Previous Entry Share Next Entry
Иное моделирование (47) Re-Modelling Modelling by John Mc Whirter
Red Tailed Hawk
metanymous wrote in metapractice
http://metapractice.livejournal.com/532666.html

По наводке http://metapractice.livejournal.com/519623.html?thread=13633735#t13633735

http://sensorysystems.co.uk/dbm-remodelled-nlp/re-modelling-nlp-articles-in-pdf-format/

Re-Modelling NLP Articles in PDF Format

26. Re-Modelling NLP: Part 14 Re-Modelling Modelling

This article, written by John McWhirter, appeared in Rapport issue 59 Spring 2003

25. Re-Modelling NLP: Part Thirteen: Part C Re-Modelling Perceptual Positioning and Processing
This article, written by John McWhirter, appeared in Rapport issue 58 in Winter 2002

24. Re-Modelling NLP: Part Thirteen: Part B Re-Modelling Perceptual Positioning and Processing
This article, written by John McWhirter, appeared in Rapport issue 57 in Autumn 2002

23. Re-Modelling NLP: Part Thirteen: Part A Re-Modelling Perceptual Positioning and Processing
This article, written by John McWhirter, appeared in Rapport issue 56 in Summer 2002

22. Re-Modelling NLP: Part Twelve: Part B Re-Modelling Hypnotic Inductions and Hypnotherapy
This article, written by John McWhirter, appeared in Rapport issue 55 in Spring 2002

21. Re-Modelling NLP: Part Twelve: Part A Re-Modelling Hypnotic Inductions and Hypnotherapy
This article, written by John McWhirter, appeared in Rapport issue 54 in Winter 2001

20. Modelling Language: Questioning and Developing Language
This article, written by John McWhirter, appeared in the Danish NLP- Foreningen I Denmark Journal, Netværkets Levende Post Nr. 3 2001

19. Modellere Sprog: Første Del: Undersøgelse og Udvikling af Sprog John McWhirter / Oversættelse: K. Garfalk
This article, in Danish, written by John McWhirter translated by Kirsten Garfalf, appeared in the Danish NLP- Foreningen I Denmark Journal, Netværkets Levende Post Nr. 3 2001

18. Re-Modelling NLP: Part Eleven: Re-Modelling Metaphors
This article, written by John McWhirter, appeared in Rapport issue 53 in Autumn 2001

17. Re-Modelling NLP Part Ten: Unconscious Processes and Hypnosis
This article, written by John McWhirter, appeared in Rapport issue 52 in Summer 2001

16. Re-Modelling NLP Part Nine: Organising Change
This article, written by John McWhirter, appeared in Rapport issue 51 in Spring 2001

15. Re-Modelling NLP Part Eight: Performing Change
This article, written by John McWhirter, appeared in Rapport issue 50 in Winter 2000

14. Re-Modelling NLP Part Seven: Facilitating Change
This article, written by John McWhirter, appeared in Rapport issue 49 in Autumn 2000

13. Planning and Optimising Outcomes
This article, written by John McWhirter, appeared in the Danish NLP- Foreningen I Denmark Journal, Netværkets Levende Post, Nr. 5, October 2000

12. Remodelling Conflicts
This article, written by John McWhirter, appeared in the Danish NLP- Foreningen I Denmark Journal Netværkets Levende Post, Nr. 3, June 2000

11. Re-Modelling NLP Part Six: Understanding Change
This article, written by John McWhirter, appeared in Rapport issue 48 in Summer 2000

10. Re-Modelling NLP Part Five: Planning, Problem-Solving, Outcomes and Achieving
This article, written by John McWhirter, appeared in Rapport issue 47 in Spring 2000

9. Re-Modelling NLP Part Four: Basic Structures and Processes
This article, written by John McWhirter, appeared in Rapport issue 46 in Winter 1999

