Question about 3D Mind Rex Sikes Please answer if you can.
HarunGnr
I am a 20 year-old student from Turkey. 5 years ago I was intensely
interested in NLP, thought that it could change world. Well after the
first book I read about it which was a book from Anthony Robbins,I
thought to myself this is nothing but crap. Classical motivational
stuff.. you get motivated but then 3 days later your old lousy self is
back. I left NLP there. Well 4 years later while talking to a friend
who just gave up smoking I met NLP again, actually I wanted to give it
another shot, after all I have tried so many things in the last four
years all crap!! I then started to call every NLP-seminar company that
I found, As far as my discussions with them on the phone most of them
didn't know anything about NLP, they were just uttering terminology
from NLP, one even told me that I could be a trainer since I have a
great voice for gods sake. Then I called this other company which I
will not give the name of, and told them "I am in university, studying
economics but I know I will never be an economist. I will find my
answer someday, since I am a natural born NLPer." They replied saying
that everyone was saying that they are natural born-NLPers, so that I
shouldn't get too excited. I chose that company. That was 10 months
ago. My point here is, there are alot of fuckers all around the
world, using NLP to make money and they pollute the Name of NLP. I was
lucky. And now I work for that company. I have more knowledge then
most of the other so called trainers in Turkey, but I work as a
secretary!(a man secretary :)) I work there for a money like 200$ a
month, just to get involved in the NLP study and I am looking forward
to everything I will learn from all of the geniuses my own teacher,
Rex Sikes, Robert Dilts, Tad James, Bandler, John La valle, David
Gordon, Rossi, J. Zeig, Stephen Gilligan, Brent Geary, M. Erickson,
and also to the things I will provide to people. I can also thank M.
Hall for Meta-states, but not the metastates model,and his overly
nominilized words which make me go into trance immediately.
Okay talking about metastates, think about DILTS' model of beliefs you
know the one with states, experience, values, expectations. Isn't 3D
Mind telling us that we can elicit the state part in the model then
figure parts making that state(it's a metastate then) and if we change
the pieces that make the metastate, then all the other connections
will take care of themselves? The x=y, the connections to values, will
dissolve new ones will come and the expectations will automatically
turn positive. From my understanding, this is what is done. Well is
just changing parts of that state enough to do all this work? Is this
possible? Well then why the hell am I working on cutting all the
connections and connecting it to my core values? I say this literally.
Is it this easy? For skillsets I use the person-behaviour-outcome
model. They worked flawlessly till today,and I think it adresses
everything needed. Not more but more importantly not less. I really
feel change in myself and in the people I "TALK" to.(What do you
expect me to become a therapist with one year of study like those
jerks? I have to use it on my family and friends to see if it's
working) Okay if you can elaborate on this I will be happy. Thanks.
HarunGnr
Tom Vizzini
"HarunGnr" <guner...@hotmail.com> wrote in message
OK I am kind of confused..... Why ask Rex about the 3D Mind?
. Isn't 3D
> Mind telling us that we can elicit the state part in the model then
> figure parts making that state(it's a metastate then) and if we change
> the pieces that make the metastate, then all the other connections
> will take care of themselves?
Nope that has nothing to do with the 3D Mind Model.
The x=y, the connections to values, will
> dissolve new ones will come and the expectations will automatically
> turn positive.
Nope not that either.
From my understanding, this is what is done. Well is
> just changing parts of that state enough to do all this work?
Balancing the dirvers of behavior works.
Is this
> possible? Well then why the hell am I working on cutting all the
> connections and connecting it to my core values?
Good question. Why would you do that?
I say this literally.
> Is it this easy? For skillsets I use the person-behaviour-outcome
> model. They worked flawlessly till today,and I think it adresses
> everything needed. Not more but more importantly not less. I really
> feel change in myself and in the people I "TALK" to.(What do you
> expect me to become a therapist with one year of study like those
> jerks? I have to use it on my family and friends to see if it's
> working) Okay if you can elaborate on this I will be happy. Thanks.
Well Rex has no clue of the 3D Mind and has not been trained in it in any
way. If you want answers I can help you since Kim and I created the 3D Mind
(tm)
Have fun
Tom
--
Tom Vizzini
Real Skills for the Real World
www.essential-skills.com
New members area
3D Mind www.essential-skills.com/3dmind.htm
HarunGnr
I will have to apologize till my post gets deleted. I am not a
native speaker, and I somehow got offended the first time I read it,
and I posted my reply after that, and now I read your post again and
realized I was the one who got offended. Well Okay, would you please
give me an explanation of your system so that I can put it in the
model I have in mind. Does 3D mind work in the level of capabilities
or values and beliefs? Which one will it affect, and where will it fit
in the current NLP models? I will be happy if you can explain me that.
Thank you and skip that last post, wasn't a nice way to meet for the
first time I admit :). Have fun
Harun
Tom Vizzini
> Well, the reason I ask is after alot of reading on this forum, i
> believe he is one of the few who is going to be the one to answer my
> questions based on knowledge and experience, and since I have seen him
> commenting on your programme, it's a high probability that he has
> bought the 70$ set and watched it to see what it actually is.
