If you want to convince people what you want them to the Conversational Hypnosis course is the best one around. Get people to do what you want including …

- How to get people to follow your lead – How to close a sale – How to get your kids and teens to listen to you – How to get respect from coworkers and friends – How to increase sales and get customers and clients to say yes – How to read people’s minds.

Learn how to hypnotize someone using simple techniques, tips and secrets that have been use for decades with success this is where conversational hypnosis comes in and you too will be able to learn these techniques with this instant download.

This is not some far fetched CIA mind control story. A good conversational hypnosis course will show you the techniques or methods it takes to be successful in dealing with every day situations that involve people

Learn how to hypnotize people and you learn how to get people to like you. A leader in society knows that the hardest part about changing peoples minds is about getting someone to like you through actions words ad body language.

Voice control methods can help you use activate emotional triggers and get the response you desire. The power of suggestion and similar techniques can help you learn how to mind control a girl or guy and help make people agreeable. When you know how to hypnotize the correct way it makes your task easier.

If you want to make someone agree with you, make sales or just easier to work with this hypnosis may help you. This conversational hypnosis course is tough by one of the finest coaches around.

You will learn not only what to do but what to avoid so you can instantly connect with people. You will learn methods of matching and mirroring the correct way and this is where many experts get it wrong.

When you have mastered the techniques of persuasion people will be attracted to you. You should have the ability to persuade a woman, man, your boss even a stranger.

When you learn how to hypnotize someone you will have learned the art of persuasion. These are just tips and tricks that people use already at a subconscious level.

This is like having the keys to the mind. Many influential people are where they are at because they use the art of persuasion subconsciously.

By: Pete Marks

There is every likelihood that you may be acquainted with Trance Formation Neuro Linguistic Programming and The Structure Of Hypnosis. You can learn so much knowledge from this publication and it is based around Bandler/Grinder who speak and teach on the ever so popular subject of hypnosis, therapy, NLP and Milton Erikson. This category of hypnosis is just so amazing in respect of the fact that you can hypnotize using what is known as embedded commands. I mean let’s stop and think about this for a moment, the majority of all communication, beliefs and thoughts are hypnosis. Everything is actually hypnosis. You begin thinking that you’re clumsy and at some point you will find that you really are clumsy! The key here is that we must choose to hypnotize and input beliefs that are helpful to us, not anything that might hold us back!

Defining Neuro Linguistic Programming.

Let us be clear about the definition of Neuro Linguistic Programming. According to Bandler, Trance Formation Neuro Linguistic Programming and The Structure Of Hypnosis is an attitude and methodology which leaves behind a trial of techniques. NLP author Robert Dilts defined it as study of structure of subjective experience.

Looking At The Basic Idea

The fundamental concept is that human senses are somewhat limited. It is not possible to perceive all parts of the world through these senses. Neuro Linguistic Programming says that the human body and mind complex which is called linguistic interact to form perception of the world and programming. In straight forward terms we can say this that people act and feel on the basis of their perception rather than the actual world around them. This is actually quite interesting when we look at it in this light because plainly what this means is that people will create destructive patterns of thought. In a bid to enhance the experience of clients , practitioners update, change or upgrade the thought patterns to achieve effective and desired behavior patterns. Of course we can add further to this school of thought but out sole intent of this article is to familiarize you with the fundamental concept of Neuro Linguistic Programming.

Methods That We Employ

1-Modeling

It is a method of adopting behavior, language and beliefs of the others to build a model of what they do. If we get the same behavioral outcome from the person that we have modeled, the modeling has been successful. Modeling is not a therapy; it is applied to a wide range of learning. Understanding the patterns of one’s own behaviors in order to model is also an aspect of modeling.

2-Meta Model

It is composed of specifying questions and languages. There is a verbal pattern and its purpose is to facilitate the estimation of restrictive beliefs and thinking. By responding to the language patterns, the practitioner may aid the client to recover the information.

3-Milton Model

In order to contact the hidden things in the personality, there is a way of communication based on hypnotic changes as well as a way of using language called Milton Mode

Techniques

1-Anchoring

Neuro Linguistic Programming supporters say that the people make association between sensational and emotional conditions. If an individual is exposed to a certain stimulus in an emotional state, there will develop a connection between state and the stimulus. If this same stimulus for example occurs again, the emotional state will therefore be stimulated. So anchors can be created and stimulated to find a key to the target states.

2-Swish

This pattern is designated to disturb the pattern of thought from one that leads an unwanted behavior to one that leads to a more desired behavior.

3-Reframing

The function of perceiving is to metamorphosing the way of perceiving events hence differentiating the meaning. As the meaning differs, the optimal response and behavioral pattern will also differ due to the change of meaning. Reframing is the backbone of the most creative ways of thinking

NLP is used in conjunction within some industry association and has been utilized as an approach for some mental health officials. Neuro Linguistic Programming methods are built on modeling the medical practitioners who communicate with the patients successfully.

I trust this information has provided you with a greater insight regarding NLP and hope the content here has been both beneficial and informative.

By: Miles Jacobs

Article Word Count 978, average reading time 3.9 minutes.

The words we use either encourage us to be creative and optimistic or they shut us down, give us a smaller view of possibilities, and weaken us. The words we use define our personal reality to ourselves as well as to others, and they have a very real effect on what we allow ourselves to think. The words we use are the way we tell ourselves what we deserve from life.

BUT

Have this ever been said to you? “This is a good idea, but –”

Get it? When I said “This is a good idea” you were probably sorting for some time when you got complimented on an idea.

Then I said “but –” and you had to cringe a little.

We’ve all been taught that no matter what someone says, if they add a “but –” we know to brace ourselves, here comes the little twist that takes away most of the meaning from the beginning of the sentence.

Happens all the time, doesn’t it? I mean, I know that you and I would NEVER do that to others, yet people sure do it to us on a constant basis.

