nlp

Philip Zimbardo and the Time meta-program

Read more. Post a comment. June 12, 2010
74_time.jpg (Philip Zimbardo and the Time meta-program)

This video does a great job of describing how a difference in someone's preferred time meta-program completely alters the way that person, or that culture of people see the world. After you watch this video, you could easily classify every single person you know and really discover the benefits of, for certain activities, existing in the present, past, or future.

Tags:

Simple Deletion

Read more. Post a comment. April 26, 2010

Simple Deletion the simplest for of Deletion that can occur when unconsciously (or consciously) transforming our linguistic deep structures into the surface structure that we experience. Simple Deletion occurs when one or more of the arguments necessary for a present verb are absent from the sentence.

Tags:

Modal Operator Challenge

Post a comment. April 26, 2010

The Modal Operator Challenge is a pattern of the Meta-Model effective at recovering the other half of the cause-effect that a sentence with a modal operator implies. Reconstructing the complete cause-effect is integral to understanding others' (and our own) models of the world and either utilizing those models or improving them.

Pattern
Outcome: 

There are two kinds of modal operators. The first are modal operators of necessity, which describe an event or action which the speaker believes must or must not be. Phrases using modal operators of necessity represent the cause of a given cause-effect. On the other hand, modal operators of possibility are used to describe an event or action which may or may not be. Phrases using modal operators of possibility represents the effect of a given cause-effect.

When we encounter modal operators, we should challenge them. What would happen if we didn't, you ask? We would lack the understanding of the speaker's map necessary to truly communicate with that person. It would be as if we only knew how to click the mouse button, but didn't know how our computer would respond to it. Or, often worse, it would be as if we saw the pointer travelling around the screen, doing things, but didn't know who or what was controlling it.

Imagine you're mother tells you "you can't go out and play" and you did not realize that what she really meant was "Because there are warring gangs shooting each other outside, you can't go out and play." Suddenly, mother seems a lot more reasonable. Indeed, by using the Modal Operator Challenge, you may have, in fact, saved your own life.

Imagine a salesman of planes using the Modal Operator Challenge to easily reframe "I can't afford to buy this plane until I fly it to know it's worth it" where before he would have been stumped at "I can't afford to buy this plane." Consider the writers of television who need to move the plot along quickly and yet realistically. A scene that could have taken three days of arguing on General Hospital in 1970 can now be resolve with a well placed choice of modal operators and challenges: "We can't get through that wall!" "What stops us?" "It's too thick for our dynamite." "But it's not too high for our jet packs!" "To the moon, Alice!" And that's how it happens.

Criteria: 

As your work with other Meta-Model challenges will confirm, assessing when to use a pattern becomes largely a matter of intuition after consciously attending to the linguistic markers which indicate the presence of specific syntactic forms.

The test for when to use the Modal Operator Challenge is definitely one of the most straightforward of all the tests. It does not rely on detecting the absence of words or the absence of specificity like many of the other deletion challenges do, and instead allows you to simply seek out a certain kind of word. In addition, the payoff for using the Modal Operator Challenge is in the same league as the results of the Nominalization Challenge, recovering, quickly, massive amounts of information with a single question.

The one potential snag of the Modal Operator Challenge is actually that it's a two-sided challenge, the form of the question used on modal operators of necessity substantially different from the question used on modal operators of possibility. The following description and your willingness to read and to understand will be what makes this challenge one of the easiest to internalize of the Meta-Model.

Modal operators are verbs which modify other verbs, though the subset we focus on with this challenge are those modal operators of necessity and possibility, two categories which share many of the same words, depending on the context. The following selection may serve as an example of the kinds of modal operators we're discussing: 'could', 'would', 'should', 'may', 'might', 'must', 'can', 'will', 'need to', 'hope to', 'wish to', 'want to', desire to', 'like to', 'have to'. Recognize that the addition of a 'to' at the end of some are to distinguish these verbs usage as modal operators from their use as regular verbs. Certain adjectives can also indicate a phrase that represents necessity or possibility. This set of words include 'necessary', 'impossible', 'possible', 'likely', 'acceptable', 'intolerable', etc.

By pausing now to generate a sentence with each of the words we've just specified, you'd be generating a plethora of information regarding the kinds of phrases that need challenging. For example, "I would leave my unhappy marriage" (possibility), "Don't feed him after midnight." (necessity), "You're behavior is intolerable." (necessity), "The problem could resolve itself." (possibility).

Distinguishing between modal operators of necessity and possibility is possibly the easiest and most necessary step. Simply consider, from the position of the speaker, whether the action or event described is possible or necessary (within the context of the speaker's model of the world, of course). Indeed, this step is as easy as asking oneself "Does the speaker consider the action possible or necessary?"

In the following examples, ask yourself that very question before reading the clarified version of each sentence. Then, after you've read the clarified sentence, notice the different forms that the resulting cause-effect can be expressed in. You will be surprised just how many of our utterances are actually unexpressed cause-effects. Prepare to amazed.

Sentence with Modal Operator Clarified Sentence
I can't stop eating. If I stop eating, I won't be myself anymore.
I would love to buy this car. I would love to buy this car, but my wife would kill me.
Remember to vote the way we say. Remember to vote the way we say or else we won't win the election.
She won't ever be a great dancer. Unless she practices as much as the other girls, she won't ever be a great dancer.
You've got to turn the crank. If you don't turn the crank, you'll break the rules!

You may have noticed, particularly if you're concerned with formal logic, that some of the not-standard forms presented above would not translate as X -> Y. For instance, sentence three (with the 'but') would translate from X but Y to ~Y -> X. This matters little for our purposes except to remind you to maintain an awareness of which phrase of a cause-effect sentence is the cause and which is the effect.

