[Neurons] 2014 "Neurons" Meta Reflections #35

Sun Aug 31 21:45:12 EDT 2014

From: L. Michael Hall

Meta Reflections 2014 #35

September 2, 2014

Cleaning Up Language Series #4

WHEN WHAT YOU SAY

IS JUST WRONG

[I began a series back in March and April on Cleaning Up Language and then
did not finish it.  In fact, it slipped my mind- until a Neurons reader
asked me about it.  So with that jolt to my memory and intention, here is
the next one.]

When someone is not being very clear or precise, the NLP tool par excellence
to use is The Meta-Model of Language.  This was the very first model created
by the co-founders of NLP and was formulated into the great sleepers- The
Structure of Magic Volumes I and II.  I cleaned up at the behest of Richard
Bandler in 1997 to commensurate the 25th anniversary of NLP.  Today the
expanded and refined NLP Communication model is now in the book,
Communication Magic (2001, Crown House Publications).

Sometimes we call the Meta-Model- The Precision Model because that is what
it is best for- eliciting precision from a speaker.  That occurs by asking
questions about the way the person has formulated his or her statements.
What is the Meta-Model?  It is a set of linguistic distinctions and a set of
precision-eliciting questions.

But sometimes the problem is not that the speaker is vague, imprecise,
confused, or engaged in fluffy or hypnotic language.  Sometimes the problem
is that the speaker is using language in erroneous ways.  Sometimes a person
uses language that is simply erroneous.  What the person says doesn't just
lack precision, it is wrong.

Sometimes the language is so contaminated with erroneous ideas and
false-to-fact assumptions, that there's a contamination in the words and the
ideas.  I'm not talking about what some people would call "bad" words or
curse words.  I'm talking about something much, much worse and much more
subtle in terms of its power to corrupt.  This is a contamination that
refers to something far more sinister and much more toxic.  I'm speaking
about- 

1) the erroneous and pseudo-language that we inherit in language

2) our interpretative filters which can contaminate how we then explain
something

3) the metaphors that we live by which mis-direct and contaminate thinking.

Erroneous Language

Some language is just wrong.  It is simply false.  As a mental map it is
fallacious in that it does not fit or correspond to the structure (form) of
the territory outside of our skin.  So as a map it will not enable us to go
and experience that part of the territory.  Sometimes this contaminated
language is just a word, sometimes it is a phrase.  Korzybski called some of
these words pseudo-words.  I quoted him extensively in Communication Magic
(2001):

Pseudo-words: Just because we can make a verbal noise or spell out marks on
paper which look like or sound like words, this does not necessarily make
them true words.  Korzybski designated such pseudo-words as  noises (in the
auditory channel) and as spell-marks (in the visual channel).  

Before a noise or a spell-mark can exist as a symbol, something must exist.
When it does, the symbol can symbolize that existing thing, process, or
concept. In language and "knowledge" we have two kinds of existence:
physical existence and logical existence.  Thus unicorns do not exist in the
external world of unaided nature.  They do not belong to zoology.  When we
apply the word "unicorn" to the field of zoology, we employ a pseudo-word.
If, however, we employ the word with reference to mythology or human fancy,
the word there has a referent and so functions meaningfully as a symbol (pp.
81-82).

What's the difference between a true word and a pseudo-word?  A true word or
symbol symbolizes something that exists.  You can point to it.  You can
refer to it.  A false word functions merely as  a noise and does not refer
to any actual thing or process.  Obviously, if a person does not make this
differentiation, that person will lack a vital skill for clear
communication, thinking, and reasoning.  Korzbyski noted that if we use
noises as if they were words, we create all sorts of problems for ourselves
and others.

"One of the obvious origins of human disagreement lies in the use of noises
for words" (p. 82).  

Actually, this a form of fraud!  Korzybski made this pronouncement because
it literally involves "the use of false representations."  He illustrated
this with the word "heat"  (Science and Sanity, p. 107).  He noted that
grammatically we classify "heat" as a substantive (actually a
nominalization).  Yet physicists labored for centuries looking for some
"substance" which would correspond to the substantive "heat."  They never
found it.  It does not exist.  Today we know that no such thing as "heat"
exists.  So what exists?  Manifestations of "energy" (processes) and
interactions between processes that create or release thermo-dynamic energy.
So we use a verb or adverb (thermo-dynamic) to more accurately represents
the referent.  Today we recognize that no such "substance" as "heat" exists,
so we talk about the process of "thermo-dynamics" as two objects or
processes interact.

