Forum Message

Topic: Re:Re:Anchoring with the Unconscious in Mind
Posted by: Michael Carroll
Date/Time: 03/01/2003 00:24:19


You pose excellent questions. Sorry for the slow response – I have been off line for a while enjoying time with my family.

You wrote “Can you give us more insight into the types and intensities of unconscious signals your training group got? I think it would be useful to get some specifics for personal comparison - to make sure we're in tune.”

I was working with the group to elicit unconscious signals that could be verified as involuntary. Such signals come in many kinesthetic submodality ranges dependent on the individual. What we are seeking is that the signal is involuntary i.e the signal has been tested to the extent that it cannot be consciously manipulated.  In the elecitation you are referring to - I was working with a group of 25 people. My purpose of the exercise was to begin the channel of communication between conscious and unconscious specifically through the participants learning how to use verbal questioning and offer frames for the unconscious to offer responses to in the form of signals through the kinesthetic system. In group situations the intensity of the signals naturally are varied.   The exercise was repeated with individuals working in groups of three later in the day.

Re: congruence you wrote is it the same as  “Think of a time when you decided to do something and it was a good decision over time. Anything ranging from deciding to get a sandwich to buying a car. Step back into the memory and pay attention to the kinaesthetics - for me a warm open feeling in  my chest. Ensure you cannot reproduce the signal consciously - and hey presto, you have your congruence signal”

While I see the above can work if the practitioner is skilled at eliciting such states that are  pure. The problem is such past events can be heavily diluted with other representations such as doubt that occurred as part of the process. So one could elicit a state of little value or one that is consciously influenced by the content of the representation for example the sandwich example the state could be diluted with hunger or all sorts of incongruencies associated with food. Or in the case of the car -  a conscious desire to fit some perceived standard that society expects as a part of car ownership.  So I would prefer start from a know nothing state moving to signals that are presented with no content attached.  

Re congruence – using my interpretation of the terminology used in Whispering.  At NLP application courses and in NLP change work when a client expresses he/she  wants to make specific change – the client presents a linguistic mapping of something they consciously want . By effective use of involuntary unconscious signals the person has a system to check that the unconscious mind is in agreement with the conscious mind desire to change. The unconscious signal as I said earlier is presented in the kinesthetic system as a portion of  FA (post linguistic representation). So portions of FA that previously has been unconscious or are brought into consciousness in way that the representation is involuntary.
Saying it another way the kinesthetics of FA and Linguistic representation are in alignment –.

In essence we are teaching people something new, which is to -

a. learn how to get involuntary signals presented in kinesthetic system
b. how to use these signals with conscious dialogue and framing  to verify congruence between conscious and unconscious minds.

You wrote “Now on to anchoring! I usually use what I call "process" states to collapse anchors. For example:A time you were determined to do something and you did it (still a good decision today)”

I am not sure specifically what you mean when you refer to process states. From where I sit all sates are process states – although the labels we use to describe them indicate that some are more process orientated than others, but I think that’s more to do with labeling than what is actually occurring at FA. In whispering Carmen and John state there is not an isomorphic mapping between our linguistic representations and representations at FA which the linguistics representation describes. The labels are often red herrings and certainly inadequate descriptions. So calibration of non verbal behavior is paramount in anchoring as to whether the state is correct for the change work in hand. 

The purpose of anchoring is capturing portions of FA (known in NLP as resources) and applying/pairing these portions with other portions of FA in selected contexts where the resource is deemed to help one have more choice. If the anchoring is successful the new response will occur at FA prior to linguistic representation- and that is the essential key - making sure the anchor fires at FA once the anchoring intervention has been done. There is a significantly  reduced value in a person saying post FA - "oh s**t, I feel like I need to fire my anchor now".

So when someone is plugged into a useful portion FA to capture - you capture with  an anchor. In the example I gave in this thread,  the client was  seeking a resource to counter the kinesthetics of nervousness in group introductions. I was seeking to capture a portion of FA  i.e. the biochemical movement in the organism at  the neurological level which can only be a process. Hence in my opinion when you are working at FA all states are a process orientated.