8. Re-Modelling NLP Part Three: Feeling, Conflict and Integration
This article, written by John McWhirter, appeared in Rapport issue 45 in Autumn 1999

7. Re-Modelling NLP Part Two: Re-Modelling Language
This article, written by John McWhirter, appeared in Rapport issue 44 in summer 1999

6. Re-Modelling NLP Part One: Models and Modelling
This article, written by John McWhirter, appeared in Rapport issue 43 in spring 1999




  • 1

Re-Modelling NLP Part One: Models and Modelling

Re-Modelling NLP

Part One: Models and Modelling
By John McWhirter, November 1998

“The purpose of the model is to enable the user to do a better job in handling the enormous complexities of life. By using models, we see and test how things work and can even predict how things will go in the future. The effectiveness of a model can be judged by how well it works, as well as how consistent it is as a mechanical or philosophical system. People are very closely identified with their models, since they also form the basis for behaviour. Men have fought and died in the name of different models of nature”.

Edward T. Hall, Beyond Culture, Doubleday 1976 (p 13-14)
...
Levels of Modelling

Detailed distinctions are important for precision modelling. That includes modelling itself. In DBM we identify a number of levels to modelling. All of them are useful.

Level

1. Naming. Names are irresistible. Identifying something often begins by naming it. It can also be a trap as the name is not the thing, the result can be the illusion of understanding.

2. Listing. Collecting things, grouping of things.
3. Classifying. Relating the list. Very popular result of testing, as in IQ or
personality. Again there is the possibility of illusory understanding.

4. Sequencing. Tracking changes over time. Attending to the dynamic qualities.
5. Mapping. Formalising a sequence. Useful in giving a simultaneous
representation but at the cost of reducing the temporal dynamic.

6. Processing. Identifying the key functioning of the sequence.
7. Replicating. Copying particular sequences.
8. Patterning. Identifying a common map across examples.
9. Modelling. Replicating product, process and principle.
10. Recursioning. Going beyond by applying model to self.
11. Modelling Modelling. Identify the product, process and principles of the modelling.

NLP aims to replicate successful behaviour (level 7). The strategies model supports this by mapping the sequence of senses used in a skill (level 5). If we follow Bandler and Grinder’s advice to understand the client’s model - the structure of subjective experience and concentrate on what they are doing, that would be (level 4), if we want to build a working model that would be (level 9). In DBM we are also interested in how the client constructs and changes their model of the world – the ongoing processing and patterning of subjective experience (levels 10 and 11). This requires modelling what, how and why modelling works, and the working of modelling, these are tasks beyond the scope of the NLP method.

NLP aims to model how things work. DBM aims not only to model how things work but how to work things.


Edited at 2016-10-22 03:32 pm (UTC)

Лингвистическое моделирование

Что он здесь описывает, очень похоже на результаты глубокого "лингвистического моделирования". Типа метамоделирования. Или моделирования в стиле Precision. Моделирования (в основном) того, как люди говорят о вещах.

Его DBM в первую очередь является вопросной техникой?

Re: Лингвистическое моделирование

Его DBM в первую очередь является вопросной техникой?

Не знаю в отношении вопросной техники. Посмотрим что будет в других статьях.

Myths and Mistakes in NLP

Myths and Mistakes in NLP

1. 93% of communication is non-verbal.
2. Eskimos have seventy words for snow.
3. Language is always literal.
4. Beliefs are difficult to change.
5. "Why" should not be used.
6. "Try" should not be used.
7. Flexibility and variability are the same.
8. Excellence and Excelling are the same.
9. Gestalt: The whole is greater than the sum of its parts.
10. NLP Ecology Check.
11. NLP is client centred.
12. NLP is Holistic.
13. In NLP there is no split between mind and body.
14. Personal "Parts" exist.
15. Beliefs and identity are neurological levels.
16. The brain is the same as the mind.
17. Modelling method is a methodology.
18. We have perceptual Filters.