And what’s even more interesting, people do it to themselves! Just listen the next time a discussion comes up about what someone wants, for example:

“I’d like to lose weight, but –”

“I’d like a promotion, but –”

“We could go see your parents on Saturday, but –”

Interesting, huh? What follows “but” is almost always either something that wipes out a compliment, or an excuse for why people can’t get what they want.

So here’s a little tip for you. What happens to these sentences if we substitute “and” for “but”?

“This is a good idea, and –” Sounds like the idea may even be used, doesn’t it?

“I’d like to lose weight, and –” And here’s how I’m going to do it!

“I’d like a promotion, and –” And this is how I’m going to get it.

“We could go see your parents on Saturday, and –” And we can have dinner by the river on the way home, or we can stop at the new shop I wanted to see on the way there, or whatever alternative comes to mind.

“But” limits possibilities, and tells you what’s wrong and WHY you can’t do something. “And” includes more choices, and leads to thoughts of HOW you will do something.

They are the language of two different worlds, two different ways of life.

Which world’s language do you prefer??

Which leads us to the next “little word.”

WHY

The problem with “why” is that it leads to “because.”

When you ask “why?” You are almost demanding a story that will explain “why” things are as they are. And you’ll answer that question with a story of why things are that way, whether they are really like that or not!

“Why can’t I get a break?”

Because I already decided that I will never get a break, so I must be a loser.

“Why are people such rude drivers?”

Because if I accept the assumption that “all people are rude drivers” I can complain and whine and be miserable instead of just dealing with the fact that some people don’t handle traffic pressures very well.

“I just don’t understand why you would want that –”

Because if you want that and I don’t want you to have it and you can’t persuade me to endorse your choices, I get to control you.

Okay. When I said you were a loser I was just speaking on behalf of the subconscious of people who think this way. The question “why” is useful to two year olds, and perhaps detectives on a case or scientists in the lab.

Not so much for adults.

You want to know what’s an even more useful word for most of us, most of the time?

The word is “how.” As in, “How can I create a break for myself?” Or,

“How can I best deal with a rude driver, if I encounter one?” Or,

“How can what I want have any impact on you, and what can I do to ease that?”

Again, two different words from two different outlooks. “Why” invites you to accept whatever the stated reality is, and then demands that you make up a story that explains it. Probably a waste of time, unless you get your jollies making up stories about unimportant stuff. “Why” turns your view to the past, looking for causes and people to blame.

On the other hand, “How” is an action word. It looks to the future. “How” can I get what I want?” Or, “How can I mesh my desires with another person’s desires?”

Good question. And it leads you in a direction of action. And actions are the stuff of life.

SHOULD

“I should have done it differently.”

“You should do it like they do.”

“What should I do?”

This time I have no suggestion for an alternative word. I just have a caution about this one.

We all have a little parent’s voice in our heads, treating us like we’re still wearing diapers. And this word is surely a parent’s word, telling us what we “should” do.

“Should” and even worse, “should have” will make you miserable. They are the words of dissatisfaction and helplessness and regret and guilt.

Try this. “I want” instead of “I should.” Even if you add the same ending, you get more power — more ADULT power, from saying “I WANT to do it differently next time” or, “I WANT to be on time” Instead of “I shouldn’t be late.”

Think about the words you use — both to others and more importantly, to yourself.

Especially these three thought-stopping little words.

Seeya,

Tom Hoobyar

By Roger Ellerton Phd, ISP, CMC, Renewal Technologies Inc. www.renewal.ca

The Meta Model assists a client to be more specific or precise about his problem and as a result he begins to discover possible resources or solutions to his problem. Gregory Batson was enthusiastic about this approach and he was also aware of the work of Milton Erickson who was also getting great results with his clients, but in a different way — being vague rather than specific, the exact opposite of the Meta Model. Batson encouraged John Grinder and Richard Bandler to meet Erickson and discover why he was so successful. Their description of Erickson’s methods became known as the Milton Model – an approach opposite to the Meta Model, yet an equally useful tool for personal change and human communication.

“The Milton Model is a way of using language to induce and maintain trance in order to contact hidden resources of our personality. It follows the way the mind works naturally. Trance is a state where you are highly motivated to learn from your unconscious mind in an inner directed way. It is not a passive state, nor are you under another’s influence. There is co-operation between client and therapist, the client’s responses letting the therapist know what to do next.”
Introducing NLP: Psychological Skills for Understanding and Influencing People, Joseph O’Connor and John Seymour; Thorsons, Hammersmith, London, 1995.

Milton Erickson

Milton Erickson was generally regarded as the foremost hypnotherapist of his time. He worked with trance and cleverly structured sentences full of vague meanings to help his clients discover how to address their problems and the resources that they already had available to them. Erickson’s success was based on his ability to read non-verbal behaviour (sensory acuity), his ability to establish rapport with his clients, his skill with language patterns and his beliefs about his clients — some of his beliefs appear in the list of NLP Presuppositions. For example:

* Every behaviour has a positive intention.
* This is the best choice available to a person given the circumstances as they see it.
* Respect for the other person’s model of the world.
* Resistance in a client is due to a lack of rapport. That is there are no resistant clients, only inflexible therapists.

Erickson would also pace a client’s experience and then begin to lead them into trance (or downtime). In NLP terms, uptime is when your senses are focused on the outside world, while downtime is related to your inner thoughts. The Meta Model is associated with uptime (i.e. who, what, how specifically), while the Milton Model is associated with downtime. As we go through our daily activities, we are continually cycling through uptime and downtime and are often somewhere in between.

Pacing and Leading

To pace a client, begin by matching and mirroring her physiology, choice of words, tone of voice, etc., then make reference to what she would most likely be seeing, hearing, feeling or thinking (e.g. “As you notice the lights slowly dimming …” or “As you hear my voice …” or As you feel the chair on your back …”, or “As you wonder …”) while speaking slowly in a soft tonally and pacing your speech to her breathing. To lead her into downtime, you would begin to focus her attention inward by saying something such as “You may notice how easy it is to close your eyes whenever you wish to feel more relaxed …”

The topic of trance and hypnosis is vast. The rest of this article will focus on the Milton Model, which is a set of language patterns used to:

* Pace and lead.
* Distract the conscious mind.
* Speak directly to the unconscious and access its hidden resources.

