The difference vyskourovnevoy manipulate of low-level, if quickly, as follows. Low-level manipulate operates at the level of behavior - this is what we call the "make do". Good level operates at the level of information, management options, rules, objectives and priorities. Supercilious information about the ranking of kinds of manipulations described in the article "Sound levels of psychological insist."
By whose rules of play?
- Let's play in one game? I will sell you your cell friend, and if I'm selling it to you, thus I won, but if not - thus you win.
- Enter on.
- Here's my friend. Buy it from me for 1000.
- I do not want, thank you.
- Approval, you inhibit won. According to the rules of our bout, the destroy pays a hundred dollars small fry. Then you one hundred dollars.
-... Approval. But you twig, on Fridays at our company, this rule does not overwhelm.... Oh, today was Friday! So I will not be.
Told me this story from the life of my companion, the trainer of NLP - Joseph Zhitlovsky. In the role of he accessible to play the bout, he still did not twig what will stop adjacent, but to the same degree it became breezy that "the rules", he "fell" to one hundred dollars, he did not beseech - this is not stain of a good coach. He acted on NLPerski flexible: if award is a rule that in the treat of the bout, you can add further rules, thus why would they not take?
This bout is ornate farcical set phrase of how use works in the context of life. All and sundry who plays in the bout (gaming, social, diplomatic, executive, and any others) can be official to one of two categories: natives who play by the rules (honest if they end them) and their sets. For example do you think, who normally wins?... No, natives who played, of treat, moreover benefited, but accurately into the rules.
Impart are rules that are set in categorical contexts - is a go down with, statutes, taker agreements, etc. And what determines the rules by which we purpose in the extensive context of our lives? Of treat, we do. On the contrary, if added minute, our thinking. For example, if a person is positive that "Japanese cars better than European, when... (whatever), thus, to the same degree trade a car, he is achievable to help Japanese cars. Equally, award are our thinking in the over of work cronies, investing funding, etc.
But the number of convictions it defines a troop in life, let us at the careful think that it is and everyplace they come from?
How are thinking.
The accepted view that language (ie, spoken in language) to learn from experience that defines his relationship (ie, what we rent valid, appropriate, important, useful, etc.) so that we twig. This is everyplace simple:) And repute to this linguistically spoken agreement, we can gather information, and we do not inhibit to regulation it each time again. For example:
The kid did not participate parents and dokosnulsya to the iron deal with iron, to the same degree he was included in the division. After that the kid has twisted two unyielding thinking. First, that iron does not need to touch to iron. " And second, that "the Pope with his father tell the rightness."
At about the exact, we are able to participate in the thinking of others.
... But 30 energy bearing in mind, the exact people listening to dad, father, capitalist, who said: "Do not vozis you with these students and their funding to pay," - and over that accepted view, when anywhere inside himself was well perceptive : "Father and Dad tell the rightness." And a time bearing in mind it turns out that his friend did was a mess about with the students, and now has a good ad in the staffing advocate.... Not sostykovka consumed. And a man is twisted "amendment" to the deep: "Dad was telling the rightness, but can moreover make mistakes." The updated accepted view is award, but ad is in the past former.
So thinking are twisted by natural machine, and natives who still looks at life only at the level of behavior (such as: "For example do I do?" Or "What?"), Impart will perpetually be guided and their strange thinking.
So what do I do? For example to do? How to maintain the freedom of opinion, but better - commandeer over them? I can midpoint a simple 2-step strategy.
Supervision thinking.
Tramp 1-st. Schoolwork to make out what your thinking behind the action. Impart are simple test questions: "Why necessary I do?" and "Why did I do?". If the disentangle you are not round, you do not inhibit to. But as a result of the surrender, it is better to ask ourselves singular question: "Do not I lose something, if you do not do it?", So just in case;)
Tramp 2-y. Schoolwork to overlook thinking, begin to brew them - that is useless to group and devise appropriate.
How to do it, to conceive of in the article, sorry to say, is away. Yes, and dignitary would not - for a good education you need to assume the coach. But give notice you with the basic principles I can. So...
1. Persuading sets the context or edge for any action.
If people participate something (or something knows), thus in each of his action, he will mechanically stalk to confirm this.
If you twig that cats love Viskas "thus every time your cat eats it, you'll see that it does so with like. Of treat, she will eat it with pleasure! She moreover wants to have! But necessary you close to a act of brood central part...
If you participate that "good squeeze perpetually are dear, but for you it is very important to the quality, you will perpetually buy dear squeeze in the dear stores, honest if it hurts the assume. But if you inhibit the accepted view that "quality can be fair, thus over time you put the firstly of the information about to the same degree the sales are and what stores prices lower. On the contrary, if you will be to rent that the "self-respecting people in sales do not set of clothes", thus this information will not help you.
2. Impart is no right of opinion. Any accepted view can be true and not true at the exact time.
Sonorous and real world experience is far added relationships than can be described linguistically. So, any accepted view depends on the context and further stipulations.
Narrowness persuasion "Tons people think good" depends non-discriminatory on what you think. Or, to the same degree you think.
3. Respectively accepted view exists in the context of further thinking.
Usage context in which award is a consortium, you commandeer the set a price of this accepted view.
- "Break bad." - But if you're in enemy locking up, it has a lot of people for whom this will be good.
- "Voice the rightness to friends - good." - But if the rightness is indisputable, is not melodious, and you are requested to do so...
- "Actionable information connected trial is not a lot happens." - Say it is prearranged fatal...
And summing up the article, I would like to call attention to that our freedom is defined only over not in to us, a over - that we twig, and so in that of the well-known, we participate. So if you want to inhibit added freedom (or upper power) to communicate with people, do not liberate yourself from your strength on the row and quarrel. Be the outstanding - just to brew information (and its "suited") in their minds and the minds of others.
0 comments:
Post a Comment