19. Sensory acuity is all about clean sensory channels.
20. NLP is Systemic.
21. Systems thinking is the same thing as thinking systemically.


Edited at 2016-10-22 03:32 pm (UTC)

1. 93% of communication is non-verbal.

1. 93% of communication is non-verbal.

This is one with which I was never comfortable. If it was true then it should be easy to communicate the precise meaning including the 93% without the lowly 7% of verbal communication – try it! Feeling that it is wrong and knowing why is very different. My friend and colleague, Chris Norris, was able to help me when he attended an Advanced Master Practitioner training which I ran a number of years ago. He knew the name of the source, Mehrabian. Mehrabian (1971) wrote a very interesting book about how we communicate and perceive feelings. On page 77 he states the generalisation from their findings on liking to feelings more generally:

“Generalising, we can say that people's implicit behaviour has more bearing than their words on communicating feelings or attitudes to others. So we have rewritten our equation for any feeling.
Total feeling = 7% verbal feeling + 38% vocal feeling + 55% facial feeling”


He later goes on in page 79 to caution:

“Incidentally, we should be careful to note that these assertions about the disproportionate contribution of implicit, relative to verbal, cues is limited to feelings (pleasure, arousal, dominance) and like-dislike. Obviously, implicit expressions are

not always more important than words. In fact, implicit cues are ineffective for communicating most referents denoted by words (for example, "I'll see you tomorrow afternoon at 2:00 pm", "I was wearing my new velour suit yesterday", or "x + y = z")”.


There are three points of note here. The first is obviously that when the percentages quoted are applied to all communication and not just how we perceive whether we are liked we are making a gross error. The second is that the details of them are often changed from vocal and facial to non-verbal movements. The third is the use of these percentages to sell non-verbal communication skills training. This is a dishonest sales practice whether done knowingly or unknowingly.

Почему мы сенситивные, но не экспрессивные

А меня тут другой вопрос удивляет. Почему такая большая разница между тем, насколько люди хорошо владеют коммуникацией. Но на порядок меньшая разница, насколько люди хорошо воспринимают (откликаются на) коммуникацию. Да, условно есть типа "внушаемые", а есть типа "непробиваемые". Но это разница ни в какое сравнение не идёт с той громадной разницей между изощрёнными коммуникаторами и не изощрёнными в коммуникации субъектами.

2. Eskimos have seventy words for snow.

2. Eskimos have seventy words for snow.

On page 15 of Frogs, Bandler and Grinder state that “Eskimos have some seventy words for snow”. Pullum explores this myth in his book ”The great Eskimo Vocabulary Hoax”. He cites the work of anthropologist Laura Martin of Cleveland State University who spent some of her research time during the 1980s attempting to slay the constantly changing, self-regenerating myth of Eskimo snow terminology. She traced the myth to the original source of Franz Boas' introduction the Handbook of North American Indians (1911).

“And all Boas says there, in the context of a low-key and slightly ill-explained discussion of independent versus derived terms for things in different languages, is that just as English uses separate roots for a variety of forms of water (liquid, lake, river, brook, rain, dew, wave, foam) that might be formed by derivational morphology from a single root meaning 'water' in some other language, so Eskimo uses the apparently distinct roots aput 'snow on the ground', gana 'falling snow', piqsirpoq 'drifting snow', and qimuqsuq 'a snow drift'. Boas' point is simply that English expressed these notions by phrases involving the root snow, but things could have been otherwise, just as the words for lake, river, etc. could have been formed derivationally or periphrastically on the root water”. P161

“Don't be a coward like me. Stand up and tell the speaker this: C W Schultz-Lorentzen's Dictionary of the West Greenlandic Eskimo Language (1927) gives just two possibly relevant roots: qanik, meaning 'snow in the air' or 'snowflake', and aput, meaning 'snow on the ground'. Then add that you would be interested to know if the speaker can cite any more”. P167

As a modeller I too am interested in what people do especially when perpetuating inaccurate models. My concern for a modelling field is the lack investigation and accurate modelling. It is one level of error to believe the Emperor is wearing fine clothes if you haven’t seen the Emperor, it is another when you have.