For more information on hypnosis, the Milton Model and other hypnotic techniques, please see Hypnosis: A Comprehensive Guide by Tad James.

Milton Model: Hypnotic Language Patterns

The Milton Model hypnotic language patterns encourage the listener to move away from detail and content and move to higher levels of thinking and deeper states of mind. Some patterns are used to establish a trance state (or downtime or relaxation in the body). Other patterns are used to loosen the listener’s model of the world from which he is expressing his current behaviours and to consider a more expansive interpretation of what is possible.

You will notice that many of these language patterns are identical to those of the Meta Model. The difference being that for the Meta Model, the client is being vague and we ask specific questions to assist him in getting clarity on his issue/problem. For the Milton Model, we use some of the same language patterns, but this time we wish to be vague so that the client can easily go into trance and/or from the vague suggestions choose a suggested course of action that will address his problem/issue.

1. Mind Read: Claiming to know another’s thoughts or feelings without specifying the how you came to that knowledge.

“I know that you believe …” or “I know you’re thinking …”

2. Lost Performative: Expressing value judgments without identifying the one doing the judging.

“Breathing is good.”

3. Cause & Effect: Implies one thing leads to or causes another; that there is sequence of cause/effect and a flow in time. Includes phrases such as: “If …, then …; As you …., then you …; Because … then …”

“If you can hear my voice, then you can learn many things.”

4. Complex Equivalence: Attributes meaning to something that may or may not have a ’cause’ capability.

“Being here means that you will change easily.”

5. Presupposition: The linguistic equivalent of assumptions.

“Will you be changing your attitude now or later today?” It is assumed the person will change their attitude, the only unknown is when.

6. Universal Quantifier: Universal generalizations without referential index.

“Everyone; No one; All; Every”

7. Modal Operator: Words that refer to possibility or necessity or that reflect internal states of intensity tied to our rules in life.

“You should care for others.” or “You must resolve this issue.”

8. Nominalization: Words which are formed as nouns and which are shorthand for processes.

“People can come to new understandings.” Here ‘understandings’ is used as a noun and is shorthand to describe the on-going experience of ‘understanding’ or ‘making sense of something’.

9. Unspecified Verb: Implies action without describing how the action has/will take place.

“He caused the problem.”

10. Tag Question: A question added at the end of a statement/question, designed to soften resistance. It is used to ratify to the listener that he has or will actually manifest the action. It has the structure of a question and often the tonality of a statement.

“Your perception of life is changing, isn’t it.”

11. Lack of Referential Index: An expression without specific reference to any portion of the speakers/listeners experience.

“People can change.”

12. Comparative Deletion (Unspecified Comparison): A comparison is made without specific reference to what or to whom it is being compared.

“You will enjoy it more.” or “That one is better.”

13. Pace Current Experience: Using sensory-grounded, behaviorally specific information to describe current experience.

“You are reading this article.”

14. Double Bind: Invites choice within a larger context of ‘no choice’.

“Do you want to begin now or later?” or “Do you want to go into trance before or after you sit down?”

15. Embedded Commands: This is a command that forms part of a larger sentence that is marked by using italics or a subtle change in voice tonality or body language and is picked up by the reader’s or listener’s unconscious.

“I will not suggest to you that change is easy.” or “Do you think this article should be sent to your friends?” or “You can learn this material easily.

16. Conversational Postulate: Are questions that operate at multiple levels. Although they require only a simple yes or no answer, they invite you to engage in an activity in some way. Often they contain an embedded command.

“Can you open the door?” or “Can you choose to change?”

17. Extended Quote: Is a rambling context for the delivery of information that may be in the format of a command.

“Many years ago, I remember meeting a wise old man who taught me many useful things. I cherished all of his advice. I remember one particular day when he said to me “Change is easy and can be fun”.”

18. Selectional Restriction Violation: Attributing intelligence or animation to inanimate objects.

“Your chair can support you as you make these changes.” or “Your diary tells interesting tales.”

19. Ambiguity: Lack of specificity

a. Phonological: “your” and “you’re” – same sound, different meaning.
b. Syntactic: More than one possible meaning. “shooting stars” or “leadership shows” – the syntax is uncertain within the context, i.e. adjectives, verbs or nouns?
c. Scope: “Speaking to you as a changed person …” (Who is the changed person?) or “The old men and women …” – the context does not reveal the scope to which a verb or modifier applies.
d. Punctuation: is unexpected and does not ‘follow the rules’, i.e. improper pauses, rambling sentences, incomplete sentences – all of which ultimately force the listener to ‘mind read’.
“Hand me your watch how quickly you go into a trance.”

20. Utilization: Takes advantage of everything in the listeners experience (both internal and external environments) to support the intention of the speaker.

Client says: “I don’t understand.” Response: “That’s right…you don’t understand, yet, because you’ve not taken that one deep breath that will allow the information to fall easily and comfortably into place.”

Or perhaps while working with a client, one of your colleagues mistakenly opens a door. Instead of getting frustrated and annoyed with your colleague, you could say to your client, “You may have heard a door opening and let this be an opportunity to invite new ideas and thoughts into your life.”

And NLP is Much more than that!

Author: Roger Ellerton is a certified NLP trainer, certified management consultant and the founder and managing partner of Renewal Technologies. He can be reached at Renewal Technologies www.renewal.ca. The above article is an extract from his book Live Your Dreams Let Reality Catch Up: NLP and Common Sense for Coaches, Managers and You.

One’s thought patterns, beliefs and attitudes can be used to “preprogram” actual experiences that are yet to happen. NLP is very focused on how we think, what influences the way we think, and how we structure what we think. Subscribers to the science are encouraged to closely study and then model those individuals who do things well.

