Home | Login | Recent Changes | Search | All Pages | Help

ExperiencesOfNeuroLinguisticProgramming

I thought it might be useful to explore here some of our thoughts regarding NLP, including our opinions of literature.

Thanks to DonGray for the references to the two books below.

- HuwLloyd 2004.09.01

'The Art of Systems Thinking' doesn't explicitly refer to NLP. However, with a little awareness to NLP concepts, I can see how NLP has influenced some of the material. Indeed, I think some of the more original aspects of the book appear to originate from an NLP twist to the content, such as the descriptions of mental models.

Although I enjoyed TAOST, I often felt I was rereading ideas and anecdotes presented in both '5th Discipline' and 'An Introduction to General Systems Thinking'.

I liked the multidisciplinary nature of the book. For example, I had to make the connection between chaos theory and systems theory. Here are a few key points I noted:

• beliefs as a point of leverage. p25
• repitition as a clue to structure. p86
• paradoxes arising from self-reference and linear thinking. p101
• taking a meta position. p103
• System thinking is a technique that answers the problems it generates. p129
• The punctuation of interpretations. p149

- HuwLloyd 2004.09.01

I listened to the CD version of this 'book'. The first thing that will strike American listeners is that the authors have British accents. The authors sound quite similar however, and I think they interchange narrator quite frequently. Curiously, a few of the interchanges sounded like they took place mid-sentence, but it didn't ditract from the flow.

From listening to the CD, I could imagine that differing opinions upon the strength of the 'linguistic' part of NLP could take hold. I am referring to the Orwellian concept of language influencing thought. I think I take the 'weak' view, that language gives us clues to the thinking, and I noted that the authors seemed to take care not to tread over this boundary into the realms of linguistic thought control. However, the linguistic part was only one of many threads. And indeed I am still hazy regarding the influence the 'linguistic' element has in the NLP community.

Other aspects I found interesting were the notions of sub-modalities and predicates - the building blocks of internal 'sensory' thought. I also found agreement with some of the more active elements, such as our ability to rehearse mentally, which I learnt from competitive sport psychology, and the clues and triggers eyes give us to cognitive processing, such as thinking aurally or visually.

- HuwLloyd 2004.09.01

What I remember about TAOST involves how language reveals our mental models. These models tend to be limiting. Specific words trip the model ... 'ought', 'should', 'have to', and 'must'. Their inverses (ought not ...) also show rules in play. The challenges to these models also stand out [to me]. The words tend to be universals (they apply all the time to everything). Among other things, I'm a linguist. I enjoyed reading "The Structure of Magic".

For me this book's value largely lays in the following:

Mental Models as a Leverage Point

A business is structured through the mental models of the people who operate it. First we have the ideas and then we create the reality. .. Often changing a mental model is the leverage point that leads to breakthrough.

Unless solving a problem leads to a shift in mental models, it hasn�t been completely solved. Do we learn form experience? Only if the experience leads us to re-evaluate our mental models. What sort of mental models do you want?

How to have Rigid, Limiting Mental Models

1. Insist that your ideas are how reality �really� is.
   
2. Have a narrow set of interests to ensure you delete a lot of experiences.
3. Do not tolerate ambiguity; jump to conclusions as fast as possible.
4. Whenever people and events do not behave as you expect, have a fund of creative explanations.
5. Use lots of modal operators and never question them.
6. Use many universals and do not admit exceptions.
7. Be quick to generalize from one example.
8. Set up plenty of one-sided, unfocused experiences to provide evidence for your ideas.
9. Blame failures on individuals (don�t forget yourself).
10. Think in straight lines of cause and effect.
11. Never by curious.
12. Never update your beliefs in the light of experience.

How to have Systemic Mental Models

1. Admit your mental models are your best guess at the moment and be on the lookout for better ones.
2. Have wide interests.
3. Be comfortable with ambiguity.
4. Be curious about, and pay particular attention to, experiences that seem to contradict your mental models.
5. Have a wide time horizon to look for feedback.
6. When confronted with a problem, look at the assumptions you are making about the situation as well as the situation itself.
7. Look for relationships, how events fit together.
8. Look for loops and circles of cause and effect, the effect of one cause being the cause of another effect.

DonGray 2004.09.03