Carding 4 Carders
Professional
Fragment of the seminar of John Grinder in Moscow (2004), devoted to the issues of the conscious-unconscious interface.
Question from the audience: how to understand if our unconscious is organized well enough?
Answer: This person has a good sense of language. It has a good bullshit detector. He identified the phrase well. The unconscious: when is it well organized? And until we give a definition, this statement does not mean anything. I propose to develop such linguistic patterns.
What does this symbol mean? (Draws) Frame. What is a frame? I am the luder of the band and I start the show. If I don't frame it, you don't know how you can intelligently participate. We are in the frame and the frame is what we are talking about modeling. And this frame sets some space and it defines what is important and what is not important. If you ask me a question about Milton Erickson's personal life in this frame, if I am in a good mood, then I will answer “it is difficult for me to understand how this question relates to the frame under discussion”. And if I am in a bad mood, I will answer "it has nothing to do with the case." And that frame defines what we define as important. [another richly illustrated example follows, which I omit because I consider it insignificant in this box]
Now I can answer this question. And I use in my answer what I answered you when you asked how to protect yourself during the modeling process. If you have a good relationship with your unconscious, there is no problem, you just ask the question. But if you are just starting, if you are just starting this crazy venture, you have just concluded this conspiracy in the name of perfection between the conscious and the unconscious, then before you enter the second position, you set a frame for your unconscious. “Unconscious, my inner brother. I want to model with the method of unconscious assimilation. My genius is this and that. I know that this man or woman is perfect in one context. And who knows if they are worthy of modeling in other contexts? I don't want to find out. I ask you: I want you to help me filter out what which could be dangerous for my health and well-being. And I ask the first question: "Do you understand my request?" And I get an answer, "yes" or "no". And it only matters if this answer is unconscious. And if the answer comes no, I go into further explanations until I get the answer yes. If the answer comes yes, I ask the following question: Will you take responsibility for using this filter to protect us? We set the framework, and then we send the request. The use of intense definitions (ie criterial descriptions of contexts), as I described earlier, is one way to correctly ask the unconscious a question. There are tons of others, but this seems to be the simplest. It all depends on whether there is rapport between the conscious and the unconscious. If you have a history of conflict between the conscious and the unconscious, if you have a history of ignoring the advice of the unconscious, you better be on your guard, you need to do some serious work to organize an effective team of conscious and unconscious ...
And this is a rather formal task and you use unconscious signals for this. It looks like this procedure is available to anyone with enough discipline to follow the steps. And this is a natural way that leads to an ever-increasing rapport between the conscious and the unconscious. And if you go this way and do it well, you will eventually realize that the procedure I described is an artificial ritual. Once you have achieved sufficient rapport, you can get rid of it. Any pattern that exists in you need to do some serious work to organize an effective team of conscious and unconscious. And this is a rather formal task and you use unconscious signals for this. It looks like this procedure is available to anyone with enough discipline to follow the steps. And this is a natural way that leads to an ever-increasing rapport between the conscious and the unconscious. And if you go this way and do it well, you will eventually realize that the procedure I described is an artificial ritual. Once you have achieved sufficient rapport, you can get rid of it.
Many years ago I had a bad experience, I fell off a cliff and I broke my ankle. And I had a plaster cast, which was needed to fix the bone, so that it healed well. And I had a cane to walk with. But now the bone has grown together. Do you see the plaster cast? Can you see the cane? If you are still doing the ritual patterns that you originally learned in NLP, you are still holding with a cane and in a cast. We have a technical term for this, it's called stupidity. But you are much smarter than that (Applause).