When studying them, you don’t ask them how they did it—just what they were thinking when they did it. For example, if you asked Michael Jordan how to play basketball, he could give you a big list of dos and don’ts. He might outline a series of necessary drills, but that is not what NLP is about. Instead, you would find out how Michael Jordan perceives basketball in his mind. What are his beliefs and attitudes about basketball? When he makes a decision on the court, what is he thinking?

NLP is made up of several different models, each then having different techniques associated with it. Let’s break NLP down further and take a basic look at some of its major models.

Sub-modalities: The Five Senses

Perhaps the foundation is, simply enough, our five senses. Each of us takes in the world around us through our five senses: seeing, hearing, feeling (both tangible and emotional), tasting and smelling. Everything and anything we think about in life, and the resulting beliefs and attitudes we form, can be based on what we receive and then interpret through these sub-modalities. Taking it a step further, with the entirety of our life experiences encapsulated in our memories as we experienced them through our senses, we can recreate those experiences in our minds, alter them if need be and thus gain tremendous power over our thought patterns, beliefs and ultimately the outward manifestation of such through our capabilities and achievements. The way you structure these representations in your mind determines how you will respond.

Try a basic experiment. Picture someone in your mind you hold very dear to your heart. Now, in your mind’s eye, enhance and intensify the colors of the image and observe how you respond. What happens when you turn up the volume of what has been said? What about if you visualize the image in shades of gray instead of color? For most people, “turning up” the colors or sounds also intensifies feelings, while turning them down diminishes those feelings. Cultivating your ability to fine-tune the way you perceive things, or the way your mind represents things, can be used to make powerful changes in your life. Once you realize that you can, in essence, create your world, you also realize that you also have the power to change it.

Meta-Model

A meta-model is a set of questions that are developed for the specific purpose of finding the exact meaning in a person’s communication. For example, often when we communicate, we generalize, or we may even distort information or leave it out altogether—intentionally or unintentionally, consciously or subconsciously. Individuals who use meta-models are able to systematically verify and clarify both verbal and written communication in order to communicate even more clearly and precisely.

Sensory Acuity

Our thought processes are very closely tied to our physiology. For example, people can sense that you’re happy, scared or angry without you even saying anything. Body language sends out strong cues about how we’re feeling. That is, our posture, our eyes, our head position, etc. all say a lot about us. Most body language is fairly obvious, but sensory acuity takes these observations beyond the obvious and uses physical feedback in addition to verbal communication to be as discerning as possible. Verbal cues even give some suggestion of which sensory modality a person operates from most strongly. For example, if someone says, “I hear what you’re saying” versus “I see what you mean,” it suggests that his or her auditory sense is more dominant than his or her visual one. It is helpful to give this concept consideration since miscommunication can often simply result from two people trying to talk about the exact same thing, only in different ways. Some experts argue that if certain thought processes are reinforced enough, over a long enough period of time, they can actually alter a person’s physiological state.

Milton-Model

The Milton-Model, named after Milton Erickson, the father of modern hypnotherapy, is a set of linguistic patterns that are designed to guide an individual without actually disrupting the way s/he is experiencing the particular activity internally. For example, the command “Recall a time when you were crying” doesn’t dictate whether the person was sobbing uncontrollably or weeping softly in the memory. This skill of describing feelings, places, events and activities in a manner that is specific and yet still universal allows the user to develop rapport with his or her subject. It also helps move the subject into a trancelike state. As a result, the Milton-Model is commonly used to induce hypnosis.

Meta-Programs

Meta-programs are essentially the “looking glasses” through which we view the world. The classic “Is the glass half full or half empty?” is a perfect meta-program example. Meta-programs control our personality and therefore how we behave. For instance, do you tend to be more of an active or passive person? Do you focus more internally or externally on the world around you? Is your orientation more focused on the past, the future or the here and now? Two people may regard the exact same thing from totally different angles, to the extent that that “exact same thing” may actually become a very different thing altogether. For example, do you move towards your goals, or do you move away from the things that are not your goals? One may simply seem like an inverted restatement of the other, but each has its own distinct nuance.

By: Kurt Mortensen -

Article Directory: http://www.articledashboard.com

Learning to persuade and influence will make the difference between hoping for a better income and having a better income. Beware of the mistakes persuaders commit that cause them to lose the deal. Go to www.PreWealth.com and explode your income!

by Steve Andreas – NLP Trainer

The following is a very interesting exchange between Richard Bandler and someone who is very sure about something.

B: Are you sure?
P: Yes.
B: Are you sure you’re sure?
P: Yes.
B: Are you sure enough to be UNSURE?
P: Yes.
B: OK, Let’s talk.

Before reading further, I strongly recommend that you think of something that you are very certain about, and find someone else to ask you this set of questions about your certainty, so that you have a concrete personal experience of their impact. At the very least, close your eyes and imagine that someone else asks you these questions, and take the time to carefully notice your response to each one, so that you can experience their effect on you.

And for those of you who teach modeling, or do modeling, this is an excellent small opportunity to do some of it. Although Bandler’s exchange is brief, and concise, it is quite interesting to explore its structure.

Now that you have an experience of it, I would like to characterize this pattern as I understand it, which requires a short journey up through logical levels.

Level 1. There is a situation X. X is an event in more or less sensory-based, “reality,” what Paul Watzlawick has called “first-order reality.” This is something that everyone can usually pretty much agree on, such as a job interview, or a critical comment. This level is often called the environment, and it is something that often we don’t have too much control over. Certain unpleasant events happen to us from time to time, and we don’t always have the choice of avoiding them or ignoring them.

Level 2. The person then thinks about the situation X in a particular way and characterizes / evaluates it, for instance, “This X is scary.” This is a meta-response, and the state is a meta-state about X. This is what Paul Watzlawick has called “second-order reality.” This is where people may differ wildly, particularly if they are from different cultures, and it is at this level where many conflicts and problems (and many solutions) exist.

The person could just as well conclude that X is “boring” or “exciting,” or “challenging,” or is an opportunity to “learn more about their Buddha nature,” etc. The person’s response will depend on the understanding that they apply to the event, and changing this understanding through content reframing can make a huge difference in the person’s experience.