Now that you have the necessary understanding of each step, here is a test you can use to determine the presence of each kind of modal operators:

  1. Listen to the surface structure of the presented sentence.
  2. Identify the modal operators in the surface structure by asking this question:
    • "Does this verb modify another verb?"
  3. Determine whether the words are modal operators of necessity or possibility using the following question:
    • "Does this word indicate the action is possible or necessary?"
  4. Additionally, check for adjectives that indicate necessity or possibility.
Pattern: 

Chances are, when a user of the Meta-Model gets stuck in his questioning, the Modal Operator Challenge will be of great use. The reason for this is that deletion of an entire half of a cause-effect statement is where the speaker gets stuck as well. After the Modal Operator Challenge, you will often find countless markers which signal the use of further patterns, the most important of the bunch, in this context, being the Cause-Effect Challenge.

  1. Listen to the surface structure of the presented sentence.
  2. Determine which verbs are modal operators and determine if they indicate necessity or possibility.
  3. Use the correct set of questions:
    • Necessity. Recover the missing effect using one of the following forms:
      • What would happen if you did/didn't _MODAL PHRASE_?
      • _MODAL PHRASE_ or else what?
    • Possibility. Recover the missing cause using one of the following forms:
      • What stops you from _MODAL PHRASE_?
      • What allows you to _MODAL PHRASE_?
      • _MODAL PHRASE_ or else what?
  4. Repeat step 3 until you recover all relevant, deleted information.
Examples: 

In reading the following examples notice which modal operators are challenged and which are ignored. When using the Meta-Model, staying focused on your outcome and taking the most direct path to it in a natural way are the mark of a true adept.

Focus:
I just can't stop eating.
User:
Really? What stops you?
Focus:
Well... I just can't.
User:
Either you won't or you can't for a reason. Which is it?
Focus:
Well... I guess I won't stop eating then.
User:
Ah! That makes much more sense. Now what would happen if you did?
Focus:
Hmm... Well, I guess I wouldn't be myself anymore.
User:
I wonder if you recognize who you'd be if you do, but I'd rather ask what stops you from being yourself when you stop eating.
Focus:
Because then I wouldn't be a fat cow.
User:
A fat cow! Your genes would not fit a fat cow, let me tell you.
Focus:
True.
User:
Before now, did you notice that you weren't yourself the whole time you were overeating?
Focus:
No, I didn't.
User:
Because technically, if you weren't yourself before, then by eating the healthy amount, who are you?
Focus:
I'm me.
User:
Say that again, I forgot what you just understand...
Focus:
If I eat healthy, then I'm me.
User:
Lucky you! I used to know this girl who had it all backwards.
Focus:
I would love to buy this car.
User:
What would happen if you did?
Focus:
Man, I'd be gettin' me some fine muff!
User:
O.K. So what stops you from buying it?
Focus:
My wife would kill me if I did.
User:
So if your wife didn't kill you?
Focus:
I'd be driving down Broadway with two blonds and a fat blunt.
User:
Well that's... That's... Really something. So either you don't buy the car and you get your wife or you do buy the car and you get two blonds, eh?
Focus:
Shit, man. You're a great salesman. I'll take it. To hell with the old bird.
User:
You'll remember I also do marriage counseling, won't you?
Focus:
You better remember!
User:
Remember what?
Focus:
Remember to vote the way we say.
User:
Or else what?
Focus:
Or else we won't win the election!
User:
What would happen if you didn't?
Focus:
Well, if we didn't win, you won't get any of the stuff we promised.
User:
Makes sense. So what would happen if we didn't get any of that stuff?
Focus:
I suppose the world would be in a much worse place.
User:
That's a big stretch from voting on this year's office theme party.
Focus:
It's a very important party.
Focus:
I do love my daughter.
User:
But...
Focus:
But she won't ever be a great dancer.
User:
What blocks her from being a great dancer?
Focus:
Well, unless she practices as much as the other girls, she won't ever be a great dancer.
User:
So she has the option...
Focus:
Sure! She doesn't have to practice...
User:
But if she doesn't, what happens?
Focus:
Huh... Hmm...
User:
Tell me.
Focus:
Well, if she doesn't practice, I yell at her.
User:
So what you're saying is unless she's a great dancer, you yell at her?
Focus:
Uhh...
User:
But she hasn't ever been a great dancer...
Focus:
Hmmph.
User:
The shape of your mouth makes me think you're self satisfied, but your eyes make me think you're full of shame.
Focus:
No, I'm just full of shame.
User:
So is your daughter.
Focus:
She doesn't have to dance.
User:
And what would happen if she doesn't?
Focus:
I'll love her anyway.
Focus:
You've got to turn the crank.
User:
What would happen if I did?
Focus:
It snaps the plank.
User:
And what happens if that happens?
Focus:
It boots the marble right down the chute.
User:
And then?
Focus:
Then you watch it roll and hit the pole and knock the ball into the rub-a-dub tub which flips the man into the pan...
User:
The trap is set.
Focus:
Here comes the bet.
User:
Yeah... So what would happen if I didn't turn the crank?
Focus:
Rats!
Tags:

Nominalization Challenge

Post a comment. April 26, 2010

The Nominalization Challenge is a Meta-Model pattern whose purpose is to transform event words (nominalizations) back into the continuous process that they describe. The ways in which this challenge reasserts the connection between reality and a person's perception of it can do wonders to facilitate change and behavioral flexibility.

Pattern
Outcome: 

There is an imprecise relationship between nominalization and process. How specifically are they relating to one another, you ask? Rather than the usual kind of generalizing deletion that occurs in natural language processing, nominalization is the process of transforming complex processes (verbs) into static events (nouns). The result is that our brains cease to interpret the nominalization as a process and instead behave as if it were dealing with a noun, an object, often immutable and often out of one's control. The Nominalization Challenge reverses this process.