He does not have the program and has nor used it. You assumption is
incorrect.
And plus
> as the creator, you haven't addressed my questions in a way that I can
> make any meaning of it to see where it fits, and what it does to
> generate the results it claims, and that makes me more glad that I
> have asked the question to Rex Sikes in the first place.
Interesting. Nice projection of what might happen.
>
> Have fun arguing, and don't bother to reply until you have intentions
> like HELPING someone asking you a question(which in my opinion has to
> be the mission of people who work as people-helpers).
Sorry....you have yet to ask me one single question.
Tell you what, Keep your money. I obviously do not fit what you need as a
....people helper.
>
> nice talking to you.
Really....I don't recall the nice part.
--
Tom Vizzini
Real Skills for the Real World
www.essential-skills.com
New members area
3D Mind www.essential-skills.com/3dmind.htm
>
> Harun
>
>
>
>
>
> guner...@hotmail.com (HarunGnr) wrote in message
news:<9194397c.04112...@posting.google.com>...
Tom Vizzini
>
> I will have to apologize till my post gets deleted. I am not a
> native speaker, and I somehow got offended the first time I read it,
> and I posted my reply after that, and now I read your post again and
> realized I was the one who got offended.
OK I should have read your second post before answering your first.
Well Okay, would you please
> give me an explanation of your system so that I can put it in the
> model I have in mind.
Does 3D mind work in the level of capabilities
> or values and beliefs?
Neither. It works on the level of structure. It directly replicates the
physical brain function for creating problems. Then uses that model to
generate powerful changes.
Which one will it affect, and where will it fit
> in the current NLP models?
It does not fit at all into current NLP models. NLP deals with strategy and
building a new reaction to a problem. The 3D Mind deals with structure and
changes the perception of the problem.
I will be happy if you can explain me that.
> Thank you and skip that last post, wasn't a nice way to meet for the
> first time I admit :). Have fun
No problem.
HarunGnr
the
> physical brain function for creating problems. Then uses that model to
> generate powerful changes
> It does not fit at all into current NLP models. NLP deals with strategy and
> building a new reaction to a problem. The 3D Mind deals with structure and
> changes the perception of the problem.
Well, that's interesting. So our brains way of making meaning of
things comes firstly from the states we assosiate to that particular
event. And the thing that keeps us doing will be an abstraction when
we translate it to language. Let's say I become paralyzed whenever I
have to do some public speaking. I call that fear of public speaking
which is an abstraction. However when I Look what is in that
abstraction, I find the components which make them up, and those are
states. So if we think of the public speaking fear as a system, when
we mess up the parts of the system, the whole changes. Very logical.
Okay, waiting about your answer to this, I will ask you where one can
specifically use this? As an important side note: My issue is not to
decide buying your material or not, it is learning something new that
I can use and enrich my, and others' realities. See I am one of those
people who likes to understand the idea behind things to customize it
to my use, and maybe transform it. So let's say I have the goal of
being a powerful person, and I think that I am a weak person. When I
modify the drivers of that "Weak PErson" feeling, how will I know that
it will turn me into the Powerful person, that I have imagined in my
mind?Maybe it will make me someone who is serious or maybe funny, how
will I apply right recipe? The first answer that comes to mind maybe,
elicit the state where you felt powerful and get into it's drivers and
try to change the "week person" drivers into that, which may sound
logical. But, thinking about it, on one hand you have the driver
fear(weak person), on the other the driver self-love(powerful person).
And say you have added acceptance to fear, and self-love to your
acceptance. How will you know that they will be the same feeling. In
the end the feelings are systems, and the whole will change, even if
little parts of it are different from each other.
Getting the exact state,perception that I want: This is the part that
bothers me.
Also as far as I know, doesn't using sleight of mouth and changing
beliefs also change your perceptions? I mean my life has literally
changed from that day I discovered I could use SOM to challange and
modify my value and belief systems. Looking back those days, I see
that the thing that changed significantly was my perceptions of
things.
Thanks in advance,
Harun
Elvis Keith Lester
======================
"Neither. It works on the level of structure. It directly REPLICATES THE
PHYSICAL BRAIN FUNCTION for creating problems. Then uses that model to
generate powerful changes."
Nice hypothesis. :) - We are always "Modeling" -- leading to - Brain
function = Structure -> "Structure" drives "Function" (Behavior).
Is that not NLP?
Brain structure certainly cannot not be involved in the 'functioning'.
Replicating "the physical brain function for creating problems" - well,
that is the stretch here.
Essential structure - shift towards DS - experience the shift -
integrate &/or VALIDATE that... new PS.
Hmmm. Have you seen this before. And with a holographic (3D) way.
DHE does the holographic, 3d (more like 4 d or 5 d).
The original writer refers to "Values & Beliefs" as noted above.
Tom deletes these in response to your question -
Values-Beliefs-Capabilities - as he likely views them as "non-essential"
focus...
Dealing with the structure shifts the calculus (of which Values and
Beliefs - etc. - are involved - they alwas are).