Level 3. The person has a degree of certainty about the meta-response. “I know this is scary.” This is a meta-response about a meta-response (a meta-meta-response, with corresponding meta-meta-state). We could call this “third-order reality,” which is even more distant from sensory experience than second-order reality, and even more troublesome and dangerous. Plenty of problems (and solutions) also occur at this level.

Many people who come for therapy appear to suffer from uncertainty: “I don’t know what to do”. “I’m not sure if this is the right thing to do”. “Lifehas no meaning”. But you can also think of this as resulting from other certainties. “I know that wouldn’t work”, “I know she hates me”, “I know I can’t succeed”, etc. Since these certainties will make it difficult for the person to consider other understandings at level 2, it can often be very useful to reduce certainty.

Someone who is phobic of airplanes, and someone who is not, may be making exactly the same images of flaming death and destruction. The difference is that the images of the non-phobic include some representation of the small probability of the crash, as well as its possibility. This could be either a certainty of its unlikeliness, or a very great uncertainty about its happening. However, a phobic person is experientially certain that it will happen, no matter what s/he says intellectually.

What makes it difficult to work with a paranoid is not just that s/he thinks that others are plotting against him/her, but that s/he is certain that this is occuring, and is unwilling to question it and consider other possibilities.

Another aspect of a person’s certainty is that others may suffer from it as much or more than the person who is certain. Think of all the deaths, persecutions, misery and destruction around the globe that have resulted from the certainty of religious prophets and institutions, revolutionaries, and politicians – all of whom are totally convinced that they were right.

Each of us has a way to assess experience and provide us with a measure of how certain we are about it. This has often been called a person’s “convincer strategy”. The exploration of the variety of ways that people use to convince themselves of something is also relevant to the topic of certainty, but this article will only discuss the result of the operation of the convincer strategy.

Every evaluation that someone makes at level 2 has some degree of certainty/uncertainty about it at level 3, and this will be on a continuum from zero certainty to absolute certainty. There are basically three possibilities:
A. Zero certainty.

If a person has zero certainty, they have no firm conclusion whatsoever about the meaning of X, so they are completely open to considering new understandings when they are offered, and they will be very easy to work with in exploring other ways of thinking about the situation X. This is an “easy client,” because their understanding of a situation is very fluid, and they have no, or very little, certainty about their understanding to lock in the understanding, and make it hard to change.
B. Partial certainty.

If someone is somewhere in the mid-range of certainty, they are at least somewhat open to considering other possible understandings (on level 2) of a situation X (on level 1). If they are very certain, it will be harder for them to consider other understandings, but at least it will be possible. These clients are somewhat harder to work with than those with zero or very little certainty, and those who are more certain will be harder to work with than those who are less certain.
C. Absolute certainty.

If a person is totally certain about their understanding, they will be closed to even considering other understandings, because their certainty about their understanding locks up the ability to consider alternatives. These are the really tough clients, and this is the situation where Bandler’s pattern is particularly useful–to move someone from the absolute certainty (which has only one representation) to the partial certainty (with more than one representation) in which a dialogue is possible. (I think it is very significant in this regard that at the end of the exchange, Bandler says “OK, Let’s talk.”) In other words, this pattern is not useful to solve a problem, it is useful to make it possible to solve a problem on level 2 by decreasing certainty on level 3.
Understanding the pattern.

To understand how the pattern works, we will need to enter the realm of paradox, which is very difficult for most of us to think about. (It was also hard for Bertrand Russell and Gottlob Frege, two very brilliant professional logicians to think about, so there is no shame in this, but the faint of heart may wish to consider turning to simpler recreations.)

“Are you sure?” asks if a person is in state of certainty. This is a question that asks for a digital yes or no answer, but permits answers which are qualified in some way.

If the person says, “No, not really,” then they are uncertain (A) and are already open to other understandings.

If they respond, “Well, I’m pretty sure,” they are somewhere in the intermediate range of partial certainty (B) and will be at least somewhat open to considering other understandings.

If they simply respond “Yes,” we need more information. (As usual the nonverbal messages in voice tone, posture, hesitations, etc. will be much more useful than the words in assessing the actual degree of certainty the person is experiencing.)

“Are you sure you’re sure?” applies certainty to itself recursively, in essence asking if the person is absolutely sure. Answering this question requires the person to go to a 4th level, applying certainty to itself. Again this is a question that asks for a digital yes or no answer, but permits a qualified answer.

If the person says. “Well, I’m pretty sure,” or qualifies it in any way, then the person is somewhere in the mid-range (B), and can already be talked with usefully.

If the person replies with an unqualified “Yes,” they are saying that they are absolutely certain (C). (Again, the nonverbals will tell you more about the absoluteness of the certainty than the words.)

This condition of absoluteness (or near absoluteness) is required for the next step of the pattern to work. However, if the condition of absoluteness is not met, it means that the next step is unecessary, because in a condition of partial certainty (B) you can proceed to usefully explore alternative understandings.

A very important aspect of this question is that it asks the person to recursively apply their certainty to itself. This requires the person to go to a fourth logical level, and this is something which is also necessary for the next step in the pattern. A “Yes” answer is a confirmation that the person is willing and able to do this recursion or “apply to self,” as it is usually called in the “sleight of mouth” patterns. Recursion is a precondition for the next question, which also asks the person to apply certainty to itself, but in a different way.

Another way of describing this is that the first two questions can be used both to gather information about the client’s degree of certainty, while at the same time beginning to assemble pieces of a puzzle which will be put all together in the third step.

“Are you sure enough to be UNSURE?” applies certainty to its negation, and is a form of logical paradox, equivalent to the statement “This sentence is false (not true),” or “I am a liar (not truth-telling).” (The word paradox can also used in a more general way to mean contradictory or unexpected, but the meaning here is restricted to logical paradox.)
The three essential ingredients of a logical paradox are:

1. An absolute statement,
2. Recursion,
3. Negation.

In paradox, an absolute statement is recursively applied to its own negation, bridging two logical levels. If the statement is true, then it is false, and if it is false, then it is true. This perpetual oscillation between truth and falsity challenges all our ideas about certainty and reality, and this is at least one reason why we find it so difficult to think about paradox.

