2nd order change

[John Grinder]

Keith

Suppose that as an operational definition, we decide that an ''ecologocial consequence'' or an ''ecological behavior'' is one (a consequence or a behavior) that takes as input the intentions of the person in the selected context as well as the specific intentions of others who are involved in that same context and any other variables that place constraints on the actors in that context (economic, social, family...) and produces as output a set of behaviors or a set of consequences that meet these requirements.

As a concrete example, George has traditionally responded to any challenge to what he is saying of doing with aggressive behavior in some set of contexts, C, and let's further say, that the consequences of that behavior (aggression) is that he becomes socially isolated (with whatever consequences that in turn yields).

Having been guided effectively through the new code 4 step format, George re-entries the selected the high-performance state associated during the prep work with this set of contexts is automatically reactivated and the unconscious takes into account the various factors mentioned above and selects some new behavior - let's say that George finds himsself interested in the opinions of others (without losing track of his own perceptions and thoughts about it) and exploring them.

In this case, the ecological behavior (curiosity and exploration of the alternative perceptions and thoughts of others) that replaces the original behavior (aggression) leads to consequences that are congruent with George's larger perceptions and choices about respect for others and a desire to actively learn about others and their perceptions and actions in the world. I would then consider these new behaviors ecological with respect to George's perceptions and choices and further that the consequences, dynamic interactions with others, acquisition of new information, participation in a group process... would be judged to be ecological with respect to those same perceptions and choices.

The difficulty, as you I suspect perceive, is that we have this extraordinary pattern of using verbs (or their surface structure derivatives such as adjective, adverbs...) with no indication of the what the deleted arguments of the underlying verb are. Ecological, how specifically, or ecological with respect to what?

All the best,

John 

[Keith]

John,

So... at what point might Triple Description be explored?  Consciously/unconsciously choosing to do so while being guided through the new code format or as one of the behaviours available when next entering the target contexts (when the HPS is activated)?

Or are we to ensure that the player has had sufficient training in doing the Triple Description process before being guided through the new code change format?

Keith

[Robin]

John Grinder

you have written previously,
''I have slowly come to the perception in the last couple of years that the integration of high-performance states (states resulting, for example, from new code games) into an well-developed representation of the context(s) in which the symptom expresses itself is typically adequate. I have done this primarily by leaving out all aspects of the filtering by positive intention that I can identify.''

Now there is at least one profound difference between the two sets of processes (induction and utilization). While the inductions (ala Erickson) are ultimately successful (or not) based on the ability of the hypnotist to use his or her sensory acuity to detect and his or her flexibility to incorporate the client's responses during induction and thus can be usefully understood as an exercise in such utilization, the induction typically begins with some structure (linkage, metaphor...) while the Utilization phase is driven nearly entirely by the responses (typically the non-verbal unconscious physiological responses) of the client to the myriad suggestions, stories and in general the artful use of patterns developed so elegantly by Dr. Erickson and coded by Bandler and me.

So, in these operational-defined senses of the terms, induction and utilization, the closest I can come to what you are proposing is that the at the termination of a well-executed new code change format, the unconscious mind of the player is well-prepared such that subsequent re-entries into the selected context will elicit different behaviors, all of which flow from the automatically unconsciously re-activated high performance state and which most importantly are generated at the time of entry into whatever particular member of the set of selected contexts. In this sense the player's unconscious mind is utilizing the intersection of the high-performance state and the specific cues available in context to generate new and effective behavior.

Then you added later,
''Now there is at least one profound difference between the two sets of processes (induction and utilization). While the inductions (ala Erickson) are ultimately successful (or not) based on the ability of the hypnotist to use his or her sensory acuity to detect and his or her flexibility to incorporate the client's responses during induction and thus can be usefully understood as an exercise in such utilization, the induction typically begins with some structure (linkage, metaphor...) while the Utilization phase is driven nearly entirely by the responses (typically the non-verbal unconscious physiological responses) of the client to the myriad suggestions, stories and in general the artful use of patterns developed so elegantly by Dr. Erickson and coded by Bandler and me.

So, in these operational-defined senses of the terms, induction and utilization, the closest I can come to what you are proposing is that the at the termination of a well-executed new code change format, the unconscious mind of the player is well-prepared such that subsequent re-entries into the selected context will elicit different behaviors, all of which flow from the automatically unconsciously re-activated high performance state and which most importantly are generated at the time of entry into whatever particular member of the set of selected contexts. In this sense the player's unconscious mind is utilizing the intersection of the high-performance state and the specific cues available in context to generate new and effective behavior.''

thanks for the nudge

will report back after a week or so on....

as always the absolute very best

Robin(bIG bIRD)

[kc]

Dr Grinder and Carmen Bostic

I enjoyed your reply to Robin recently here.


Background-
In the past month I have been running around the US launching a new landscape financeprogram. Most lanscapers like other fields/markets in the US are behind when it comes to novel ways of going to market. We are exploring 17 new markets to go for right now by the way beside this market. My philosiphy is the dealers patterns that are being continually presented to me in these rooms are trainings for me to induce my company to go after new future industries to relaunch our oppurtunity to. We have 100,00 dealers now we can go to already and move them along more efficiently.

JG
it jsut seems to me with all the imagination that could be at work at work or being proposed by some pompous CEO'S in this country I would think there would be more open minded workers and business people looking to build and grow their markets but as you know for some reason at this moment there are some but a limited few in comparison to the real oppurtunity your methodlogy called New Code presented offers.

So my task working with my distribution client is to open up their to their 15,000 dealers minds thru these dog and pony presentations demonstrating new ways (vehicles called financing programs)of behaving and looking at there ...

So this week after reading your reply to Robin I decided to walk in on my meetings in Philadelphia,Pittsburgh and Boston in a HPS state and a I don't know state allowing my clients to teach me where to go next.

I found myself slightly uncomfortable with the ideA of knot knowing but I got to tell you, I now more than ever do recognize the value of not knowing. The dealer and client participation was more strinking and defintely more fun.
I think Shemin Nurseries (landscapping financing.com) will ask me to come back soon and train more of their clients.

But I do find myself continuing asking what is my high performance state I wanted/need to set up before I walk into the training rooms.

It looks to me I need to make some adjustment here. Do you have any more advise?

How do you set up yourself sir brfore you go into a training?

Keep up the great work,thoughts and I do appreciate you sharing it all here to the rest of us.

have an all fun weekend

kc

[John Grinder]

kc

You wrote

''I found myself slightly uncomfortable with the ideA of knot knowing''

and

''But I do find myself continuing asking what is my high performance state I wanted/need to set up before I walk into the training rooms.''

There are two possibilities and likely both are involved in appreciating and responding to your questions

1. you are doing something quite new and may be confusing unfamiliarity with discomfort (in the sense of signals from your unconscious that it has some reservations about proceeding with this strategy). You could, for example, use involuntary signals to tease out the distinction. Of course, simply continuing with this strategy will itself sort out this difference if, in fact, it is operative here.

2. the second possibility, which is well worth pursuing in any case, is that when we speak of high-performance states and of know-nothing states, we are in danger of becoming victims of our own verbal productions. Speaking more precisely, it would be far more useful to speak of a set of high-performance states and likewise of a set of know-nothing states.

Let's pursue this second possibility a bit - with the above comment in mind, I understand your statements (listed above) to be more or less,

Which of the members of the set of high-performance states and which of the members of the set of know-nothing states is most appropriate and effective for this particular application (your presentations)?

Here enters the important distinction of intensive definitions - I would urge you to think about (all primary systems) and then write up a list of intensive definitions which together describe your best understanding of what specific member of the intersection of the two sets (the high-performance set and the know-nothing set) would be ideal. Submit this list, itme by itme, to your unconscious and note the involuntaty responses.

This is essentially preparation for the selection of some activity that respects the design variables of new code games and leads more specifically to a state which is optimized for your application. Let me know when you have accomplished this.

BTW, I would be careful about specific public (such as this forum) discussions of such business activities (for example, listing clients) as this is not typically acceptable to clients.

All the best,

John 

[kc]

John in your reply to me you wrote,

''Which of the members of the set of high-performance states and which of the members of the set of know-nothing states is most appropriate and effective for this particular application (your presentations)?

Here enters the important distinction of intensive definitions - I would urge you to think about (all primary systems) and then write up a list of intensive definitions which together describe your best understanding of what specific member of the intersection of the two sets (the high-performance set and the know-nothing set) would be ideal. Submit this list, itme by itme, to your unconscious and note the involuntaty responses.

This is essentially preparation for the selection of some activity that respects the design variables of new code games and leads more specifically to a state which is optimized for your application. Let me know when you have accomplished this.''

I am sorry as I am unfamiliar with your term intensive definitions so I cannot know what to list...


Can you send me an example of a list of
intensive definitions please?

And what is a memeber set which intersects set of HPS and a set  I don't know state.

Thanks sir!

kc'

[John Grinder]

kc

In Whispering, Carmen and I pointed out that there are two explicit strategies for specifying sets

1. an exhaustive listing of all members of the set (extensional definition)

2. the presentation of set-membership rules (intensional definition)

As a concrete example, suppose I offer you a list

1. Trygve Lie, Dag Hammarskjöld, U Thant, Kurt Waldheim, Javier Pérez de Cuéllar, Boutros Boutros-Ghali, Koft Annan

As an alternative to this listing, I could simply say,

2. the secretaries-general of the United Nations.

Notice that the two expressions (the list and the set membership rule definition of the set) are co-extensive and in that sense equivalent. An intensive definition is a well-defined procedure for moving through the world and classifying things as either being in the set or in its compplement set (all things not in the set).

So when I proposed that you ''write up a list of intensive definitions which together describe your best understanding of what specific member of the intersection of the two sets (the high-performance set and the know-nothing set) would be ideal''. I am inviting you to create descriptions of what characteristics you could ideally display in the context of application (your recruiting of clients for your business). Now, the level of specificity is important here. If you simply say, ''all characteristics that would allow me to recruit a minimum of 50% of the potential clients present'', then we have not advanced the discussion usefully - you would have to be more specific (move down tree in the hierarchy of logical levels).

The next point you asked about is the intersection of the two sets the set of all high-performance states and the set of all know-thing states? So, the set of all high-performance would include Aaron Ralston's state while amputating his own right hand to avoid dying, Maria Sharapova's state when serving the tie-breaker in her match in which she defeated Lindsay Davenport, Norgay Tensig and Edmund Hillary in their summitting of Everest,... while the set of all know-nothing states would include everything from drug addicts semi-conscious to the highly disciplined suspension of f2 transforms in modeling...

Some high-performance states are also know-nothing stats (some are not). The intersection of the these two sets is all and only the members of the high-performance set that are ALSO know-nothing states.

Does this work for you?

John

[kc]

Absolutely!

thanks again

)