In the example I gave – I have no knowledge of the content of the state the lady accessed. Her unconscious provided her with the resource, the lady did not access the state through conscious reconstruction. She didn’t access a visual or auditory recalled representation to get to the kinesthetic of the state. Her eyes indicted she just went straight the kinesthetic of the state. From my calibration, she accessed the state first and labeled it after.

You wrote “I got a bit fed up of trainers saying "trust your unconscious mind - that's all you need to do." Fine if you've got the unconscious of a highly skilled trainer! Eventually I reckoned they just couldn't teach the skillsets! As I see it the unconscious is home to both the worst of all our habits AND the best of all our resources. The trick being to combine the two.”

Great comments Lewis. Many people go to NLP trainings to discover strategies to get effective communication between conscious and unconscious mind only to be told to trust their unconscious mind- which is something so far they have failed to do. Or when they attempted to use the so called trust – it did not work out. The key is teaching people strategies to build rapport between conscious and unconscious mind. The games you have been playing, the exercises you have been doing on your practice groups are a great, and the use of switching to peripheral vision so internal dialogue reduces are great way to start the process.

“ If, left to it's own devices, the unconscious hasn't yet come up with a solution that's the best indicator to me that conscious mind involvement in setting up a PROCESS for resolution is inicated.

I see life as dance between conscious and unconscious processing. The conscious mind is  great at tracking our everyday  life experience while the unconscious is useful for providing  off line resources that are way out of conscious reach.  The key is having both parts of the mind working together.

In my opinion in our society we are generally becoming more conscious mind oriented. Look  at the school system for evidence-  as the child matures the activities he/she takes part in that are connected with non dominant processing are significantly  reduced from the curriculum. I see part of my NLP application work as helping people redress the imbalance and start developing effective personal communication between conscious and unconscious mind.

Lewis you wrote  So, how do you know when to trust your unconscious mind Michael? And when not?”

Through my unconscious signals – and guess what Lewis, and I am learning more and more about myself everyday, something I will never stop doing. I make many mis-takes and I do my best to learn from each one tracking my own internal experience.

My conscious mind is a great friend, it sometimes is overwhelmed in our fast society of 2003, but it helps me with all the things that I chose to do in society , like paying bills etc, but it’s my unconscious that provides me verification for congruence that I am making choice that fits with the overall organism called Michael Carroll

Hope the above helps you in part with your excellent questions

All the best for 2003



Entire Thread

TopicDate PostedPosted By
Anchoring with the Unconscious in Mind 24/12/2002 17:53:28Michael Carroll
     Re:Anchoring with the Unconscious in Mind 24/12/2002 18:28:19John Schertzer
          Re:Re:Anchoring with the Unconscious in Mind 25/12/2002 00:44:50Michael Carroll
     Re:Anchoring with the Unconscious in Mind 25/12/2002 00:45:19SMH
          Re:Re:Anchoring with the Unconscious in Mind 25/12/2002 01:07:32Michael Carroll
     Re:Anchoring with the Unconscious in Mind 27/12/2002 21:52:28Lewis Walker
          Re:Re:Anchoring with the Unconscious in Mind 28/12/2002 02:22:54John Grinder
          Re:Re:Anchoring with the Unconscious in Mind 03/01/2003 00:24:19Michael Carroll
               Re:Re:Re:Anchoring with the Unconscious in Mind 03/01/2003 20:57:20Lewis Walker
                    Re:Re:Re:Re:Anchoring with the Unconscious in Mind 16/01/2003 01:03:03Michael Carroll
                         Re:Re:Re:Re:Re:Anchoring with the Unconscious in Mind 16/01/2003 07:40:16kc
                              Re:Re:Re:Re:Re:Re:Anchoring with the Unconscious in Mind 17/01/2003 00:25:16Michael Carroll
                                   Re:Re:Re:Re:Re:Re:Re:Anchoring with the Unconscious in Mind 17/01/2003 08:51:22kc
                                   Re:Re:Re:Re:Re:Re:Re:Anchoring with the Unconscious in Mind 18/01/2003 23:12:20Robert

Forum Home