So what are the four meta-models of NLP? In the same way as may make this a bit mess up is that yes, one of these meta-models is called "The Meta-Model." That is it sounds as if the first one and why it got the name that it did. The full name is "the Meta-Model of Regulations in management." And that's in the same way as it arose from the linguistic distinctions that "JOHN Ax" established in the patterning doubling-up that "RICHARD BANDLERFRITZ PERL" made from 's use of language and "VIRGINIA SATIR"'s use of language.
But, as noted, that's just the first of four meta-models. It is strange that normal NLP Trainers do not know the four meta-models. Not too long ago I strut to a NLP Trainers group and mentioned "the four meta-models. Four?" It was as if I had not permitted some secret brainstorm dense in the mountains of SANTA CRUZ and only accessible to a few mystery people!
Now as a meta-discipline itself, NLP is a field about how all bits and pieces human work, principally any aspect of the human experience that has a cognitive-behavioral construction to it. This construction doesn't keep up to be in a person's planned aim, it can and in fact habitually is in a person's cognitive-behavioral unexciting aim. This is in the same way as Neuro-Linguistic Rules and NEURO-SEMANTICS are greatest extent when you come right down to it about how we humans "construction "bits and pieces. And in the same way as we construction bits and pieces with language, representations, perceptions, and self-reflexive states, NLP has four meta-models by which we can model bits and pieces.
These four meta-models carry out a pointless system of images. This explains why the models tinkle be on a par with, they approach the mind-body-system of experiences in be on a par with ways. So direct although they refer to the awfully crux, each one gives us something else strait of approach. Respectively provides something else decorous construction and life of the processes of an experience. The four NLP meta-models are:1) THE META-MODEL OF LANGUAGE: THE NLP Native tongue Occurrence.2) THE SUB-MODALITY OR CINEMATIC Tone Occurrence.3) THE META-STATES Occurrence OF SELF-REFLEXIVE Dip.4) THE META-PROGRAMS OF PERCEPTUAL LENS AND POINTS OF Keep up.
1) THE META-MODEL OF LANGUAGEThe first, the "Meta-Model of Regulations, "is a model that identifies the form of how we mentally map our experiences in language. Via this model you can open the linguistics governing a person's mental mapping and as you do, it provides a way for you to draw up plans linguistic thoroughness. How does language work? By enabling us to use sensory-based words to draw up plans an inner desire for our mind, and as a consequence to make upper level evaluations.
This first meta-model of NLP is a model about the linguistics which send as a code for your thinking. And in which did it come from? From Transformational Language rules (TG) which Bandler and Ax used it to sort out and draw up plans a model of the communication patterns of Fritz Perls, Virginia Satir, and "MILTON ERICKSON".
To use this model, dance to words and language terminology, ask questions that quad the speaker to carry out extend reliable answers, and thereby remind a extend complete and intelligent mapping about the new experience. The questions that challenge the linguistic terminology jaunt the evaluative language back to sensory-based words so that we can make a mental motion picture in our mind and understand what the speaker is referring to and so meaning. "S"ee "The Entice of Magic, Volumes I and II; "moreover, "Native tongue Magic."
2) THE "SUB-MODALITIES" OR CINEMATIC Tone MODELClassic NLP did not, and still does not, retrieve that this is a meta-model. Why not? Since gang labeled the distinctions as "sub" and that got related to the name. If we were to faithfully cup the model, it would be Meta-Modalities. This meta-model refers to the cinematic look that carry out a code for the mental movies that you draw up plans in your mind. It refers to how you framework the movies in your mind in stipulation of the qualities of your sights, sounds, and atmosphere. So whether you make a motion picture close or far, bright or dim, spiky or stifle, whether you step into it or just feel about it, whether you add rational music to it, or the music from Door, these look or distinctions complete you to edit your movies.
"The nothing in this model stand for semantic evaluations. "Almost certainly "close, three-dimensional, and in coloring" stand for everything being "real" or "persuasive." That's why the cinematic look (sub-modalities) are governed semantically. In and of themselves, they mean nothing. Yet inside of every person, they stand for some weight or meaning.
As you framework the movies in your mind, you code the sights, sounds, and atmosphere with a little look, cinematic look. These look or distinctions complete you to develop "an editor's position or twist "to your own mental movies. You can as a consequence use "close" or "far" to stand for and mean some semantic framework (real, unreal; persuasive, less persuasive).
To comprehend your sub-modalities and work with these cinematic look in how you code your representations, you keep up to step back or "go meta." You keep up to gain a broader twist and ask questions that are "meta" to or upper than the representations. Is that desire close or far? Is that image bright or dim? Is that completely stifle or loud? To unconditional such meta-questions, you keep up to stop being a "citizen" of the motion picture, step out of it, and as you transcend that experience, turn up the code as it at this point is. That's why these are not really "sub" but grip as a meta-level to your representations. See "Insiders Marshal to Sub-Modalities; "moreover "Sub-Modalities Departure Meta."
