Topic: | Re:Re:Re:Re:Re:Re:Re:Re:Re:Re:Re:ethics (metaphor) |
Posted by: | carrie |
Date/Time: | 24/10/2003 13:47:49 |
Todd, you ask, "do you think that it is possible to introduce a metaphor that the client will map OVER to their model of the world without mapping the content of your metaphor ON TO their model of their world?" Yes, I do. But it is still introducing a content and you simply can not ensure that a client won't map any content across. For me, that's great. I love using metaphors. I agree that working with a very specific type of metaphor in a specific context in which the metaphor is introduced will lessen the tendency for the client to map across all content, but there is always the chance that a client will be compelled to think further about the content or to, unconsciously, be influenced by the content itself. I think that doesn't have to be a problem, ethically or procedurally. Carrie P.S. I think Matt's questions regarding Milton are very interesting because I can think of many examples in which Milton needed the client to map the cotent across as well. What do fellow NLPers think about Milton's use of content and ethics? |