
IRC Chat Log, July 1, 1998
(Adult Language Present)
All rights reserved; Publication rights to this chat log are shared by &
Generative Imprint, Ready State, Ready Mode, G.D.S,
between J. Riggio & J. Altfeld.
& Generalized Desired State, as well as the processes they represent,
are trademarks of Roye Fraser, NLP AMERICA/Blue Dell Systems.
| Jonathan | Joe Riggio runs Applied Behavioral Technologies and tends to train more advanced NLP material. We're pleased to have him join us again for PART 2... of his previous chat... & if you haven't read the previous chat with Joe -- its up on the site now! Joe? May I turn things over to you directly?
| Ethonics | Sure ... why not. First off any specific questions come to mind? What I'll probably want to delve right into is the issue of where language ends...
| _Marc_ | I take it there is no planned topic...
| Jonathan | Actually there were several topics that we broached originally in the 1st chat; please allow Joe to weave us into an extension to the previous evening!
| Ethonics | There is of course something beyond language that we reference in NLP but usually do not make explicit. What I specifically want to draw attention to is the internal structure of experience itself... prior to any semantic form and beyond semantic form as well. There is a direct sensory knowing that has a form which is stored in the somatic process and is both explicit and implicit in the expressions given to it. This is what is usually bypassed when a practitioner is doing an elicitation in ordinary terms. What I am referencing here by my use of the word ordinary is when the presenting problem is taken as the lead into what is real for the individual.
| Occum | The stream of consciousness?
| Ethonics | Occum - it is what precedes the stream of consciousness. Someone on NLPTalk responded to a posting of mine with regard to the 'parts' thing by asking me how is it possible to address the whole system? My question is how can you do anything else? One of my missions is to do away with this who idea of parts in NLP completely!
| Jonathan | I think the parts model is just that -- a "model" -- its a way of thinking. It isn't necessarily right.
| _Marc_ | You mean parts integration and things like that?
| Ethonics | Yes the whole range of techniques that use parts as a basis.
| _Marc_ | Hmm...
| Jonathan | Its a method of fractionation; It sounds like you wish to move more towards a holistic approach.
| _Marc_ | Inner conflict makes sense to me
| Ethonics | Marc - Given your intro {editor's note -- the intro referenced was from before the chat officially started} it makes sense to me that it does to you.
| _Marc_ | It's at least a nice way of representing thing sometimes
| NLPerDude | Even when the client uses the parts model herself?
| Jonathan | Great question, Wesley!
| Ethonics | NLPerDude: Yes, maybe even more specifically here. The issue that's raised around this is 'pacing'. I don't want to pace their sh-t. What I prefer is to recognize what it tells me about the presenter... I'm more interested in them then the presenting problem.
| NLPerDude | Them = the whole person, I assume. I want to use whatever they present as the shortest way to their outcome. I don't care about parts per se.
| _Marc_ | Yeah - talking to a part is a quick way to get at some representation
| Jonathan | Joseph, when I learned the parts model recently (at what I would call the end of the era of its wide acceptance ;) ... I find that the tail-end of working with parts (i.e. reintegration)... may have a lot in common with the approach you espouse. If you have a moment to cover this, what might be the primary differences in your view?
| Ethonics | NLPerDude: In a 'clinical' setting you are the influence their responding to ... whether you like it or not what you validate becomes more 'real' to them (the client). Jonathan: What do you mean by 'reintegration' here???
| NLPerDude | Well, I have been known to depart into unknown land for their sakes if it seems to be in the client's best interests
| Ethonics | NLPerDude & Marc - Yes I mean the whole person, and psychotropic drugs make fast work of the symptoms but don't necessarily help the client.
| _Marc_ | Who said anything about drugs?
| Jonathan | When working with parts (from that model), it seems that you want to validate each part and get them to negotiate with each other and then reintegrate their intentions, in a way, as a whole. So that the persons conflict is eliminated or at least ameliorated.
| _Marc_ | Yeah, just like all the Dilts stuff
| Ethonics | NLPerDude: - I also am willing to go where it takes to get them where they are themselves most ... what I'm asking is what's the best way in ... to their experience??? Not the surface structure that the language presents but deeper???
| Jonathan | That process of negotiating often leads to -- chunking up in goals -- which can integrate the parts...
| Ethonics | Jonathan - a reintegration of parts is not the same as a whole wellformed structure.