By using the Nominalization Challenge, the user is, to speak metaphorically, exposing the cogs that allow the surface of the clock to tell the time. The noun 'economy' is a nominalization, but what it is supposed to describe is the 'continuing evolution of value when assigned to human labor, property, products, and services'. To say 'the economy is bad' is as simple-minded as saying 'the clock is bad', but when we explore deeper into the nature of the nominalization, we often discover countless ways in which to fix, to improve, and to explore the system.

A successful use of the Nominalization Challenge will expose the process behind the nominalization, completely transmuting our interpretation of the information. Consider the effectiveness of a therapist who transforms "I can't bear this depression." into "I can't bear being alone and seeing other people in relationships." Consider how a doctor's bedside manner would improve if she could reframe "the burden of my illness" into the much more manageable "the pressing feeling on my temples and the soreness in my limbs". Imagine the effectiveness of a writer who begins a book with a nominalization like "A screaming comes across the sky."

Criteria: 

Knowing when to use a Meta-Model pattern is the most important step in using it effectively. That's why it's number one in every pattern description. The Nominalization Challenge, by far the most transformative of all the Meta-Model patterns, has one of the easiest first steps.

The classic method for unearthing a nominalization is to simply ask the question, "Can you put it in a wheelbarrow?" If the answer is no, you've found a nominalization. Thus, neither 'apples', nor 'firemen' nor 'my favorite brown egg' are nominalizations, while 'happiness', 'charity', 'this decision', and 'my apprenticeship' are. This method is great for discovering the vast majority of nominalizations hiding in the noun-pool, but this method does have its shortcomings...

Consider the words 'house' and 'home'. Neither of these two things can be put in a wheelbarrow, yet 'house' is a standard verb while 'home' is a nominalization. A shortsighted argument can be made that you can put a 'house' in a wheelbarrow if you break it into pieces, but this would only be skirting the point. What's relevant about the question and questions like it (my favorite: "Does it have a reflection?") is that it will help you to define internally the very distinct line that separates people, places, and things from their cousin, ideas.

As you read the sentences that follow, pay close attention to how precise your internal representation is of the nominalizations. And then compare it to your experience of the process it describes. Doing so will give you a real head start on fully internalizing the distinction.

Sentence with Nominalization Clarified Sentence
He has great difficulty with math. He gets the 6 and the 9 confused.
The house is haunted. The house makes strange noises compared to other houses I know of.
He's such a bore. He tells stories filled with unnecessary details.
I dream of power. I dream of wearing a halo and healing people with just my words.
I'm in mourning. I'm choosing to feel sad for a period of time.

Perhaps you've begun to notice how nominalizations differ from processes in that nominalizations can represent any number of processes, while the factual reality of the process will often be a small subset of the infinite potential present in a nominalization. In addition, you may also have recognized that a process is full of verbs and verb phrases, your representations of which are perhaps very fluid, while a nominalization is a simply noun, whose representation is often less flexible because it is more abstract and poorly defined.

The following process should be applied to test for nominalizations until you become unconsciously competent at detecting them:

  1. Listen to the surface structure of the presented sentence.
  2. Identify the nouns in the surface structure.
  3. Determine whether those nouns are nominalizations by testing for their physicality. The following questions can act as a guide.
    • "Is it something that happens or something that is?"
    • "Does it have a reflection?"
    • "Can you put it in a wheelbarrow?"
Pattern: 

A canny observer will notice that the result of the Nominalization Challenge will often be followed by a series of other Meta-Model challenges. It is a rare occurrence that the focus of your questioning will jump from one of the most generalized forms, the nominalization, all the way to their fully actualized deep structure. Keep your outcome in mind at all times.

  1. Listen to the surface structure of the presented sentence.
  2. Determine which nouns are nominalizations.
  3. Use one of the forms provided to extract the necessary information:
    • How does __NOMINALIZATION__ happen?
    • __NOMINALIZATION__ in what way, specifically?
  4. Repeat step 3 until you recover all relevant, deleted information.
Examples: 

While reading the following examples, notice how a nominalization will often require multiple challenges to fully 'decompress'.

Focus:
He has great difficulty with math.
User:
How is he having difficulty?
Focus:
He's a complete mess with numbers.
User:
A complete mess in what way, specifically?
Focus:
Well, he gets the 2 and the 5 confused.
User:
So do you. He's 2.
Focus:
I'm afraid. The house is haunted.
User:
Anyone could think that! How does the haunting happen?
Focus:
The house makes strange noises.
User:
Strange compared to what?
Focus:
To other houses.
User:
It is a different house, is it not?
Focus:
Well yes, but these noises make me afraid!
User:
Afraid in what way, exactly?
Focus:
Well when the house screams "Focus!" my eyes get really tight and my heart starts pounding.
User:
That sounds serious! Do you listen to the voice?
Focus:
Never!
User:
Then you give it no reason to stop haunting you.
Focus:
He's such a bore.
User:
In what way does he bore you, specifically?
Focus:
Well, I we were at this party for the friend of my sister's husband's best friend, but really she's my best friend too, and we were listening to this music that I liked the beat of, but not the melody, of course, that's because I took piano lessons briefly when I was in kindergarten, so I know a thing or two, three, four, one, two, three, and he was telling this story about his mother and her prize-winning Pomeranian who he once described as having bad teeth and I hate dogs with bad teeth more than I hate people or cats with bad teeth, because it's like "Get a clue!" and he was telling us all these really useless details that didn't make any difference to what we were talking about, which was...
User:
I really liked the part about the brief piano lessons. Not boring at all.
Focus:
Is this wrong?
User:
How exactly can it be wrong?
Focus:
Well, I dream of power all the time. Is it wrong?
User:
How specifically does who have power in what way?
Focus:
In my dreams, I've got this halo.
User:
That'd look good on you.
Focus:
And I hear people, everyone, calling my name.
User:
That sounds good too!
Focus:
And I'm healing people's wounds with a single touch.
User:
A little derivative, but that's still ok... Again, how exactly can it be wrong?
Focus:
I'm a Satanist, dude!
Focus:
I've been diagnosed with depression.
User:
I see you're all in black. That's pretty depressing.
Focus:
Well, I'm in mourning.
User:
Did you forget to set your clocks back? It's almost dinner time.
Focus:
No, I'm in mourning for my husband.
User:
Oh, right! How specifically are you mourning him?
Focus:
Well, I wear black every day and feel sad.
User:
And wake up late, apparently.
Focus:
No!
User:
So, you feel sad how, exactly?
Focus:
I already said, I wear black!
User:
Even when you're asleep?
Focus:
Yes.
User:
How do you know?
Focus:
I don't. I'm asleep.
User:
And do you feel sad then?
Focus:
Well, I guess not.
User:
Then you only eat breakfast when you're wearing black?
Focus:
No! No! NO! You've got it all wrong! Don't you see? I feel depressed because I wear black! I just have to take these stupid clothes off!
User:
Wow! It's almost as if you didn't need me to help you at all.
Tags:

Unspecified Verb Challenge

Post a comment. April 26, 2010

The Unspecified Verb Challenge is a pattern of the Meta-Model used to learn how an action or relationship functions. As with all Meta-Model patterns, the purpose of using the Unspecified Verb Challenge is to gain a more accurate comprehension of a person's model of the world.

Pattern
Outcome: 

A communicator can very often recognize the verbs used by a given person without truly understanding what the person means when using those particular words. For example, the sentence, "I did my homework." uses the verb 'to do', and yet does not communicate in any way whether the homework was 'done accurately', nor if it was 'done on the computer', 'done with a calculator', or 'done on the train'. As often as verbs are spoken, there is the danger of misinterpreting their meaning. This challenge is designed so that user can clarify the verbs that are integral to perceiving another's mental maps.

As we are well aware, in order for our mind to represent anything consciously, given that we can only focus on 7+/-2 chunks of information at a time, our mind will naturally delete, distort, and generalize all aspects of our internal representations. This necessary process can often alter our understanding in a way that is not useful, which is what makes the Meta-Model so important to comprehending the inner workings of others and ourselves.

The result of the Unspecified Verb Challenge is gaining this comprehension with respect to the relationships between the subject and object of verbs. How specifically is this comprehension gained, you ask? Just as the Unspecified Noun Challenge specifies the meaning of a chosen noun phrase, so does the Unspecified Verb Challenge clarify the meaning of a given verb phrase.

Consider how the Unspecified Verb Challenge can come in handy when discovering that when your girlfriend says, "Do that again." she'd really like you to "Do that slower and longer and harder this time." Imagine how useful this challenge is to communicating biologists, one of which doesn't need to know, "The experiment was a success." but that "The experiment succeeded at proving the indefinite life extension is a real possibility."

Criteria: 

For this particular challenge, recognizing when to use it is not as readily apparent as with other Meta-Model challenges. The reason for this, specifically, is that with most verbs, the ambiguity of meaning is so small that we don't immediately recognize that there is ambiguity in how exactly one 'ran away', 'ate the ice cream', or 'went to sleep'.

Thankfully, for the verbs that require this use of this challenge most imperatively are often consciously unspecific. Consider, momentarily, the many ways in which one may 'do the work', 'be a man', 'learn the subject', 'get caught up', or 'imagine it'. There are ways innumerable to do each of these things and parting the tides of ambiguity in such cases will often transform for the interpreter and the speaker, the understanding of the meaning of the words.

The Unspecified Verb Challenge is one of the challenges whose repeated application has no definite endpoint. With this challenge, success is reached when all necessary information is clarified. As you read the following sample sentences, consider which verbs can benefit from continued clarification and which you can build sufficiently accurate internal representations of.

 

Sentence with Unspecified Verb Clarified Sentence
You're hurting me! The words you're using are hurting my feelings.
It's unclear how to complete the project. It's unclear how to present the information in an interesting and precise manner.
The attempt and not the deed confounds us. It doesn't make sense to attempt murder and not complete it.
The Cylons can project. The Cylons can project what they're thinking onto the outside world.
I did him twice. I read his tarot cards twice.

 

As you are beginning to grow conscious of, recognizing which verbs are unspecified enough to require the Unspecified Verb Challenge is a matter of the particular outcome one has in mind. While a therapist might be interested in how a person comes to experience a feeling in "Because I'm feeling sad, tasting a different kind of ice cream cheers me up." a chef might be more interested in how the speaker's taste changes when she's sad. For both the chef and the therapist, exploring such information will yield two very different ways to cheer the speaker up. Similarly, an entrepreneur might not need to specify either verb, and would instead concern himself with exploring the relationship between different kinds of sadness and different kinds of ice cream to ultimately name his flagship flavor 'Melon-Coffee with Infinite Sad Mints'.

The following sequence will aid in recognizing unspecified verbs:

  1. Listen to the surface structure of the presented sentence.
  2. Identify markers which indicate unspecified verbs are present. Typically, they will fall into one of these categories, though depending on its use, any verb can potentially be unspecified:
    • Abstract Verbs (to be, to do, to have, to want, to cost, to seem, to need, to exist)
    • Emotion Verbs (to like, to love, to hate, to dislike, to fear, to envy, to mind)
    • Ambiguous Verbs (to appear, to feel, to have, to hear, to look, to see, to weigh)
  3. Determine whether specifying those verbs will reduce ambiguity.
Pattern: 

As any Meta-Model user will attest to, making a conscious effort to hear the unspecified information is the most important step in being able to utilize the pattern effectively. It is also the best way for both the recognition of unspecified verbs and the use of the unspecified verb challenge to become unconscious, which we can conclude is the desired result of practicing any particular skill. After all, with only 7+/-2 conscious chunks to work with, we want as many of our useful behaviors to become unconscious as possible. This can only happen when we have sufficiently practiced them consciously.