If you have no values then they may not be... :>)
Tom states: "Balancing the dirvers of behavior works."
Values & Beliefs ARE "drivers" of behavior as are Intentions and
Expectations and more. We know that. Determining what drivers are at work is
important.
"Balancing" - maybe, maybe not? We are really just creating another
'set' of these - going on... integrating into the Mix as we wish along the
way.. sometimes not very intentionally, let's say likely more times than
not - we are not directing what we Think-Feel-Evaluate-etc.
(perceive-conceive).
Focusing 'directly' on the structure (which includes several processes at
work) and the perspective'/view (and sub-structure or SET of that) that is
created from that is not new - NLP has been doing this for years.
Working on the "structure" - the formula, recipe, mix, ingredients - the
very elements/components of the experience - leading to 'SET' - is likely
what works.
What we do think-feel-evaluate (how we eValuate) impacts our
experience of reality and leads to other things EMERGING from that MIX.
This is an ongoing and never-ending process that we should "JOIN"
and direct it. We need to aware of and utilizing throughout our lives.
Some of us do not get it (skills/concsiousness) until much later in
life (sometimes when it is too late).
When we shift the "mapping/maps" we are creating & generating a new
filter/"perception" of what we are experiencing (new maps) and thus
Conception shifts as well. Maybe "Map" is not really a good word as it
denotes a more 'static' look. We are always "Mapping" our realities. I refer
to it as "PsyEngineering". Are we not?
We map with Identity, Values, Intentions, Beliefs, Expectations and States
(http://www.IVIBES.com ). This leads to us 'identifying' with those very
same elements (+ or Negative - calibrated to the situation and events or
happenings in our lives (that empower or dis-empower us) - likely in the
past as we are not 'very up-to-date'). We refer to and perceive through
these "structures" - brain functions-pathways activated - (again - likely
older and sometimes "outdated") - we are really continuing to do the
'structuring' (cognitive/mental/emotional/behavioral/physiological/etc.) of
our own realities "in-time". We are the PsyEngineers of our realities.
We are seeing the evolutions of NLP and other people's works daily now.
Regarding Richard Bandler - One thing I can attest to is that he can inspire
others to learn and use NLP/Hypnotics/etc. to make their and others lives
better.
People who glean from Richard's table scraps (what ideas and theories he has
left on the table) abound in synthesis skills and 'original' art and
science. ;)
Give credit where it is due.
Elvis
"Tom Vizzini" <T...@essential-skills.com> wrote in message
news:QZSdnchDNdi...@adelphia.com...
Tom Vizzini
"Elvis Keith Lester" <lear...@tampabay.rr.com> wrote in message
news:CC1pd.64059$8G4....@tornado.tampabay.rr.com...
> Tom makes a A "WILD" Claim ---
> ======================
> "Neither. It works on the level of structure. It directly REPLICATES THE
> PHYSICAL BRAIN FUNCTION for creating problems. Then uses that model to
> generate powerful changes."
>
> Nice hypothesis. :) - We are always "Modeling" -- leading to - Brain
> function = Structure -> "Structure" drives "Function" (Behavior).
> Is that not NLP?
>
> Brain structure certainly cannot not be involved in the 'functioning'.
Hi Elf,
The level of your cluelessness is astounding. So much of your post is
inaccuarate rambling that it is hard to reply to. Let me try a few key
points...
>
> Replicating "the physical brain function for creating problems" -
well,
> that is the stretch here.
> Essential structure - shift towards DS - experience the shift -
> integrate &/or VALIDATE that... new PS.
> Hmmm. Have you seen this before. And with a holographic (3D) way.
> DHE does the holographic, 3d (more like 4 d or 5 d).
Geeze...another claim of what DHE does. There is no structure to DHE. It is
truly the seminar about nothing. Unless you can get specific as to HOW DHE
does this...it is all hype without substance.
If you have any understanding of the physical brain and how brain chemistry
reacts to generate neural connections, you would not be off in la la land
quoting theory.
>
> The original writer refers to "Values & Beliefs" as noted above.
> Tom deletes these in response to your question -
> Values-Beliefs-Capabilities - as he likely views them as "non-essential"
> focus...
> Dealing with the structure shifts the calculus (of which Values
and
> Beliefs - etc. - are involved - they alwas are).
> If you have no values then they may not be... :>)
Again blatantly stupid. Values are simply a non issue. Capabilities are a
non issue. In no way do I ever suggest that they do not exist. The brain is
not calculus. It is not a computer and equations do not apply. That is a
simplistic metaphor used my the ignorant to exaplain something they have no
clue about.
>
> Tom states: "Balancing the dirvers of behavior works."
> Values & Beliefs ARE "drivers" of behavior as are Intentions and
> Expectations and more. We know that. Determining what drivers are at work
is
> important.
> "Balancing" - maybe, maybe not? We are really just creating another
> 'set' of these - going on... integrating into the Mix as we wish along the
> way.. sometimes not very intentionally, let's say likely more times than
> not - we are not directing what we Think-Feel-Evaluate-etc.
> (perceive-conceive).