3) META-STATES Sending OF SELF-REFLEXIVE CONSCIOUSNESSThe Meta-States Occurrence looks at the awfully structures, not generally in stipulation of linguistics or cinematic look, but in stipulation of thinking-and-feeling states. A unforeseen event hold forth or a penury hold forth, for example, will ordinarily show up linguistically as a modal operator of unforeseen event (can, get to, want to) and/or a modal operator of penury (keep up to, need). The Meta-Model describes it linguistically, the Meta-States model describes it in stipulation of hold forth.
Since we never just think, we sadly think about our thinking, we feel about our feeling. This self-reflexivity creates our meta-states as our states-about-states and all of the layering we do. Reflecting back onto our own states and experiences, layers levels of experiences (what we call "logical levels") to draw up plans each person's original "psycho-logics." This income that we are not logical creatures, we are psycho-logical beings. Our meanings make impression to us-on the inside.
Nor does our reflexivity ever end. Whatever you think or feel, you can step back and keep up something else thought or feeling about that. This creates the layers of meanings as beliefs, understandings, decisions, memoirs, imaginations, permissions, anticipations, identities, and so on. It is what makes our minds set of connections and not simple. And as we seat to automatically extend a near thought or feeling to ourselves, we keep building extend frames contained by our framework construction or matrix. This makes up the rich layeredness of our mind or our neuro-semantic system. See "Meta-States "(2008), "Secrets of Special Mastery "(1997), and "Prizewinning the Innermost Standing by "(2007).
4) THE META-PROGRAMS OF PERCEPTUAL LENSThe Meta-Programs model is one of thinking patterns, thinking styles, or perceptual lens. This model refers to how you see or bit bits and pieces. Is the cup short understandable or short full? Do you see it disapprovingly or optimistically? Several style of thinking/perceiving characterizes you, as a consequence your language will differ, as will your states, as will the ways you decide your inner mental movies.
A global way of thinking will sort for the big desire and meta-state or framework greatest extent bits and pieces from the global thinking-and-feeling hold forth. A celebrity who sorts for "penury" will consistently extend a hold forth of coercion to considerably thought-and-feeling states. Habituation of your internal giving out gives rise to your meta-programs and as a consequence governs your everyday states, language, and perceptual filters. As your meta-programs show up in language, the Meta-Model offers a life. And as you pierce a song hold forth and use it robotically, your meta-state becomes your meta-program. That's why a meta-program is a coalesced meta-state.
From your meta-states, you draw up plans the meta-programs that manage your perceptions. You generalize from the states that you greatest extent consistently and ordinarily pierce and as you do you habituate that way of thinking and feeling until it becomes your basic style of perceiving. You meta-state global thinking or number thinking until it coalesces into your neurology and becomes your perceptual lens or meta-program. You meta-state tedium thinking or difference thinking until it becomes your meta-program style.
A "hooligan" perceptual style is a meta-program that you keep up encrusted with direct extend meta-states-states of corollary, atmosphere in, kind with, etc. So if a person who thinks globally and sorts for the big desire begins to framework greatest extent bits and pieces from that global hold forth and as a consequence begins to fondly corollary it, be aware of with it, conviction in it, they person may draw up plans a "hooligan meta-program of global thinking. "Similarly the person thinks in stipulation of "penury" and brings that hold forth of mind and emotion to extend and extend of his or her experiences and as a consequence believes in it, values it, identifies with it, will extend than physical extend that hold forth of coercion to every considerably hold forth. This will eventuate in the "hooligan meta-program of penury. "
Habituation of internal giving out gives rise to meta-programs-to a person's orderly ways of perceiving. They as a consequence manage that person's everyday thinking-and-feeling as his or her "perceptual filters." To the broaden they show up in language, you can dig up them using the Meta-Model. For example, people keep up partisan "modals" that embodiment their basic "modus operandi" (modal operators) for operating: penury, implausibility, unforeseen event, thrill, etc. They originated as meta-level posture or feelings, they were first meta-states. As they coalesced, they got into one's neurology, one's eyes, one's muscle and become the person's meta-programs. See "Figuring Out Sophistication "(2007), moreover "Oratory that Rearrange Minds."
All together these four models carry out four be on a par with lenses for observing your meaning-making processes.
"Language: "Linguistics and the VAK sensory systems." Cinematic Features: "The qualities and distinctions with which we code our mental movies." States: "Mind-body states from which you grip." Perception:" Filters for your lens for seeing and perceiving, for sorting, paying attention, and thinking.
Now you know what for some is a big secret-the four meta-models of NLP which carry out an blanket meta-cognitive twist on experience. Now you keep up four that you can imagine ways to embodiment experience.
NEUROSEMANTICS homepage
"L. MICHAEL Entrance hall, PH.D."(June 27, 2011)
0 comments:
Post a Comment