This is the procedure for the Unspecified Verb Challenge:

  1. Listen to the surface structure of the presented sentence.
  2. Determine which verbs require further specification.
  3. Use one of the forms provided to extract the necessary information:
    • How does __VERB__ happen, specifically?
    • __VERB__ in what way, specifically?
  4. Repeat step 3 until you recover all relevant, unspecified information.
Examples: 

The following examples will aid in discovering more fluid and tempered uses of the Unspecified Verb Challenge and how you can seamlessly incorporate this pattern into your behavior.

Focus:
You're hurting me!
User:
How am I hurting you, specifically?
Focus:
You're saying mean things.
User:
How do my words hurt you, exactly?
Focus:
They hurt my feelings, dummy!
User:
That's a very hurtful thing to say.
Focus:
Well what you said hurt my feelings.
User:
Yes, and how did what I said hurt your feelings?
Focus:
I don't know. You made me think about what I was doing wrong.
User:
So thinking about what you're doing wrong makes you feel hurt?
Focus:
Well, yeah.
User:
What would happen if you changed what you were doing wrong?
Focus:
I guess I'd be sorry for calling you a dummy.
Focus:
The attempt and not the deed confounds us.
User:
Specify attempt.
Focus:
Alack! My husband went to do the deed, and did it but half-hearted.
User:
What, specifically was he attempting?
Focus:
MacBeth, he doth attempt a murder.
User:
How, specifically, is he murdering?
Focus:
By dagger under cloak of night, and yet attempted, the deed's not done.
User:
It seems like stabbing is either done or not done.
Focus:
'Tis why the man confounds us so.
User:
For me, it was your language.
Focus:
It's unclear how to complete the project.
User:
Well what exactly must you do to complete it?
Focus:
Well, I've got to finish the layout and fill the site with content.
User:
Seems clear to me! So what stops you from doing that?
Focus:
I'm really concerned with doing it right.
User:
How exactly does one 'do it right'?
Focus:
By paying attention to what the user's experience is and by providing the information as precisely and as interestingly as possible.
User:
Can you conceive of a clear way to complete the project while still paying attention to the users and providing precise and interesting information?
Focus:
Oh god, yes! It's funny how clear it is now.
User:
It's funny because it's true.
Focus:
The Cylons can project!
User:
How do they do it, exactly?
Focus:
Well, what they think appears in the outside world.
User:
How specifically does it appear?
Focus:
Well, what they project appears only to them.
User:
Like hallucination...
Focus:
Yeah, so what they think on the inside can change how they experience what happens on the outside.
User:
Cylons don't sound so very different from humans.
Focus:
Depends on how you look at it.
User:
That's what they said!
User:
How was your session?
Focus:
I did him twice.
User:
How specifically did you do him?
Focus:
Well, after he came inside, I felt a real connection.
User:
How did you feel a real connection, exactly?
Focus:
Most people are too big-headed for me to do properly, but he was very open to new possibilities.
User:
I'm reserving judgment, because I still don't understand precisely what you do.
Focus:
Well, during the session, when I've got them focused on what we're doing on the table, I sneak in the backdoor and really surprise 'em. They can never believe how good I am.
User:
What on earth are you talking about?
Focus:
I read tarot cards... and I use the Meta-Model.
Tags:

Unspecified Noun Challenge

Post a comment. April 26, 2010

The Unspecified Noun Challenge is the most commonly used and easily understood of all the Meta-Model patterns. This pattern quickly and easily reconnects what a person experiences as an generalized set with the specific experiences that generated the generalization to begin with. This is an incredibly useful technique for any communicator.

Pattern
Outcome: 

One of the chief requirements of a successful communicator is to be able to traverse the logical levels of language, from most general to most specific, with the dexterity and fluidity of a ballet dancer. The function of the Unspecified Noun Challenge is to move effectively from generalized nouns to words that are more specifically associated with persons, places, things, or ideas.

What you will discover as you explore the multitude of unspecified nouns is that most of the time, information is unintentionally distorted by people. Which people, specifically, you ask? People who are not linguistically trained are more likely to say, "people scare me" rather than "dark-haired men scare me." The speaker himself might not even recognize that the surface structure he experiences is so far removed from his experience.

In itself, unspecified nouns are an acceptable form when specifically chosen by the speaker. A politician will often choose to say, "While in office, I fixed many of this city's problems" rather than specifying that most of the "fixing" was specifically of "this city's bed bug problem." Likewise, a storyteller would rather tell of "all the king's horses and all the king's men" rather than "twelve soldiers and a horse named Ben."

However, the usefulness of the Unspecified Noun Challenge lay in the overwhelming percentage of unspecified nouns that we encounter on a daily basis. Imagine how effective the teacher is who can discover that a student does not feel "math is hard," but feels "the Pythagorean theorem is hard." Imagine the how simple the job of a graphic designer who discovers his client doesn't want "more action" but more specifically desires "an animated menu." Put yourself in the shoes of a priest who can reveal that "the enemy of God's work, the enemy who shatters families, ruins lives, and inspires sin in the hearts of men" is specifically "intolerance."

Criteria: 

As with all Meta-Model patterns, understanding when a pattern is appropriate is truly a function of our natural intuition as speakers of language. What is most important in learning the Meta-Model is in fact making those unconscious perceptions conscious.