Again the stupidity is stunning. Without ANY working knowledge of the 3D
Mind model, Elf attempts to claim he understand it. Instead we get parroted
jargon and pop new age theory quotes.
>
> Focusing 'directly' on the structure (which includes several processes
at
> work) and the perspective'/view (and sub-structure or SET of that) that is
> created from that is not new - NLP has been doing this for years.
Where? See here is the problem. You have no clue what I am referring to. You
sort what I am saying through you NLP goggles and come up with no
understanding. NLP focuses on the same area as hypnosis. That is installing
a new program which is running in the reactive part of the brain. It works
on strategy which is all reactive brain function. The swish.....new reaction
to old stimulus. Anchor collapse.....new reaction to old stimulus.
Reframing.....new reaction to old stimulus. Phobia Cure.....new reaction to
old stimulus. Core transformations.....new reaction to old stimulus. All
these things affect only the reactionary part of the brain and do not tap
into the creative/adaptive area of the brain that generate more choice.
>
> Working on the "structure" - the formula, recipe, mix, ingredients - the
> very elements/components of the experience - leading to 'SET' - is likely
> what works.
Likely? You still have no clue what you are talking about.
> What we do think-feel-evaluate (how we eValuate) impacts our
> experience of reality and leads to other things EMERGING from that MIX.
> This is an ongoing and never-ending process that we should "JOIN"
> and direct it. We need to aware of and utilizing throughout our lives.
> Some of us do not get it (skills/concsiousness) until much later
in
> life (sometimes when it is too late).
WTF? New age babbling crap. Makes no sense. Try again in english.
>
> When we shift the "mapping/maps" we are creating & generating a new
> filter/"perception" of what we are experiencing (new maps) and thus
> Conception shifts as well. Maybe "Map" is not really a good word as it
> denotes a more 'static' look. We are always "Mapping" our realities. I
refer
> to it as "PsyEngineering". Are we not?
Nope 3D Mind has nothing to do with maps. Nice try though.
Try this Elf. Actually learn about what you are trying to discuss. That
could save you a lot of embarrasment.
SluttyFox
> physical brain function for creating problems. Then uses that model to
> generate powerful changes.
I take you are a neurosurgeon? Wow! Maybe you should write a paper and
share with the doctors of the world. They still can't figure out how the
brain works , and you did it for 70 old dollars. Most Impressive.
>
Elvis Keith Lester
Over-Emotional
No reply was asked for...
Equations do apply in this case...
Regardless of Tom's rants and namecalling, poor and lack of
judgment, Value-Meaning Assignment is going on in the equation.
As if Tom "knows" what is accurate...
The word 'audacity' comes to mind.
Tom draws both from/on NLP & DHE and should Respect it.
It appears Tom didn't get the 'calculus' comment/metaphor. I find no need to
apologize for using it. ;)
The stuff Tom doesn't understand or can't make sense out of or chooses
not to attend to, well that is Tom's prerogative. Wasn't it.
BTW it's... Elves
Hookah
trying to read this post NLP has become so mumble jumbled, what on earth
are you trying to say, say it in english, in laymens terms so that new
people here can understand just how fucken stupid you really are. I
guess when you become a trainer you have to talk like a moron so that no
one can guess how stupid you are and be simply amazed at your seemingly
intelligent posts.
Elvis Keith Lester wrote:
>Tom makes a A "WILD" Claim ---
>======================
>
That your a dumbass? No wild claim there, your post here is evident of that.
>"Neither. It works on the level of structure. It directly REPLICATES THE
>PHYSICAL BRAIN FUNCTION for creating problems. Then uses that model to
>generate powerful changes."
>
Whar oh Whar did you get that horse pucky?
>
> Nice hypothesis. :) - We are always "Modeling" -- leading to - Brain
>function = Structure -> "Structure" drives "Function" (Behavior).
> Is that not NLP?
>
Sorry, but damn your stupid. Now I know your always modeling pink tutu's
but set that aside for one minute.
Everything is context driven and the situation involved, depending on if
it is in the creative/adaptive or reptilan brain.
Structure does not always drive behavior, behavior can drive itself,
sometimes. No, it is not NLP.
>
>Brain structure certainly cannot not be involved in the 'functioning'.
>
Hahahahahahahahhahahahahhahahahhahahhahahaha, Oh Man that is a good one,
hahahahahahahahhahahah, shows you how much you
know..hahahahahahahahahahhahaha geez, ever think about becoming a
comedian, shouldn't be hard because your already a clown.
>
> Replicating "the physical brain function for creating problems" - well,
>that is the stretch here.
> Essential structure - shift towards DS - experience the shift -
>integrate &/or VALIDATE that... new PS.
> Hmmm. Have you seen this before. And with a holographic (3D) way.
>DHE does the holographic, 3d (more like 4 d or 5 d).
>
You take acid again Elvis? Who is replicating anything? When you have a
problem state, the physical brain goes thru a series of neuron firings
to produce what we call thought, stimuli comes into the brain, then
depending on weather there is threat or not detemines where it goes,
thus producing a behavior, or in your case more scratching of your nuts.
Let me put it in a way even you can understand.
