2 Reality Strategy Chunk Down

As we chunk down from the belief systems and paradigms that people offer as the magic that runs their meaning box, we will not only discover the parts and pieces of their subjective experience, we will find their strategy for it.

Strategy refers to how we sequence our internal representations (VAK and A in such a way that when you add all of the ingredients together it creates a formula for cooking up a particular soup of human subjectivity—the process for generating that experience.

Consider the "strategy" below the formula, "When she looks at me and narrows her eyes, I feel judged and put down."

suppose a guy uses this as his way to feel depressed. It could happen. The EB=IS might go: "Eyes narrowing = feeling judged and put down."

His strategy that creates this experience might go: external visual awareness (Ve) of her facial expression with special focus on her eyes, represented image in color, close, three-dimensional, then a rehearsing of the words (A), "She's judging me and criticizing me," then more words (Adm), now words of self-evaluation, "I don't measure up to her expectations,"then feeling tension in stomach (K), an ache in back of the neck and head, remembering other times of criticism, etc.

Of course, strategies occur at lightning fast speed so that most of it does not occur in consciousness-justthe final kinestheticfeeling and emotion: depression. And as strategies streamline (which they all do), this process becomes so quick, so automatic, so immediate, that she only has to do one thing to evoke it: narrow her eyes (EB) and his meaning equation fires.

Almost immediately he feels depressed, so he then really "knows" that it "causes" him to feel depressed (his limited belief). Here we have a neuro-semantic "program" in fine working order. Oh sure, the content stinks. Sure the magic here leads to some really rotten states of discouragement. The magic here turns princes into frogs. But the structure, the neurology, and the process work perfectly.

Finding this strategy for a person's "reality" (hence, a person's "Reality Strategy") offers us a conversational reframing pattern whereby we can pull off some neat "Sleight of Mouth" patterns. It enables us to both identify the pattern within the meaning formula and the strategy that runs the thinking. Essentially, we will use some mind-lines that question or challenge the data of "the program."

"How did you arrive at that understanding and conclusion?"

"How do you know that you feel depressed?"

"What lets you know that it is depression, and not fear?"

These process questions ask the person to access his or her strategy, to run it from a more objective point-of-view and to thereby get into watching and noticing it as they do. This thereby interrupts it, introduces a distinction between stimulus (EB) and response (IS), plants a question of doubt about its "reality," etc.

(A) "Saying mean things makes you a bad person."

"When you think about that belief, how do you represent that in your mind? Do you see, hear, or feel it?" "How would you know if it was not true? What, for you, would falsify this understanding?" "What would you specifically see, hear or feel that would indicatewhen that has occurred?" "Does this start with a feeling and then you draw this conclusion? Or do you first hear the tonality, and then experience a body sensation?"

(B) "Cancer causes death."

"What do you see (hear/feel) that convinces you some cancer cells have to bring an end to a person's life? Does this always happen? So you believe that the human immune system never has, and never will, respond effectively to cancer cells? Since carcinogenic substances occur in almost everything and in all of us, how do some immune systems protect some people against such?

In the Reality Strategy Chunk Down, we ask for the evidence and the process that comprises the strategy. In doing so, we discover how a person constructs the limiting belief program. As a planter of doubt and skepticism, Reality Strategy Chunk Down deframes by the very process of asking a person to pull the program apart so that, together, we can examine it.

Then, as any good constructionist knows(!), when you start playing around with the "reality"by asking other questions, making suggestions, offering advice, linking it up conceptually with other understandings, it messes the reality program up!

[By the way, all of these processes fall under the philosophical category of Constructivism, and so that makes us constructionists!]

[Another by the way. This explains how we humans can get so messed up! We're not born deficient—we just learn so quickly and associate things in our consciousness with so many other things, that when people talk to us, especially when they don't feel good, when they come out of a grumpy and grouchy state—we can get all kinds of toxic and stupid ideas linked up. So people "walk with their dirty shoes in our minds"—bringing with them poisonous and irrational crazinesses and lo, and behold—we link it up to some EB and presto, a meaning formula that will do us great ham ! Okay, back to the story.]

(C) 'Your being late means you don't care about me."

"How do you know that my being late means I don't care? What do you have to do in your head to get these thoughts and feelings going that I don't care about you when you look at the clock and notice my lateness? Do you make a picture of it, do you say words, what words, with what tonality, in what order, etc.? If you said, 'I wonder if this means he doesn't care? and asked it in a questioning way, what would that do? How would you know when my lateness really means I care?"

(D) "Stress causes me to eat chocolate."

"How fascinating that stress 'causes' you to eat chocolate. How specifically does this process work? How do you represent stress? Do you do that in your mind with pictures, or do you say something to yourself, ordo you have some kinesthetic sensation somewhere in your body? Where? To what degree? Then how does your motor program activate your feet to go looking for chocolate and your hands to start ripping off wrappings and cramming chocolate down your throat? etc."

(E) "I can't really make a difference because management doesn't walk their talk."

"Management must really have a powerful hold over your neurology! How does management not walking their talk 'cause' you to choose to believe that you can't make a difference? How do you represent 'management' in a way that causes this program to work in this way? Does it always work this way? So you have a colored picture, and you're sure you don't have a black-and-white and a small photograph type of picture of management..?" (Here we have walked in their mind and begun to mess up the old strategy! How fun to tear things apart! Oops, there goes your sand castle! Sorry!) (F) "I can't buy your product because it costs too much." "I'm interested in how you think about 'the price.' Do you make a picture of it? Or do you just say words that summarize 'the price? What tone of voice do you hear that in? Now you feel sure you don't hear that in a scoffing voice do you? Or a lustful voice?

To elicit this reframing pattern, use the strategy elicitation questions:

"How do you represent that belief?"

"How will you know if and when it does not hold true?"

"What comes first? What comes next? How do you have each piece coded representationally?"

"And you're absolutely sure you don't have that in this other format?"

600 Chocolate Recipes

600 Chocolate Recipes

Within this in cookbook full of chocolate recipes you will find over 600 Chocolate Recipes For Chocolate Lovers.

Get My Free Ebook


Post a comment