The Unspecified Noun Challenge, sometimes refered to as the Unspecified Referential Index Challenge addresses, specifically, unspecified referential indices. All such indices are nouns. When becoming aware of them in spoken (or internally referenced) sentences, pay special attention to any noun that does not directly correspond to a specific entity. In other words, any words denoting a set of nouns, such as 'people', 'stuff', 'dogs', and 'thoughts'; any nouns with an unspecific quantifier, such as 'all ATM machines', 'every single dolphin', and 'rappers who released an album in 2008'; and every single pronoun including, but not limited to, 'he', 'she', 'that', 'there', 'those', and 'they', are all considered unspecified referential indices because the index to which the speaker is referring is not specified.

As I'm sure you're becoming acutely aware, most nouns and noun phrases used in every day speech are actually unspecified. This is precisely the quality that makes this challenge one of the most frequently used of the Meta-Model and what makes it so very useful. When reading the following examples, notice how gaining specificity in this area reveal storehouses of knowledge while transforming your perception of the experience.

Sentence with Unspecified Noun Clarified Sentence
She ran away after she ate the children. My rabbit ran away after she ate her eleven dead children.
They had problems because of what happened with their agreement. The couple broke up because he cheated while they were separated.
Everybody is out to do something horrible to me. My oldest sister tickles me too often for my liking.
I hate everything about it. I hate the material, the shape, and the color.
It's just the way it is. This is the situation that we are experiencing right now.

In reading the above sentences, did you have the sense that there are still numerous unspecified nouns yet left unrecovered? It should come as no surprise that this particular challenge will lead you down a rabbit hole of specificity and it is most important to keep the outcome of your activity firmly in mind while using it. For example, an actor using this challenge to discover that a director does not want "a better performance," but instead "a melancholy posture" will do nothing but annoy the director if she pursues the issue until the director has specified, to the millimeter, the exact stance he has in mind. Indeed, there are cases where the speaker means, specifically, 'black people', 'Saturdays', or 'dead presidents'.

When seeking out unspecified nouns, pay attention to any nouns in the surface structure which do not correspond to a sufficiently clear representation internally. Note the differences between 'a sex god' and 'Aphrodite' and the differences between 'dogs' and 'Dalmatians'.

The following steps can be used to test a given sentence for unspecified nouns:

  1. Listen to the surface structure of the presented sentence.
  2. Identify markers which indicate unspecified nouns are present. Typically, they will fall into one of these categories:
    • Plural nouns.
    • Nouns that denote a set of other nouns.
    • Nouns which have attached quantifiers.
    • Pronouns.
  3. Determine whether specifying those nouns will reduce ambiguity. (Sometimes a cigar is just a cigar.)

There is a tendency in early Meta-Model learners not to be completely aware of all unspecified nouns present and not to have a total awareness of which nouns require further specification. Keep the question of usage in your mind at all times and practice will reveal the understanding readily.

Pattern: 

As you may have already begun to discover, the platonic form of every Meta-Model pattern is rarely the precise form you will use in conversation. What is important, as you branch away from the presented question format to more natural language patterns, is that the quality of the response you get be of equal or greater caliber than that you receive by using the form provided.

  1. Listen to the surface structure of the presented sentence.
  2. Determine which nouns require further specification.
  3. Use the form provided to extract the necessary information:
    • What/Which __INDEX__ specifically?
  4. Repeat step 3 until you recover all relevant, unspecified information.
Examples: 

The examples that conclude this article will undoubtedly spark the fires of potential as to how and when you will use the Unspecified Noun Challenge.

User:
What are you crying about?
Focus:
What happened!
User:
What happened, specifically?
Focus:
She ran away after she ate all of them.
User:
How dreadful! Who was she anyway?
Focus:
My rabbit.
User:
It's no surprise, really. We eat rabbit all the time upstate.
Focus:
But she ate all eleven of them!
User:
All eleven of what, exactly?
Focus:
Her babies!
User:
It's a good thing she did, otherwise she might've eaten you instead!
Focus:
Ha, ha, ha. Yeah, but she'll never get to see the play I wrote about her.
User:
What's it called?
Focus:
Medea.
Focus:
I can't get over the whole thing.
User:
What's the whole thing you're referring to?
Focus:
The agreement and then what happened and then the problems.
User:
Bells are ringing! Which agreement specifically?
Focus:
The agreement to separate for a while.
User:
And what happened, exactly?
Focus:
He was with another woman.
User:
So, what was the problem, exactly?
Focus:
Well, then she broke up with him! And he deserved it!
User:
Wait a second... Who are we talking about?
Focus:
Rachel and that jerk Ross.
User:
"But they were on a break!"
Focus:
A break from what, specifically?
Focus:
Sometimes I feel like everyone is out to do something horrible to me.
User:
Who, specifically?
Focus:
Everybody!
User:
Yes, but which everybody, exactly?
Focus:
Well, my family, mostly.
User:
Ah! Precisely which family members?
Focus:
My older sister. She's just horrible.
User:
Oh, I thought you just sometimes felt that way. My mistake!
Focus:
I do! Because she always surprises me with something horrible.
User:
When you say something horrible, you mean what, exactly?
Focus:
You know... She tickles me way too much!
User:
So you're complaining because your sister makes you laugh?
Focus:
No. I'm complaining because she make me pee myself.
User:
Feed her to the rabbit!
Focus:
A client bought me a gift and I hate everything about it. What do I do?
User:
What do you hate about it, specifically?
Focus:
I hate the material, the shape, and the color.
User:
I can see you dislike what it looks like. Can you be more specific?
Focus:
Well, it's made of animal flesh, hardened into a twisted receptacle, artificially colored, and then covered in expensive lace to make the whole thing more abominable.
User:
Oh! So, he bought you a surrealist tea set!
Focus:
No, he bought me a black teddy!
User:
Now that's a whore of a different color!
Focus:
What can I say? It's just the way it is.
User:
That's just a saying people say.
Focus:
What do you mean?
User:
Well, what specifically is it?
Focus:
I guess it is the situation we are in right now.
User:
And what situation is that? Be specific now.
Focus:
Well, you're asking me about what I just said.
User:
And what did you just say?
Focus:
It's just the way it is.
User:
And now what is it specifically?
Focus:
Something different, I guess.
User:
It sounds to me like it isn't really the way it is anymore.
Focus:
I guess it never is.
User:
Ain't it the truth!
Tags:

Comparative / Superlative Deletion Challenge

Post a comment. April 26, 2010

The Comparative/Superlative Deletion Challenge is a Meta-Model pattern designed to reconnect one's internal experience with the life experience that caused it. This particular pattern is used to reveal what a person is drawing comparison to when words like 'better than', 'mostly', and 'less' are used.