Stimulus + Context + beliefs = behavior, it is that simple.
>
>The original writer refers to "Values & Beliefs" as noted above.
> Tom deletes these in response to your question -
>Values-Beliefs-Capabilities - as he likely views them as "non-essential"
>focus...
> Dealing with the structure shifts the calculus (of which Values and
>Beliefs - etc. - are involved - they alwas are).
> If you have no values then they may not be... :>)
>
I got news for you, the logical levels produced from NLP are again more
NLP bullshit. Beliefs and values are actually the same thing, because
what you value, is a belief about what you value, mission is about what
you believe about yourself, capabilites are again what you believe to be
true about yourself. Is this too simple for you to understand?
>
>Tom states: "Balancing the dirvers of behavior works."
> Values & Beliefs ARE "drivers" of behavior as are Intentions and
>Expectations and more. We know that. Determining what drivers are at work is
>important.
> "Balancing" - maybe, maybe not? We are really just creating another
>'set' of these - going on... integrating into the Mix as we wish along the
>way.. sometimes not very intentionally, let's say likely more times than
>not - we are not directing what we Think-Feel-Evaluate-etc.
>(perceive-conceive).
>
OMG...Elvis...I got one question for you? Have you seen the 3-D Mind,
apparently not. Balancing the drivers of a behavior can work if there is
no belief there, if there is a belief then you work from that Logical (
I know you understand that term ) Level.
resolve the belief, behavior change is automatic. Beliefs drive the
behavior, but intentions and expectations? Well I suppose if I told you
that your big toe was a driver, then according to that pre-sup you'd go
looking for it. I think again this is too simple for you to get it.
>
> Focusing 'directly' on the structure (which includes several processes at
>work) and the perspective'/view (and sub-structure or SET of that) that is
>created from that is not new - NLP has been doing this for years.
>
We are talking drivers, your talking about sub-modalites, there is a
hugh difference, the only thing I can agree upon is that taking apart
thing, but then again you should understand how this works now, but
again, I'm betting it's too simple for you.
>
>Working on the "structure" - the formula, recipe, mix, ingredients - the
>very elements/components of the experience - leading to 'SET' - is likely
>what works.
>
Ummm, no, why because you and other NLP'ers work with sub-modalites all
the time and it is not consistant, but there again we work with a
different set of things than anything in NLP.
> What we do think-feel-evaluate (how we eValuate) impacts our
>experience of reality and leads to other things EMERGING from that MIX.
>
WRONG.......damn Elvis, do you lay in bed at night while rover bops the
old lady while your thinking this stupid shit up?
Your supposed to be the smart one but your still not getting it, I'll
tell you the secret at the end, and I'll bet you still won't get it.
> This is an ongoing and never-ending process that we should "JOIN"
>and direct it. We need to aware of and utilizing throughout our lives.
> Some of us do not get it (skills/concsiousness) until much later in
>life (sometimes when it is too late).
>
How the fuck would you know that? Kids are far smarter than you any day
of the week and twice on sunday. That is a really bad generalization to
be spewing out to those reading this. What are you trying to say, people
are stupid? People are just not smart enough to be enlightened like you
or won't get it till later in life like you because your such a dumbass?
>
>When we shift the "mapping/maps" we are creating & generating a new
>filter/"perception" of what we are experiencing (new maps) and thus
>Conception shifts as well. Maybe "Map" is not really a good word as it
>denotes a more 'static' look. We are always "Mapping" our realities. I refer
>to it as "PsyEngineering". Are we not
>
I agree, but yes maps is a bad choice of words, filters is good,
psyengineering sounds like a frankenstein movie.
>
>We map with Identity, Values, Intentions, Beliefs, Expectations and States
>(http://www.IVIBES.com ). This leads to us 'identifying' with those very
>same elements (+ or Negative - calibrated to the situation and events or
>happenings in our lives (that empower or dis-empower us) - likely in the
>past as we are not 'very up-to-date'). We refer to and perceive through
>these "structures" - brain functions-pathways activated - (again - likely
>older and sometimes "outdated") - we are really continuing to do the
>'structuring' (cognitive/mental/emotional/behavioral/physiological/etc.) of
>our own realities "in-time". We are the PsyEngineers of our realities.
>
Sorry, hate to burst your bubble, but all of that mean exactly nothing
without something, which again at the end I will tell you the secret.
No, we are not PsyEngineers of our realites, are phobic people in charge
of their realities? Are Schizophrenic's Phychotic engineers of their
realities? In-Time, thru-time 3-d Mind eliminates most of the bullshit
because it really is not that important.
>
>We are seeing the evolutions of NLP and other people's works daily now.
>
I'm seeing the same old shit repackaged
>
>Regarding Richard Bandler - One thing I can attest to is that he can inspire
>others to learn and use NLP/Hypnotics/etc. to make their and others lives
>better.
>
I guess you must have your Polyanna filters on.
>
>People who glean from Richard's table scraps (what ideas and theories he has
>left on the table) abound in synthesis skills and 'original' art and
>science. ;)
>Give credit where it is due.
>
The biggest one being buyers remorse.