There are two more very important elements in the word “enough.” “Enough” presupposes some point on a continuum, while the person has been using an absolute either/or (sure/unsure) distinction with no middle ground. No matter how the person answers, if they accept this presupposition, they are agreeing to a frame in which certainty is on an analog continuum rather than an absolute, digital either/or, and consequently other alternative understandings can be considered. Unless they challenge this presupposition, either answer to this question moves them to an experience of partial uncertainty.

There is yet another important element in the word “enough”. It presupposes reaching a threshold, in this case a threshold of certainty. If the person replies “No”, they are saying that their certainty is something less than the threshold. If they reply “Yes”, they are saying that their certainty has reached (or exceeded) the threshold, and is “enough” to be uncertain.

Are you sure enough to be unsure? is the question form of the statement, “If you are sure enough, you will be unsure”, and this is presupposed when asked as a question. This presupposition states that great certainty includes within it the ability to be unsure, taking two experiences that have been experienced as polar opposites, and nesting one within the other.

I have already mentioned that it is very difficult for most of us to process logical paradoxes. When we hear this paradox, stated as a question, (with the “enough” presuppositions packed inside it), most people simply give up and respond yes or no.

If a person answers “Yes,” they are agreeing to a state of unsureness (the “unsure”), and if they answer “No,” they are also agreeing to a state of unsureness “not sure enough.” Whichever response is given, they are agreeing to a degree of uncertainty, and consequently the willingness to consider alternative understandings.

This pattern has the same form as a paradoxical challenge that the devil supposedly once offered to God in regard to God’s omnipotence. The devil challenged God to create a rock so large that even God could not move it. If God cannot create a very large rock that he cannot move, he is not omniptent in his ability to create rocks, and if he does create such a rock, he is not omnipotent in his ability to move rocks. Either way the absoluteness of God’s omnipotence is destroyed.

To summarize, this pattern is very useful in situations in which a person is very certain about how they understand something, this understanding causes them difficulty, and their certainty results in their being not willing to even consider alternative understandings. Using this pattern can open them to considering other models of the world.

Learning how to sort out levels of experience in this way is a very useful skill that can help us understand the structure of problems, and decide which level of understanding could use some improvement. This makes it much easier to find our way through the twisting corridors of another person’s mind, in order to help them find their way out of their predicaments–and also keeps us from wasting our time solving problems that they don’t have!

Confusion about levels of thinking, the recursion which transcends levels, and particularly recursion that includes negation, are present in many human problems. It is a little-explored realm, and one that often creates paradoxical traps for us. Knowing the three essential elements of paradox (absolute statement, recursion, and negation) can help us identify these traps, and avoid them.

We can’t avoid logical levels, or recursion, and we wouldn’t want to–that would keep us from thinking about thinking, and having feelings about feelings, thinking about feelings, and many other valuable and unique aspects of our humanity.

But we can learn to use positive statements whenever possible, rather than negations, and learn to be very careful when we do use negation.The NLP emphasis on positive outcomes is one example of the value of this, and the benefits that can result from this kind of care in thinking.

And we can be doubly careful when recursion is also present, which is much more often than we usually think. To give only one example, when someone says, “I am a bad person”, they are saying that everything that they do is bad, and one of their behaviors is the sentence that s/he just said to you, so “badness” applies to the sentence about badness.

And finally, we can also learn to be very cautious about making absolute statements, realizing that all knowledge is relative, contextual, and based on our very limited experience and understanding. Paradoxically, that is one thing we can be very certain about!

I think it is truly amazing that with the three pounds of jelly between our ears we can imagine and think about an infinite universe, but it would be useful to have a little humility all the same.Let’s start with some humility about our knowledge and certainty.

In case the reader at this point is still insistent that there is such a thing as absolute certainty, I offer the following quote from Warren S. McCulloch’s 1945 article “Why the Mind is in the Head”, now included in his marvelous book Embodiments of Mind, MIT Press, 1965. McCulloch was one of the first and the best to apply mathematical analysis to the functioning of the nervous system.

“Accordingly to increase certainty, every hypothesis should be of minimum logical, or a priori, probability, so that if it be confirmed in experiment, then it shall be because the world is so constructed. Unfortunately for those who quest absolute certainty, a hypothesis of zero logical probability is a contradiction, and hence can never be confirmed. Its neurological equivalent would be a neuron that required infinite coincidence to trip it. This, in a finite world, is the same as though it had no afferents. It never fires”.

First published in Anchor Point, October, 2000, Vol. 14, No. 10, pp. 3-8

©2000 Steve Andreas
AndreasYour Coach
Steve Andreas BS, MA

Steve Andreas is an NLP Modeller, Developer, Trainer, Writer and Publisher with over 20 years experience in the discipline of Neuro-Linguistic Programming. He founded, with his wife Connirae Andreas, NLP Comprehensive one of the first and a major NLP training institute. As a writer he has written on Gestalt therapy, (he was a significant figure in the Gestalt world) personal development (“Is there Lifebefore Death”) and NLP (“Virginia Satir; Patterns of her magic” and co-authored with Connirae “Change Your Mind and Keep the Change”, “Heart of the Mind”).

Through his publishing company Real People Press he and Connirae edited and published a number of classic NLP books by Bandler and Grinder (“Frogs into Princes”, “Reframing”, “Trance-formations”). Steve holds a distinguished position in the NLP community.

Steve and Connirae have developed a number of NLP Patterns and processes, their most famous being the modelling and original development of mental timelines from their ground breaking work with submodalities. NLP Comprehensive was the first training institute to incorporate submodalities into NLP Training.