Pattern
Outcome: 

This pattern, (herein shorten to) the Comparative Deletion Challenge, reconnects the conscious object of a sentence with the unconscious objects or context in which the comparison is relevant. Typically, a person made said comparison at some point in the past, with time and the natural human tendency towards generalization eventually causing the context of the comparison to be deleted. When a person holds such a comparison to be true, and is not aware of where and with what is specifically attached, the generalized behaviors that result are often inappropriate and damaging to the individual.

Similarly, when the Meta-Model is employed as a communication tool, becoming aware of what a person is drawing comparison to can be the most effective tool at your disposal. Most effective compared to what, you ask? Most effective compared to doing nothing certainly and, in context on understanding internal relationships, compared to other meta-model questions.

For instance, a web developer might attract more traffic if he didn't title a page, "10 Best Programs" but instead, "10 Best Linux Programs of 2009". A therapist can shave years of therapy off a client's personal development by, within moments, discovering that when his client says, "I'm the worst." what he really means is, "I'm the worst player of monopoly that I know." What you will discover by utilizing this pattern is that oftentimes, the gap between internal experience and real-world evidence is vast.

Criteria: 

As with all Meta-Model patterns, familiarity and practice will draw the criteria for each pattern's use into your unconscious behavior, so that testing for which information is missing will become automatic and increasingly effective. As that occurs, the following criteria and test will be invaluable in using the Comparative Deletion Challenge.

As many of you can infer, whenever you hear a comparison ("This way is better.") or a superlative ("It's the most heavy.") or even either of these with an unspecified context ("She's too good for him."), you can use the Comparative Deletion Challenge.

Noticing the similarities to the Simple Deletion Challenge is only useful in conjunction with noticing the differences. The following sentences will help to make distinct the set of surface structures that this pattern targets. Pay close attention to how your internal experience changes as you compare each of the following sentences to its clarified derivation.

Sentence with Deletion Clarified Sentence
We're more lost now. We're more lost now than when we entered the maze.
I'm mostly dead. I'm mostly dead compared to a newborn.
You're too tall. You're too tall for this ride.
It's the worst! This book is the worst historical fiction I read in grade school.
Zhe's a better woman. Zhe's a better woman than zhe was a man.

When testing for comparative deletion, you're seeking what mathematics calls the 'bounds'. There are no comparisons which are boundless. Each comparison and superlative you encounter will have at least two objects and a context within which the comparison is true. The usefulness and relevance of this fact is that outside the bounds of a given comparison are countless contexts in which the comparison is false. Very often, once the bounds are determined, the inverse is where a user of this pattern will want to focus her attention next.

The following steps can be used to test a given sentence for comparatives and superlatives:

  1. Listen to the surface structure of the presented sentence.
  2. Identify markers which indicate comparatives/superlatives are present. Typically, they will fall into one of these categories:
    • Adjectives ending -er or -est.
    • Modifiers like more/less or most/least followed by an adjective.
  3. Determine whether those all necessary arguments (at least two objects and a context) are present.

The awareness we naturally possess of what data is missing from a comparison can often be the strongest indicator that the Comparative Deletion Challenge is appropriate.

Pattern: 

As with all Meta-Model patterns, the application of this pattern will become more fluid and more robust with every usage.

  1. Listen to the surface structure of the presented sentence.
  2. Determine what information is missing.
  3. Use one of the forms provided to extract the necessary information:
    • __COMPARATIVE__ compared to whom/what?
    • __SUPERLATIVE__ with respect to what?
  4. Repeat step 3 until you recover all relevant, deleted information.
Examples: 

The following examples will allow you to realize in how many more ways this pattern will become useful to you.

Focus:
We're more lost now!
User:
More lost compared to what?
Focus:
More lost than when we started.
User:
More lost than when you started what?
Focus:
More lost than when we started this trip.
User:
Where are you calling from?
Focus:
The craziest maze ever!
User:
Craziest compared to what?
Focus:
Compared to when we're not on LSD!
Focus:
I'm mostly dead.
User:
Compared to what?
Focus:
Compared to the less old.
User:
Most of the people in your graduating class are less old than you.
Focus:
And they're mostly dead too.
User:
So when you say, 'mostly dead', to whom are you comparing?
Focus:
To my newborn granddaughter.
User:
I once knew a dead man who thought he was mostly dead, except...
Focus:
Except what?
User:
Except he was comparing himself to you.
Focus:
Sorry sir, you're too far off.
User:
Too far off with respect to what?
Focus:
With respect, you're too tall.
User:
Excellent! Too tall compared to what?
Focus:
To the painting of a ruler. You can't use this ride.
User:
That's a good thing! For a moment, I thought I was too tall to use the ruler.
Focus:
It's the worst!
User:
What's the worst?
Focus:
This book.
User:
The worst compared to what?
Focus:
Compared to any book I ever read.
User:
Ever read when?
Focus:
In grade school.
User:
Ahh! So this was the worst book you ever read in grade school?
Focus:
That's what I meant to say!
User:
It's a good thing that you have. The worst with regard to what?
Focus:
The worst with regard to historical fiction.
User:
What was the name of this book?
Focus:
"1,000 Paper Cranes".
User:
You're absolutely right. That must have been the worst historical fiction book you ever read in grade school.
Focus:
Well, it wasn't so bad. I've read worse.
User:
Sure you have!
User:
Zhe's a better woman.
Focus:
Better compared to what?
User:
Compared to what zhe was before.
Focus:
Before what?
User:
Before zhe became a woman.
Focus:
So zhe's a better woman than zhe was a...?
User:
Man.
Focus:
Ok. Better with regard to what?
User:
Well... you know... it was very small anyway...
Focus:
Very small compared to what?
User:
Compared to a large clitoris.
Focus:
It's nice to learn zhe's growing as a person!
Tags:

Simple Deletion Challenge

Post a comment. April 26, 2010

The Simple Deletion Challenge is pattern of the Meta-Model, used for recovering nouns that are missing in surface structure of a sentence, thereby reconnecting the thought-patterns it describes with actual experience.

Pattern
Outcome: 

The Simple Deletion Challenge swiftly recovers missing persons, places, things, or ideas (nouns) in the subject's spoken surface structure. As with all Meta-Model patterns, the purpose of this pattern is to gain specificity in a person's model of the world. This facilitates greater understanding in both you and the subject concerning the rules that govern that person's thinking and behavior.

Though it sounds simple, recovering deleted nouns is often one of the most relevant steps. Relevant to what, you ask? It is one of the most relevant steps in applying the meta model and reattaching a person's surface structure to their real-world experience. When applying this pattern, you will often discover that clarifying a person's map of the world is the most direct and useful ways to change it.

As you'll discover, we often make great assumptions as to what a person is thinking. By using this pattern to understand what is present inside another's head, we can more easily interact with that person. A saleman is better able to address an objection in the form of "I'm still looking for a better color." than he is at addressing, "I'm still looking." A journalist will discern more usable data from "The building was attacked by killer bees." than "The building was attacked."

Criteria: 

Becoming aware of when to apply the Simple Deletion Challenge pattern is rooted in your natural ability to understand language. Each of us is aware that when someone says, "I'm going." that they are in fact going somewhere, perhaps with someone, often away from something in particular. This awareness is why every speaker of language is so easily able to apply the Meta-Model. We know how to find.

Sometimes, it's not so obvious what information has been deleted from a sentence or, for that reason, what we're trying to find. Here's a selection of sentences that are prime subjects for applying this pattern. In each example, notice what images, sounds, and feelings are present in your mind before reading the clarified sentence.

Sentence with Deletion Clarified Sentence
I'm scared. I'm scared of clowns with red noses.
I can't stop drinking. I can't stop drinking seltzer.
I have to run. I have to run to the cemetery before dawn.
I'm in love. I'm in love with oatmeal.
I need to leave. I need to leave my cabin to hunt in five hours.

By now, you might have a sense for where this pattern is appropriate. If there is any doubt, given a particular sentence, apply this test to discover whether the Simple Deletion Challenge is appropriate.

  1. Listen to the surface structure of the presented sentence.
  2. Identify the verbs in the surface structure.
  3. Determine whether those verbs can accept more arguments than the original sentence provides.
    • To facilitate this, you can hallucinate the verb occurring presently to discover what additional data is required to complete the hallucination. With practice, this addition will become unnecessary, because you will have formed an unconscious awareness of appropriate verb structures.
Pattern: 

Once you become aware that relevant data is missing from a given surface structure, like all meta model patterns, the Simple Deletion Challenge is easily applied.

  1. Listen to the surface structure of the presented sentence.
  2. Determine what information is missing.
  3. Use one of the forms provided to extract the necessary information:
    • __VERB__ about whom/what?
    • __VERB__ when?
  4. Repeat step 3 until you recover all relevant, deleted information.
Examples: 

The following examples will provide the necessary reference material to enable your continued experimentation.

Focus:
I'm scared.
User:
Scared of what?
Focus:
I'm just scared!
User:
Even people who fear 'fear itself' are scared of something, so what are you scared of?
Focus:
Well, I'm scared of... well, this is embarrassing... I'm scared of clowns with, you know, red noses.
User:
So you're scared of clowns with red noses?
Focus:
Do you think they heard me?
Focus:
I'm here because I just can't stop.
User:
You can't stop what, exactly?
Focus:
I can't stop drinking.
User:
What can't you stop drinking?
Focus:
I can't stop drinking seltzer!
User:
OK, so you drink a lot of seltzer. And that is a problem, when, specifically?
Focus:
Before I go to bed. My wife can't sleep when I'm farting.
Focus:
I can't talk now. I have to run.
User:
Are you running towards something or away from something?
Focus:
Towards.
User:
And you're running towards what?
Focus:
The cemetery.
User:
And you can't talk because you have to run to the cemetary when?
Focus:
By dawn. If you haven't figured it out yet, I'm a vampire.
User:
My inability to mirror you gave it away.
Focus:
I have a strange feeling.
User:
What are you feeling?
Focus:
I think I'm in love.
User:
You think you're in love with what?
Focus:
I think I'm in love with oatmeal.
User:
Descartes said, "I think, therefore I am."
Focus:
So I am in love with oatmeal!
User:
That's one way to think about it.
Focus:
I need to leave.
User:
You need to leave what?
Focus:
My cabin.
User:
You need to leave your cabin for what?
Focus:
To hunt.
User:
With all this TNT? When?
Focus:
In five hours.
User:
So, you need to leave your cabin to hunt in five hours, eh Doc?
Focus:
That's right.
User:
What, specifically, are you hunting?
Focus:
Wabbits.
User:
You don't say.
Tags: