|NLP ARTICLE MENU|
|A flowering of the heart|
|Curing the Heart of Violence|
|Develop Your Psychic Skills|
|Do your thought serve you?|
|Do you have a disaster prep strategy?|
|How much money do you waste?|
|How much time do you waste?|
|How to build confidence in public speaking|
|How to deal with Bulimia|
|How to deal with depression|
|How to explore your past lives|
|How to find your values|
|How to get into flow|
|How to get out of your own way|
|How to increase motivation|
|How to increase your IQ?|
|How to love making the sale|
|How to make better decisions|
|How to overcome chocolate addiction|
|How to quit smoking cigarettes|
|How to quit smoking marijuana|
|How to set a goal and commit|
|How to stop procrastinating|
|How to spell like a pro|
|How to put insomnia to sleep|
|How to quit gambling and get ahead in life|
|How to stop drinking alcohol using NLP and Hypnotherapy|
|How to turn down the heat on your anger|
|How to use 'but' to transform your life|
|How to use acknowledgement to heal addictive behaviour|
|Ideomotor Signals - Finger Signals|
|Meditation for NLP Coaches|
|Natural Therapies First|
|NLP Fast Phobia Cure|
|NLP Meta Model Example in Politics|
|Personality type for Forex traders?|
|Process versus content|
|Rhetoric and debating skills|
|Seven Secrets of Success|
|Stop Coughing With Hypnosis|
|Submodalities to Heal Addictions|
|The Ikaria Effect|
|The millennial tragedy|
|The parable of the lost treasure|
|What is NLP|
|What is the origin of thought?|
|Why learn the NLP Meta Model|
|Read feedback on NLP hypnotherapy Gold Coast Qld|
Phone 07 5562 5718 to book a free 20 minute telephone consultation - or send an email from https://www.abbyeagle.com. Over hundreds of thousands of years the human mind has evolved a structure which has served us up until now. However the Internet has enabled people to self segregate into groups of like minded people - which is probably doing more harm than good.- NLP and Hypnotherapy, Gold Coast...
By Abby Eagle (2017)
In this article I want to give you an overview of my – Why What Do – series of videos. The aim of these interviews is to help bring understanding to why people do what they do. There are a number of factors which play a part in this – life experience, religious background, education, family upbringing, culture and so on but behind all of this is personality type which is based upon values and meta programs.
So typically if you bring a group of people together to discuss a topic on current affairs you will find that the group becomes polarised between political Left and Right. The polarisation is because of a difference in values and meta programs. At times it is important to focus on content but in arguments between the Left and Right our first option should be to take a step back – to acknowledge the differences in values and meta programs which work to form personality type – and to take a risk and look at the topic through the eyes of the other. I am not talking about empathy or standing in someone else’s shoes which is more about how it feels to be the other. Here I am talking more about a fundamental difference in the programming of the mind.
So these conversations are an opportunity to gain an understanding of why people do what they do. Every action is driven by a thought – so to change behaviour we need to understand what it is that drives and motivates people. We can gain an understanding of that structure by mapping out values and meta programs.
Meta Programs are perceptual filters that generally operate out of conscious awareness. They filter perception and determine your preferences in how you think, feel and act. For example, making a decision based upon feelings versus facts and logic is a meta program.
Values work in a similar fashion to meta programs in that they create a frame, a focus, a perceptual filter. Values determine every decision that you make but how you go about making the decision will be based upon your meta programs.
By learning how to recognise values and meta programs we can begin to understand why people do what they do. In doing so we can begin the process of mapping out the structure of peace and reconciliation throughout the world.
In my Why What Do interviews I don’t elicit values and meta programs – what I do is to start with meta programs and values that differentiate political Left from Right – and then ask the guest to choose between one or the other. This gives us some interesting information about how the person thinks.
Now there are heaps of talk show hosts, journalists and interviewers – some are really good – especially some of the guys and girls in the alternative media on youtube – but some are real bad and just perpetuate problems. Let me give you an example. About a week ago I saw Ann Coulter on Bill Maher’s show.
She had just published a book and she said that she was unable to find accurate data on illegal immigration into the US from Latin America so she did her own research and compiled the data from which she drew her conclusions. There was a Latino gentleman on the show. I don’t know whether he was a politician or what but anyway he listens to Ann Coulter then says, “You are wrong”.
Then he says the problem is not how many illegal immigrants there are in the USA but how many of the Latinos in the US are good people. And then he talked about all the positive attributes of the good Latinos.
Ann kept on asking the man to give some specific reasons why her conclusions were wrong. I think he called her some one word names and then continued to talk about how good it feels to be kind to Latinos.
It was a real bad conversation yet typical of conversations between Left and Right in terms of the thinking/feeling meta program. That is, how do you make a decision – is it based upon thinking, facts and logic – or feelings and emotions?
Ann Coulter was operating from the facts and logic end of the meta program – while the man was operating out of feelings and emotions. As long as they stayed at either end of the meta program it would be impossible for them to have an intelligent conversation.
If I had been in Bill Maher’s shoes I would have stopped the conversation. I would describe the meta programs and tell the man that saying, ‘wrong’ without providing any specific reasons why the data is wrong is not an intelligent conversation. That he needed to provide some specific evidence, some data, some hard facts to refute her claims.
I would have also pointed out that by saying wrong and then shifting the topic to illegal immigrants and then shifting the focus from illegal immigrants to how nice some of these people are is just a diversionary tactic which leads the conversation away from facts to his preference for talking about something which makes him feel good.
I would then have asked him if it was more important for him to discuss facts or for him to feel good?
In the Ann Coulter example there are four meta programs which are evident. 1. Facts versus Feelings. 2. Big picture versus Details. 3. Intuition versus Sensing. 4. And Mismatching.
Usually I write the meta program with thinking, facts and logic at the top and feelings and emotions at the bottom but we are better off reversing that. That is because feelings and emotions are abstract and facts are more specific. This lines up with the global meta program – do you prefer the big picture or the details? And we might as well bring in the intuition sensing meta program. Intuitors pay more attention to their gut feelings while sensors pay more attention to the sensory environment.
So when we get someone who preferences feelings, big picture and intuition – and they are in a conversation with someone who is more sensory based and prefers to think through data and facts – then there is no real communication.
What is the solution? If the sensory based person meets the other at the level of feelings –
and if they hold different feelings on the topic then it is going to get real emotional. And a problem with having a feelings based conversation is that everyone involved in that conversation is in trance – and the only way a listener can understand the conversation is to go into trance.
The only solution to political arguments is to bring people out of trance. How do we do that? Well in the context of what I have just talked about – step 1 is to stop the conversation – point out to the people involved that they are using different meta programs or values – then invite the people to understand the meta program distinctions. Once they understand the distinctions then slowly move the conversation forwards. You will need to constantly interrupt and point out which meta programs are being used – otherwise once they get into the content of the conversation they will lose track of the process.
If you have any comments or suggestions for topics that you would like covered please leave them in the comments box below or contact me using the contact form at the top left of this page.
|The secret of high achievers|
|How to build a powerful team|
|Learn the NLP Meta Model|
|How I stopped drinking alcohol.|
|How to coach yourself using NLP.|