He holds a Bachelors degree in Chemistry, a Masters Degree in Psychology and is a Certified Trainer of Neuro-Linguistic Programming.

by Steve Andreas – NLP Trainer

One powerful aspect of NLP is to discover what kind of internal experience is elicited by the use of specific language. This enables us to use language in a very directed way in order to get the results that we want. Often the careful examination of a single word yields great dividends, and the word “but” is certainly one of them.

“But” is a negator (Fritz Perls used to call it a “killer”) of whatever experience immediately precedes the word. For me, the image preceding the word “but” quickly slides to my left, disappearing out of my field of internal vision. So “but” is very useful any time you want to (or have to) mention something to someone, but then you want it to diminish in importance or even disappear from their awareness altogether.

Notice what happens in your internal experience when you take any two contents, connect them with “but,” and then repeat this, but reversing the two contents. A tired old joke illustrates this nicely. The mother says to the daughter: “I know he’s ugly, but he’s rich.” and the daughter replies, “Mother, you are so right. I know he’s rich, but he’s ugly.”

So the other side of the coin is to be able to use “but” to defend yourself against a communication that asks you to ignore something that is important to you.

When people are cautious or wary, they often tend to respond defensively, and may oppose whatever someone else says, and find problems with it, no matter how sensible the suggestion might be. In such a situation, often the other person will reply, “Yes, but . . .” (negating the “Yes” agreement) and then responding with an opposite opinion. “Yes, I can see that, but there is a problem with it.” Once someone is focused on a problem, it is easy to get “tunnel vision” and forget that the reason for studying a problem is to find a way to make the suggestion work. Many people then become frustrated because they are stuck with discussing a problem, and donÃt know how to get the conversation back to the suggestion that they want the other person to consider.

One alternative is to repeat what the person just said, but replacing the word “but” with “and.” “OK, you can see that, and there is a problem with it.” This keeps both of the two representations (the suggestion and the problem) connected together in the person’s awareness, and the problem can be considered in the context of the possible advantages of the suggestion.

If you expect that your suggestion is likely to be met with a “Yes, but” response, you can make the first move, and state the reverse of what you want the person to consider. Someone who “Yes, buts” consistently will usually feel compelled to reverse it.

In the example above, if the daughter (knowing that her mother is a “Yes-butter”), says, “I don’t know . . . he’s ugly, but he’s rich,” the mother is likely to respond, “Yes, he’s rich, but he’s ugly.” If the mother doesn’t reverse it, the daughter can always follow up with the reversal – and now her position is one of considering both sides of the matter, so she can’t be accused of being stuck in one narrow point of view!

Another very effective use of “but” is as a preemptive move with someone who tends to frequently respond with a “Yes, but,” or someone you expect to respond in this way because of the content, context, etc. Since they unconsciously process with the “Yes, but” pattern, they will also process unconsciously when you use the same pattern with them.

For example, let’s say you want to make a proposal to your boss, who you know from experience tends to find objections, or respond negatively and reject the entire proposal. “You will probably think what I have to say is really crazy, . . . but I’d like to offer you my proposal and see what you think.” If the boss tends to respond in opposition, he will first have to disagree with what precedes the “but” (especially if you pause for a half-second before the “but”), and this will put him into an attitude of agreement with what you will say next. At this point, the boss has already had the opportunity to respond negatively, and then the “but” will tend to push this aside, so he is more likely to simply consider the proposal on its merits. If you’re pretty sure that someone is going to oppose what you say, giving him something else to object to allows him to approach the proposal itself with an open mind.

You can also invite him to find flaws in your proposal (which is something that you know he will likely do anyway). “You will probably think what I have to say is really crazy, . . . but I’d like to offer you my proposal and have you point out the problems with it.” If he is likely to respond in opposition to whatever you propose, he will also oppose your suggestion to find flaws in your proposal, and be at least a little less vigorous in doing this. By inviting him to find flaws, you have allied yourself with what he will do anyway, so there is no opposition. He may still find objections to it, but likely without the defensive and critical attitude that otherwise would have been there.

Then when he finds something to object to in the proposal and says, “Yes, but this (X) is a problem,” you can say, “Yes, I see that (X) could be a problem, but if we can find a way to deal with that, I think that the proposal as a whole could still be worth exploring in more detail, because. . . (of the profit potential, etc.).” This is using the “Yes, but” in response to a “Yes, butter” in a way that can keep the discussion going usefully. Again you are allied with the boss, and together you can consider both the proposal and the problems with it.

When someone says, “Yes (X), but (Y)” you can also include their entire “Yes, but” response as the “Yes” part of your “Yes, but” reply. “Yes, what you just said is clearly important to consider, but I think that (Z) (whatever you want him / her to consider next) is also worth thinking about.” You can continue this kind of move as many times as you want to, in order to keep the discussion going in a useful direction. Since most people have great difficulty consciously tracking even one such move, this can be particularly effective in getting people to continue to pay attention to what you think is important, and continue to consider and discuss it.

These are all very useful ways to keep a discussion on track, and not get caught up in struggling with peoples, habitual and defensive responses. But all these moves, no matter how skillfully done, will not salvage a lousy proposal, no matter how clever you are.

Steve Andreas © 2000
AndreasYour Coach
Steve Andreas BS, MA

Steve Andreas is an NLP Modeller, Developer, Trainer, Writer and Publisher with over 20 years experience in the discipline of Neuro-Linguistic Programming. He founded, with his wife Connirae Andreas, NLP Comprehensive one of the first and a major NLP training institute. As a writer he has written on Gestalt therapy, (he was a significant figure in the Gestalt world) personal development (“Is there Lifebefore Death”) and NLP (“Virginia Satir; Patterns of her magic” and co-authored with Connirae “Change Your Mind and Keep the Change”, “Heart of the Mind”).

Through his publishing company Real People Press he and Connirae edited and published a number of classic NLP books by Bandler and Grinder (“Frogs into Princes”, “Reframing”, “Trance-formations”). Steve holds a distinguished position in the NLP community.