Now here is the secret I promised you, Everything is driven by emotion,
with out emotions, you can not have a phobia or Schizophrenia, you can
not be in a flow state or in the zone. This is where 3-D Mind vastly
differs from NLP, this is also why most NLP doesn't work most of the
time in the hands of people who only have limited experience or even
trainers, because your messing with the structure of any given state
leaving out the most important aspect of all........THE EMOTIONS.
This is why two hours of 3-D Mind tape is better ( and cheaper ) than
10 days of NLP training. Because it is simple and most get it, and can
make some real lasting changes in minutes without the help of the guru
trainers. Some need a little extra help, most of them being NLP'ers,
but that is why Tom has a list for that, so they can talk about things
and get any help they need.
UnKaH
But Elvis we still love you even though your a dickhead
Hookah
UnKaH
Joe Bloggs
trainer of the future?) would attack another trainer who doesn't share the
same philosophy as you.
In fact it seems that a high majority of the postings here are along these
lines. Good thing Myron has done a great
job "flushing vermin".
Take a look at the disaster in his wake:
David Gould
Nick Kunt Kemp and all his personalities
Jonathan Flim Flam Altfeld
The only ones remaining are those that have no shame, less intelligence, and
nothing to sell and therefor are not affected in any way financially (ie;
bartenders) ;-) or potheads like Michaela, Gentle Spirit, etc.
Interesting how this newsgroup works.
"Elvis Keith Lester" <lear...@tampabay.rr.com> wrote in message
news:rH3pd.29582$Oc.2...@tornado.tampabay.rr.com...
Greg Alexander
"Hookah" <monst...@alltel.net> wrote:
> When you have a problem state, the physical brain goes thru a series
> of neuron firings to produce what we call thought, stimuli comes into
> the brain, then depending on weather there is threat or not detemines
> where it goes, thus producing a behavior
Well, it depends on more than just threat or not, but basically yes.
> Let me put it in a way even you can understand.
> Stimulus + Context + beliefs = behavior, it is that simple.
How broad a scope do you give a belief?
I mean: Stimulus+Context, + neural pathway => behaviour
Do you consider any neural pathway to be a belief?
Otherwise we restrict beliefs to a certain subset of neural pathways and to
accept your premise, we have to assume that the other neural pathways have
no significant effect on behaviour. Right?
> I got news for you, the logical levels produced from NLP are again more
> NLP bullshit.
Are you talking about Dilts' neurological levels, or logical levels?
I take it that in you're work you've seen no advantages in using higher
logical levels for change. I think I've seen you say some stuff on
intentions and behaviours, so you are aware of what we mean by them, and
just don't agree that they are valuable?
I'm wondering about an interesting cross over for Intentions/Behaviours, and
work on beliefs:
When we work with intentions - we start with someone doing a behaviour.
We ask them their intention, something that's even more important than the
behaviour itself. We ask them other behaviours that might fulfill that
intention.
We end up changing a belief from
- "Doing this behaviour is how I'll get what I value"
To
- "What I value can be achieved through many behaviours"
Any reframe really is a new way of looking at something.
Would you consider a reframe a type of belief change?
>> Tom states: "Balancing the dirvers of behavior works."
>> Values & Beliefs ARE "drivers" of behavior as are Intentions and
>> Expectations and more. We know that. Determining what drivers are at work is
>> important.
>> "Balancing" - maybe, maybe not? We are really just creating another
>> 'set' of these - going on... integrating into the Mix as we wish along the
>> way.. sometimes not very intentionally, let's say likely more times than
>> not - we are not directing what we Think-Feel-Evaluate-etc.
>> (perceive-conceive).
Hi Elvis,
Are you saying that Values, Beliefs, Expectations, Intentions are all part
of the mix, and adjusting any will affect anything else?
If so I would only disagree in so much some of these things may not be part
of the pattern - so only changing something that's part of the pattern would
be effective.
Working with the positive intention to achieve change presupposes that there
is something even more important about a behaviour (the intention) that is
an integral part of the behaviour's pattern.
UnKaH replied:
> Balancing the drivers of a behavior can work if there is
> no belief there,
I assume you are referring to intention (etc) here??
> Beliefs and values are actually the same thing, because
> what you value, is a belief about what you value, mission is about what
> you believe about yourself, capabilites are again what you believe to be
> true about yourself.
From that, wouldn't it also follow that Beliefs and Seeing are the same
thing, because really what you see is a belief about what you see?
Is a capability what you are capable of, or what you believe you are capable
of?
> resolve the belief, behavior change is automatic. Beliefs drive the
> behavior, but intentions and expectations?
Change ANY pattern that is an integral part of the larger behaviour pattern,
and behaviour change is automatic, right?
I'm still playing with your example of imagining a guy I get annoyed with
and changing his clothes into a dress - the beliefs about guys who wear
dresses conflicting with beliefs about the guy to form a totally new state.
I still like that, I think there is value in bringing 2 conflicting beliefs
together to make a change.
I just also think beliefs are just one place to operate from.
Thanks,
Greg
HarunGnr
logic, and decided to learn about this.Until you came. What kind of a
trainer are you? What's with your fancy language? You talk to your
clients like that? If you don't come to provide people with an answer
why bother coming here? I have written a whole paragraph about 3dmind
above and not a single one of you have answered it yet. Just fighting
each other. I have not ever seen one trainer in Turkey, who insults
people and gets insulted like this by people. This forum lost my
trust, nothing but grownup babyboys fighting. Have fun kids. And don't
bother posting a reply unless you want to answer my last post.
Harun
"SluttyFox" <m...@laughingatyou.com> wrote in message news:<jw2mmjhyf8m2peu.241120041216@gso-scotty>...
Greg Alexander
> And say you have added acceptance to fear, and self-love to your
> acceptance. How will you know that they will be the same feeling. In
> the end the feelings are systems, and the whole will change, even if
> little parts of it are different from each other.
> Getting the exact state,perception that I want: This is the part that
> bothers me.
I'm interested in that myself, it's a good question and seems related to the
issue of emergence. If the parts are changed in certain ways, is it
predictable what kind of new state emerges from these changes?
Or in similar words, is there a certain level you need to work at in order
to ensure that the changes you make are acceptable to you as a whole?
Thanks,
Greg
Ps. On a personal note, thank you for asking your question, I'm learning
even if I have to weed through some of the noise.
Tom Vizzini
"SluttyFox" <m...@laughingatyou.com> wrote in message
news:jw2mmjhyf8m2peu.241120041216@gso-scotty...
Here is the appearent difference between you and I. I never stopped
learning.
I have been working with Dr. Ken Guiffre. Harvard, Jons Hopkins and 7 years
of brain research. There are many aspects of the brain that they can
explain. I suggest you do at least as much research as I have and get back
to me.
Tom Vizzini
> Typical Tom response.
> Over-Emotional
Again.....Zero information and all output. There was no emotion in my
response at all.
>
> No reply was asked for...
Ok so no response was asked for by you but you did anyway.
>
> Equations do apply in this case...
> Regardless of Tom's rants and namecalling, poor and lack of
> judgment, Value-Meaning Assignment is going on in the equation.
>
> As if Tom "knows" what is accurate...
> The word 'audacity' comes to mind.
Look....criticize all you want but...at least be informed about what you are
critisizing. Not to do so is stupid. That is not name calling...it is fact.
>
> Tom draws both from/on NLP & DHE and should Respect it.
Nope not one single bit.
>
> It appears Tom didn't get the 'calculus' comment/metaphor. I find no need
to
> apologize for using it. ;)
The brain is not an equation nor a computer. That metaphor stinks and always
has.
> The stuff Tom doesn't understand or can't make sense out of or chooses
> not to attend to, well that is Tom's prerogative. Wasn't it.
Thanks for the instructive response. You could not refute anything I said
nor confirm any claim you made. As usual your post was totally content free
and shows a great degree of ignorance of neurochemistry and brain function.
Try this. Instead of being a mouthpiece....educate yourself and stop looking
foolish.
See ya Elf,
Hookah
Hookah
is being sarcastic, yet you say nothing of it. Wow, I can see what side
your camels ass is buttered on. If you follow the other threads, it is
being discussed, but if you think for one minute, I am going to just
stand there and do nothing while they attack my friends, ain't gonna happen.
UnKaH
HarunGnr
I definitely agree with you that 3DMind offers a structure of change
far more elegant and powerful than most of the techniques that NLP
founders or trained people have devised over the years.
You wrote:
> NLP Phobia cure and 3D mind's way of curing it are structurally different.
> First, 3D mind way is simpler. NLP is more arcane, more of an effort to do
> things. Secondly, a 16 year old can do 3D mind without a large amount of NLP
> education or any for that matter. Lastly, 3D Mind is more broad and
> applied to different areas.
We can appreciate your comparison of the NLP Phobia cure and 3D Mind.
Two sentences later, you state that NLP is more arcane. It all depends
on what we agree NLP stands for. If we understand NLP to be a research
and modeling approach and methodology as devised by the founders,
comparing NLP and 3D Mind is an inadequate effort. 3D Mind is a
changework model that stands its own ground along with the Milton
Model, Swish Patterns, Phobia Cure, Provocative Therapy, Gestalt,
etc... People may or may not agree that it's more or less powerful
and/or easy to learn than other changework models. To make an
effective comparison between 3D Mind and anything involving NLP, we
must limit ourselves to the changework techniques designed by NLP
founders and/or practicioners. Otherwise we'd be saying that an elk's
antlers are superior to a whole elephant. Without being situated in
the proper context, that affirmation remains vague at best.
You wrote:
> NLP changes how a person views a situation, 3D mind removes the fear. Thus,
> the individual gets better results, more broad results, and a tool that they
> can use anywhere they need to.
In that sentence, you write that NLP changes how a person views a
situation. So does the 3D Mind. Pulling out the state and picking
apart the drivers is, in my opinion, an outstanding way of changing
how a person views a situation. And to use Tom Vizzini's own words,
the 3D Mind technique doesn't remove the fear but balances it out by
adding resources.
