|Posted by:||Martin Messier|
I am absolutely fascinated. I submerged myself in NLP about a year ago and got mired in the "Richard side." Oddly enough, I just recently read more on John's approach to NLP, and discovered a whole new side to it. His -- and also Carmen's -- sharp (almost razor) focus on modeling makes so much sense, and I'm surprised not to have stumbled upon it before.|
I hallucinate that many people in the NLP community have become stuck in "abouting." About NLP, about new models, about this and that. As a result, I got myself stuck in developing some more "meta" models instead of going out and beefing up my life with some practical uses and primary models. Once again, short on modeling skills.
Quite frankly, I'm very surprised -- and slightly disappointed -- that most Practicioner courses teach applications of NLP and not the modeling process itself.
Are there two sides to modeling, a digital side, and an analogous one? Digital, where strategies are explicitly unpacked and installed. Analogous, where the modeler develops unconscious competence prior to making the strategy explicit.
Aside from Whispering in the Wind, what else can I read on the subject of unconscious modeling? An article discussed this process very briefly, describing how John had to prepare and set up "contextual markers" before he could commit his neurology to becoming Milton Erickson. This may be an exaggeration, but made me curious nonetheless. Also, could this be compared to what Castaneda refers to as stalking, or the fixating of the assemblage point on another position?
I know I'm all over the place, but I'm like a kid in a new playpen with tons of new toys!
Rock on, folks!
|Topic||Date Posted||Posted By|
|Abouting||29/07/2002 20:51:54||Martin Messier|
|Re:Abouting||29/07/2002 23:00:53||Carmen Bostic and John Grinder|