Steve and Connirae have developed a number of NLP Patterns and processes, their most famous being the modelling and original development of mental timelines from their ground breaking work with submodalities. NLP Comprehensive was the first training institute to incorporate submodalities into NLP Training.

He holds a Bachelors degree in Chemistry, a Masters Degree in Psychology and is a Certified Trainer of Neuro-Linguistic Programming.

Have you ever tried persuasion techniques to get what you want? Consciously, I mean, because smiling and many other simple persuasion techniques are used unconsciously all the time. You might think that intentionally using a technique is somehow unethical, but I would argue that it depends on the purpose and the circumstance. In any case, here are some you can try at your discretion.

The technique of “mirroring and matching” involves changing your verbal and body language to more closely match the person you are with. You slow or accelerate your speech to match his or hers, and sit in the same position. You use the same facial expressions, and laugh when he or she laughs. Done well, you can use this technique to establish rapport quickly and easily with most people.

You can try this on anyone. With practice most people won’t notice you’re doing anything unusual. People will simply feel like you’re like them, that you can “relate” to them. We tend to trust those who are like us. A bond develops between you, and you can test this bond by “leading.”

NLP Techniques

NLP or “neuro-linguistic programming” has produced some great persuasion techniques. For example, according to NLP, if you hear a person saying, “I see,” a few times, they’re most likely primarily process information visually. In this case, you would use phrases like, “You can see how…” or you would actually show the person things. More auditory people would be influenced by, “I hear what you’re saying,” or the word “Listen.”

Note the words a person uses. Are they visual, aural, or kinesthetic? Use the same. For example, to convince your spouse to go to the Bahamas, you could say “We’ll be feeling that sun on our backs,” or “We’ll see sunny beaches and mountains,” or “We’ll listen to the waves at night.” Of course, you can use all three ways to describe something, but one of the three types of words will most influence the person in front of you.

Some More Persuasion Techniques

Use the person’s name a few times. Salesmen use and abuse this technique. In fact, a statement like “Look Bob, you can see the benefits here…” might just turn you off. However, using a person’s name IS a powerful persuasion technique, if you do it right. Use it how a person wants to hear it, for example. Ask him or her how they prefer to be addressed. Steve may not like “Steven,” and Daniel may be irritated by you calling him “Dan.”

Also use the person’s name at the right time. If you are great at reading people and know it is okay, you might say “Hi Joan!” the moment she walks into your office. Otherwise wait until there is a bit of rapport, and maybe even ask permission (“Is it okay if I call you Joan?”).

Use more motivating words. If you tell a person to “think about it,” they’ll often do just that. This certainly is not a call to action. On the other hand, words like “today,” and “now,” and “do this,” have been shown to make people more likely to act.

Other words like “happy” and “feel good” simply address the unconscious mind and put the person in a more receptive mental state. These are more directly subliminal. Some subliminal persuasion experts will even tell you that the words “by now,” as in “By now you can see the advantages,” is subconsciously taken as “buy now.”

Use the person’s most common words, whatever they are. If a man uses the word “efficient” often, then it’s an important word to him. An boat salesman (if he’s paying attention) should be saying something like, “You can see how efficient this boat is in it’s use of space.” Pick out any words a person uses often, so you can speak the same “language.” This is one of the easiest persuasion techniques to try.

By: Steve Gillman

Article Directory: http://www.articledashboard.com

Copyright Steve Gillman. Get a free course in secret information, and discover more Persuasion Techniques and other valuable information in You Aren’t Supposed To Know – A Book Of Secrets. Visit: www.TheSecretInformationSite.com

By Greg London

NLP stands for Neuro-Linguistic Programming. The techniques of NLP are based in psycology and hypnosis. I have been using these techniques on other people and myself for years to improve my life and theirs.

Controlling someone without their knowledge does not have to be a bad thing. Think about it. You could help a friend end their self destructive behaviour. That would be a good thing wouldn’t it? You could motivate your children to do better in school without openly nagging and critisizing. That would be really good wouldn’t it? So NLP is a really good thing isn’t it?

If you can see the obvious manipulation in the above paragraph you already know and probably use some NLP without realising it. Neuro-Linguistic Programming is simply put using words, inflection and body language to influence someones thought process. To make them think that your idea is their own. They obey because they think it was their idea.

There are far too many techniques to cover in one short article, but this is one you can start using immediately. The power of the pause. It has to do with the way our brains process language. Some people believe that listening is like reading. One word after the other stop at the period and digest the meaning and then begin the next sentence. Nothing could be further from the truth. We don’t talk in sentences. We talk in phrases, and we listen in phrases. While our concious mind thinks we are listening to the whole sentence our unconcious mind is processing each phrase and gleaning meaning from the tone inflection and a million other subtle things we don’t consciously notice.

A pause and sudden restart causes a mental hiccup in our language processor. Allowing a skilled user of NLP to slip in a hypnotic suggestion. Such as:

“Don’t (pause) feel guilty about it. You know you shouldn’t (pause) feel like you have to make it up to me.”

The conscious mind hears the whole statement. The unconscious has a hiccup and processes the command. “…feel guilty about it.” “…feel like you have to make it up to me.”

This also works with positive statements. “You have good reason to (pause) be proud of your accomplishment.” “You should should (pause) feel confident. You know (pause) you are very good at this.”

Why not just say these words of encouragement without the pause? Because the concious mind can resist. We all have doubt swirling around in our heads. We think about what could go wrong and how embarassed we will be if it does. The conscious mind is nervous and afraid. The unconcious simply processes what it hears. The unconcious simply does as it’s told. Tell it to feel and it feels. Tell it to doubt and it doubts.

Neuro-Linguistic Programming can be a powerful tool to get what you want out of life. To heal or to hurt, so use it wisely. Make someone your slave and you will end up with him dependant on you, unable to make the simplest choice without your input.

Framing and re-framing are two NLP terms that refer to the context and the content of a conversation. Re-framing is a tool frequently used in belief change techniques and language patterns. To learn more about re-framing, read Richard Bandler’s and John Grinder’s book: Reframing.