We can really enrich our perspective of both NLP as a whole and the 3D
Mind by accurately situating them. NLP is a modeling technology and
the 3D Mind is a changework model. To effectively promote the 3D Mind,
we can peg it against existing changework models. If we wish to
evaluate it against models and techniques devised from NLP variables,
then state those techniques. For instance, "works better than the
Swish Pattern" or "way more effective than the phobia cure" or "light
years beyond the change history pattern". I, for one, can agree with
all of these opinions and many more regarding the greater
effectiveness of the 3D Mind as a changework model.
Unless I misunderstood something from the flood of posts regarding the
3D Mind, the purpose of the model that Tom and Kim designed is not to
model excellence but to balance out limiting states, behaviors and
beliefs.
NLP is a code and a methodology and not much beyond that. It's just a
set of variables created for the purpose of creating an explicit map
of how ouststanding people exercise their talent in order to replicate
it. Think of it as HTML or C++. After that, others thought: "Let's use
that code to build other stuff!" And they used it in the changework
arena (and others) and produced all kinds of techniques. Just like
you'd use HTML. You can use it to build cool sites and also crappy
sites. Some say that Flash is more powerful than HTML. If you want
animation and movement, it certainly is. If a crisp and sharp online
brochure is what will give you the results you're after, maybe it
isn't. It all depends.
We're conditioned to think of NLP as changework because the founders
initially modeled therapists. Others then extrapolated the variables
they distilled into different fields of communication (motivation,
persuasion, seduction, training, teaching, therapy and many others).
But the point of NLP is to also replicate and encode the results
produced by Stevie Ray Vaughan, Ronaldo (soccer star), John Grisham,
and state-of-the-art cooks. Whether we agree that those are worthwhile
pursuits or not is a different story, but that was and still is the
intent of NLP (Drs. Bandler and Grinder, please correct me if I'm
wrong).
In a nutshell, I think that we can greatly enrich our dialogue by
accurately situating the fields. NLP is not changework, it's a
methodology, tool, and jargon for modeling excellence (just as
newtonian physics is a methodology, tool and jargon for modeling of
space/matter). 3D Mind is a technology for change. I tell Robert
Johannson from SvenskNLP the same thing. The Riggio Model kicks ass,
but it's not beyond NLP. It's beyond a series of changework techniques
created from NLP-distilled variables.
If Tom and Kim are change wizards, let's model them. If Robert is a
change wizard, let's model him. That's the point in NLP. Remember,
Milton Erickson was never able to transmit the use of his patterns as
effectively as Grinder and Bandler were.
HTML and Flash. C++, Java, Visual Basic. I'm looking for new codes and
methodologies to model excellence with. If someone has one that allows
me to do more than what I can do with NLP, let me know.
Rock on!
Martin
"Tom Vizzini" <T...@essential-skills.com> wrote in message news:<p6GdnQr3Rsx...@adelphia.com>...
HarunGnr
before I am not a native speaker, and I don't know any of you, and
plus I have used the word grown up baby-boys which is plural, not
singular. And also as far as I have read, you are the only one posting
things that are ridicolous in language. And your intention is clear,
defending your friend(and use any kind of language to accomplish it).
So your answer will not be valueable to me anyways.(how about that to
outframe your thoughtvirus that says I am on the other side) Being a
friend, and a therapist are seperate. The forum's name is
alt.psychology.nlp not alt.friendship.nlp, so the logical thing to do,
in my opinion, would be speaking of NLP, psychology or 3DMind etc.;
whatever is useful for the context of therapeutic change. Anyways as a
model of therapeutic change, I find the 3D mind model interesting.
Will try it, and post my results.
Harun
Hookah <monst...@alltel.net> wrote in message news:<fWopd.11619$Uq3....@fe39.usenetserver.com>...
HarunGnr
I came to some conclusions. I think that people who say 3Dmind Model
is nothing new is missing a point. 3D mind Model is a model for how
the brain works phsyically and chemically. Our brains would have
worked this way even if we didn't have language, and were not-speaking
creatures. Associated states are in my point of view are the primary
way brain does any learning. What this means in my thought is that 3D
mind model is an extention to NLP's way of thinking, in that it also
mentions about the psyhical aspect of the brain and what chemicals are
doing what to makes us feel the way we do. Moreover, I also want to
mention that NLP also do change chemicals and Neurological paths or
else we wouldn't feel different. For instance, if you change a belief
you also change the drivers of the state that holds the belief. In
other words you break the adrenalin\dopamine cycle and put the
creative\adaptive part back in the equation again. And as another
example, if you use the NLP way of curing phobias, they are cured
also. 3d mind does it, and NLP does it too. Why? Because they both
change the states.(and the drivers are modified automatically) So what
may be different in 3D mind TECHNIQUE(beware that the term "3dmind
model" is different in my jargon) that is used? I think where there
isn't any language, and things done with NLP don't work, 3D mind will
have an advantage, since it will use the primary way of brain to
change. No need for language. What are your views?
Harun
guner...@hotmail.com (HarunGnr) wrote in message news:<9194397c.04112...@posting.google.com>...