| Jonathan | Thats the comment I was waiting for ;)
| NLPerDude | I will agree with Joe in that encouraging the notion of a whole self is one of my goals for my clients
| Ethonics | What I want to do is remind them that at any point in time what they're doing or thinking, the whole of them is doing or thinking, even if it nanoseconds at a time.
| _Marc_ | Er.... I'm not so sure of that. what about brain hemispheres and all that?
| Ethonics | When a client comes into a session or training who they are is present in what they do long before they speak. Marc - What about brain hemispheres?
| _Marc_ | I read somewhere that at any given point in time, only a portion of your neurons are active, like only Part of the brain is doing anything
| Ioel | Will the whole self integration shall be chunked in the future or in the past to start?
| Ethonics | Marc - Have you yourself ever been of two minds about something???
| _Marc_ | Yes
| Occum | Well, Marc, I think that that part still has an affect on the rest of the system, uptake of glycogen, use of caloric energy, etc.
| Ethonics | Ioel - it's a Future Present state. I'll come back to this ... remind me.
| NLPerDude | Marc, there are also some pretty convincing arguments to be made that the brain functions holographically.
| tranzpupy | I'm not sure it's the *brain* that thinks... more like channeling thought...
| _Marc_ | Holographically?
| Ethonics | Marc - About what??? Specifically? What were the two positions???
| Jonathan | Lets tighten the topic up a little and give Joe a couple more seconds to respond -- That way we don't have 4 conversations going at once ;)
| _Marc_ | Erm - safety and a relationship, I think
| Ethonics | NLPerDude: - This is the track I'm running on ... to a large extent ... I think we're gettin' there. Pup - I agree, it's exactly how I understand the process to operate. Marc - You wanted in and out at the same time or something like that???
| NLPerDude | A piece of a hologram has all of the image of the original whole contained within it as well
| _Marc_ | I wanted something but was too afraid to go for it
| Ethonics | So what were you of two minds about to go or not to go?
| _Marc_ | Yeah, I guess
| Ioel | I see a hologram model a a colorful fractal all around me and it moves dinamically 8)
| Ethonics | Were you oscillating between the two positions, back and forth, back and forth (even if very rapidly) or did you hold them in mind simultaneously?
| _Marc_ | Hmm.... most of the time, one "side" seemed to override the other, except toward the end
| Ethonics | One at a time ... go ... no go ... go ... again ... even if one won out ... go or no go.
| _Marc_ | Actually - in my thoughts it was "go!", in behaviour it was "no go!"
| Ethonics | So something stopped you.
| _Marc_ | Right
| Ethonics | Was it a 'part' of you that stopped or all of you?
| _Marc_ | I have no idea
| Ethonics | Like did your hand commit while the rest of you stayed home?
| _Marc_ | It certainly seemed like some "part" was sabotaging me
| Ethonics | Was it a 'part' or an oscillation of positions?
| _Marc_ | You lost me.
| Ethonics | Did you ever get up and start going and then find yourself stopping yourself in mid ...
| _Marc_ | Umm, yeah. That was a different example, but yeah.
| Ethonics | What I'm suggesting is that what occurs is that you are operating off of two different internal positions ... shifting ontology. These are experienced you could say in terms of the perceptual grid each constructs and filters the world through.
| _Marc_ | So if each position has its own perceptual grid... doesn't that support the "parts" model?
| Ethonics | NO, it's diametrically opposed to the 'parts' model. There are no 'parts' only a whole experiencing the world through a differing perceptual filter system.
| NLPerDude | No, it could be explained by a rapid ocillation between different positions, each expeienced extremely briefly
| tranzpupy | Like looking out different windows in your house...
| Ethonics | The perceptual filters I'm referring to are "set' in the body, the somatic experience. When the somatic experience changes so do the filters.
| _Marc_ | Same crap different jargon, Joe :)
| Occum | Could you define for us somatic experience please?
| _Marc_ | I was just asking the EXACT same thing Occum :)
| Ethonics | Does anyone recall the Castaneda books when Don Juan smacks Carlos on the back and the 'assembelage point' shifts???
| Ioel, thefool, Jonathan | Yes
| _Marc_, Occum, NLPerDude | No
| thefool | Nice anchor hehe ..
| Ethonics | What Don Juan was doing was shifting Carlos' perceptual experience to a completely different reality through the body, in simple terms a k-anchor, and yet much more.
| Ioel | This is a somatic threshhold??? correct
| | |