10. Ecology Check

The question at the end of techniques is not a test of ecology but of the client's congruence with the changes. It is a test of “affect”. On its own it could never be a test of “effect”, what the results would be on the client as a whole system. It is a useful thing to do but deceptively mis-leading to give it a grander title than is accurate.

Не полное рассмотрение

Тут мы можем согласиться, что по вопросу "экологической проверки" в явном виде информация от БиГов скупа и не полна. Но с тем, что этот процесс априори не эффективен я бы возразил. Методы "экологической проверки", если в них вглядеться, на деле являются методами "экологической настройки/установки" — клиент получает прямые комплексные постгипнотические внушения САМОСТОЯТЕЛЬНО ВОССТАНОВИТЬ экологию в будущем по месту возникновения возможных заранее неучтённых экологических касательств. Это же основа бриф-терапии.

18 Perceptual Filters

18 Perceptual Filters

It is often stated in NLP that we have Perceptual Filters. These are responsible for filtering the incoming information about the world. As a metaphoric description this is an interesting one, as a process description it is the exact opposite of what happens. Our nervous system works on thresholds and news of a difference. We learn to become sensitive to particular stimuli and so actively select what we let through – the exact opposite of a filter whose active response is to hold things back. What could hold a perception back and what happens to all the rubbish in the filter?

Мы серьёзно с вопросом "фильтров" разбирались

Вот здесь lidenskap_frost поднимал вопрос "фильтров восприятия": http://metapractice.livejournal.com/503411.html

В целом мы бы скорее согласились с его мыслью о том, что в человеке едва ли можно указать на какие-то нейрологические структуры, исполняющие именно роль "фильтров". Но иногда всё же можно. Например, фрейдовские системы вытеснения/замещения информации.

Re: Мы серьёзно с вопросом "фильтров" разбирались


9. Gestalt: The whole is greater than the sum of its parts.

9. Gestalt: The whole is greater than the sum of its parts.

This is one that can have such misleading connotations as ‘big is better’. In my work with gangs, dysfunctional teams and organisations it is clear that the opposite is the case - the whole is less than the sum of the parts. I’m a little embarrassed to think how many years it took me to work this out (however I am somewhat consoled by the fact that no one else I have met has realised it until I tell them!). The accurate conclusion is that the whole is different from the sum of its parts.

I hope that this is enough to stimulate for now. The others will be clarified in future articles.

In this article I have outlined some of the beginnings of ‘re-modelling’ NLP to make it more effective, efficient and elegant. In future articles I will go into more depth on each of the main elements of practitioner and master practitioner level NLP. I hope that this will encourage an open and developmental approach to NLP through constructive criticism. Only if this happens can NLP continue as a field of study rather than becoming a dead technology. By demonstrating openness to learning and development in our own thinking and behaviour we offer our clients a deeper pattern of successful behaviour, one that will benefit them beyond the range of any particular technique.

Since the introduction of sub-modalities in the early 80’s there has been little in the way of major developments of the NLP model. There have been many developments beyond NLP; chaos theory, fractal structures, fuzzy logic to name a few. As Bateson said in the introduction to Magic I “But, indeed, much that was so difficult to say in 1955 is strikingly easier to say in 1975" p xi. We have moved on a lot since 1975.

Part two of this series will be “Re-Modelling the Meta and Milton models” and include a simple model of conversational belief change that is also a basis for constructive questioning of NLP.


Про упрощение в "системе" мысль интересная

Мысль о том, что любой коллектив как "целое" будет скорее проще/примитивней составляющих его частей — интересна. Та же мысль является пресуппозицией шестишагового рефрейминга — развитие возможно через ээ актуализацию отдельных частей.

  • 1
?

Log in

No account? Create an account