criteria).
"What comments do you have on my outcome and evidence? Are these criteria that
you would use? If not, how would your criteria differ?"
3 . M o d e l the G E O .
Begin with the internal sequence : the strategy and submodalities your Model uses in
processing information to achiev e the desired result.
[2] T h e n you see a picture of yourself doing it the w a y you do it now. Most of the
submodalities are the same, except the location. This picture is about three inches
to the left of the other one. Y o u look back and forth between the two pictures,
selecting elements that you like. You talk to yourself as you compare them,
saying things like, ' H e ' s right about that. Y o u look better when you do it that
way,' or ' Y e s , I think I could do that.'
[3] Y o u then create a third picture, larger, higher and even more to the right,
w h i c h incorporates the best elements of the other two pictures. When it 'looks
right' it gets a small, almost unnoticeable element of sparkle and moves in closer,
to about here [gesture].
[4] T h e n you see the picture from your w i f e ' s eyes and ask yourself (as your
wife) h o w you like h i m doing that. If i t ' s affirmative, you proceed. If she d o e s n ' t
like it, you chang e the picture until she does.
[5] T h e n you get a good feeling about it in the m i d d l e of your body, a lightness
and a little pull forward.
[6] Y o u step into the picture, noticing h o w it feels - familiar, enjoyable, authentic.
If it meets those tests, you go ahead and begin to use the new choices."
Almost by definition, the targeted skill or response will probably be more an unconscious
than conscious process for your M o d e l . Be prepared to dig for the information. It m a y be
useful to provide a m e n u , "Is it that you do... or do y o u . . . ? " Sometimes the information
becomes available w h e n you provide something for t h e m to compare.
Also identify the places in the process in which content knowledg e makes a difference.
For example, if the M o d e l is a business consultant, does he u s e a content framework or
template for analyzing the client's problem? A consultant w ho appraises businesses for
sale m a y have certain guidelines a b o u t valuation: "In this industry, the formula is 3 times
the average profit for the last 5 y e a r s , " Process understanding is only part of the M o d e l ' s
competence in this situation.
SPIRIT How does the Model conceive of her larger connection in the Universe?
What spiritual connections are present in the skill?
Does she feel guided or connected to a force outside herself in this
context? How?
IDENTITY Is there something unique or unusual about the Model that contributes to
this ability?
What role do they play with others as they do the skill?
CAPABILITY/BEHAVIOR/ENVIRONMENT
Gather more detail and clean up any missing or unclear information from
your first (GEO) interview with your Model.
Scope General
Natural
Specific
You can ask these questions directly. The quality of the information is sometimes higher,
though, if you gather this information conversationally (engaging less of the Model's
conscious attention). Get the Model to talk about the skill, about themselves as they do it,
about the differences between themselves and those who are unable to do it. Later you
can analyze the data you gathered for each of the categories you want to describe.
If it's available, some people find it helpful to record the modeling sessions on tape. It
frees the Modeler's conscious mind to attend to the Model, knowing that they can go
back through the conversation on tape sorting for other categories. Some categories will
be highly relevant, others irrelevant. Usually the most important ones emerge naturally in
conversation. You can always ask later about any categories you miss.
After this interview, you'll organize the information you've gathered, starting with your
understanding of the GEO, then sorting the Model of the World information for the parts
that are relevant (support the skill/response you're modeling) or irrelevant (don't support
it in any meaningful way). At this point, you should have tried the GEO and have
sufficient experience in Second Position with your Model to know what aspects of the
skill you have modeled and what aspects remain. The remaining aspects and any
clarification you need are the subject for your Third Interview, if you need one.
Follow-up, Evaluation
This is an optional session held with your Assistant or with another participant to debrief
the Modeling Project. Think of it as an opportunity for tape-editing.
What went well?
What would you do the same way over again?
What obstacles did you encounter, expected or unexpected?
How did you handle them?
What are some other ways you might have handled them?
Were there other resources you might have called upon or used?
Did you make it more difficult than it needed to be in any way? How?
Is there anything that you wouldn't do the same way, if you had it to do over?
What surprises did you encounter?
What did you discover about yourself in this process?