Rational-Emotive Behavior Therapy (REBT) has highlighted common pseudo-words
of unsanity that torment lots of people and send them to a pit of emotional
hell.  These include: "awful," "horrible," "terrible," etc.  What do these
words refer to?  Answer: Nothing. They function only as emotional
amplification words.  People use them to exaggerate an unpleasant and
undesirable situation.  When Albert Ellis was alive, I heard him many times
challenge this philosophical nonsense.  He would ask a client to explain why
they said something was "awful" or "terrible" rather than just undesirable.

"What do you mean other than that you intensely dislike that and feel a
strong aversion to it?"  "Why is this experience 'awful,' 'terrible,' or a
'catastrophe?'  I know that you don't like it and that you wish you didn't
have to deal with it.  I can see how unpleasant and distressful it feels,
but why is it 'awful?'"

Interpretative Filters

The filters could be a wide range of processes from our meta-programs,
values, explanatory styles that we have learned, cognitive biases that are
mostly built into our neurology-brain.  I usually start the confrontation
with a description of their language patterns.  Take, as an example, the
word "you" when a person is actually speaking about oneself.   This is the
generalized you.  Yet the person does not mean "you."  The person means
"me."  Yet the speaker has not said so.  "'You just always have to feel bad
when they reject you...'"

When I hear that kind of language in the context of coaching, I always
highlight it by feeding it back to the person so the person can hear his or
her words and take responsibility.

"I have to feel bad?  Me?   ...   You are talking about me?"

That typically elicits a "No, I'm talking about me."  

"Whew! [wiping my brow] and so you have to feel bad?  So there's a rule?
You have a rule that requires and demands that you have to feel bad?" 

"No, I just do." 

"Okay, good.  You just do.  And you do because you believe what?  What has
to be true for you in your mental map so that you just feel bad to the
trigger of someone rejecting you?"

I will keep at this meta-modeling to create a greater sense of the precision
of the person's use of language and to straighten out the distortion that
comes from using the generalized-you and making it an universal rule.  And
yes, oftentimes the person will experience this interaction as
confrontative, even "debating."  Yet the purpose is to provide a way to
clean up one's language from a false map.  

Neuro-Semantic News

.        Master Coach, Graham Richard, will appear for a special 1-day
presentation of Masterful Coaching in Brussels, Belgium, Friday Oct. 3.
Contact Germaine Rediger to be a part of this special day.  Michael Hall
will interview and model Graham's Coaching after each session.  Germaine --
germaine at indialogue.eu 

L. Michael Hall, Ph.D.

                Neuro-Semantics Executive Director 

                Neuro-Semantics International

P.O. Box 8

Clifton, CO. 81520 USA                             

                1 970-523-7877 

                Dr. Hall's email:
<mailto:meta at acsol.net\hich\af31506\dbch\af31505\loch\f31506> meta at acsol.net

What is Neuro-Semantic NLP?

Neurons:  Get your free subscription to the weekly International \Post on
Neuro-Semantics by Dr. L. Michael Hall. Subscribe at:
wwww.neurosemantics.com 

    Solutions:  Sign up for the Neuro-Semantic Newsletter ---
<http://neurosemantics.com/newsletter> neurosemantics.com/newsletter. 

 This is a monthly newsletter for anyone new to Neuro-Semantics.  Femke
Stuut, Editor.

Coaching: For world-class Coach Training - The Meta-Coaching System:
www.meta-coaching.org and \
<http://www.metacoachfo/hich/a/hich/af31506/dbch/af31505/loch/f31506%20f3150
6/dbch/af31505/loch/f31506%20undation.org/hich/af31506/dbch/af31505/loch/f31
506/hich/af31506/dbch/af31505/loch/f31506> www.metacoachfoundation.org.
Meta-Coach Reflections sent every Wednesday to the group of Licensed
Meta-Coaches.

Self-Actualization: Neuro-Semantics launched the New Human Potential
Movement in 2007, for information about this, see
<http://www.self-actualizing.org/> www.self-actualizing.org  

NSP --- Neuro-Semantic Publications: Order books from Neuro-Semantic
website,  <http://www.neurosemantics.com> www.neurosemantics.com  click on
Products and Services and then the Catalogue of books.  Order via paypal.  

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://eight.pairlist.net/pipermail/neurons/attachments/20140831/48f74164/attachment-0001.html>
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: image001.png
Type: image/png
Size: 81558 bytes
Desc: not available
URL: <http://eight.pairlist.net/pipermail/neurons/attachments/20140831/48f74164/attachment-0001.png>