STUDY - Technical - New Dacian's Medicine
The
Language of the Conscious (1).
Translation Draft
Although the language of the subconscious is very useful in many situations, difficulties can arise when, in decisive situations, we do not discern reality and react according to it. That's why there will be some posts about the language of the conscious in which we will try to understand some possibilities and limitations. Firstly, with this language we can obtain, in a rather simple way, access to the reality behind illusions, anxieties and greed (and many other "stuff" of conscious life) and secondly we will be able to communicate more effectively, more "understandably" with the subconscious.
By being able to move from the language of the subconscious to that of the conscious, your ability to truly understand others as well as to make yourself understood by others and yourself will also increase. With the help of the meta-model, as the language of the conscious is called in the jargon of NLP/ SNLP, you can find out where the causes of the problems are found, why people are dissatisfied and what leads to the eternal misunderstandings between partners, friends and co-workers. And you'll be able to change all that! Anchor sheets and other "relationship", planning, description of objectives, etc., all become simpler and more practical by using the possibilities that offer them the meta-model. In short, the meta-model can: a. reduce the abstract information transmitted verbally to the concrete experiences that are behind them; b. be helpful in obtaining accurate important information for future activities; c. clarify the meaning of words and give precise definitions; d. flexibly identify and structure the limited images an individual has of the world and of himself; and e. to offer more opportunities for rational choice in decision-making situations.
Conscious language is characterized by the need to define exactly what you want or uses this "requirement" to find out exactly what the other wants (another person or one's own subconscious). There is no room for imprecise, metaphorical or symbolic clarifications, leaving open as many possibilities for interpretation as possible because everything can lead to interpretations that are not in tune with what you want to convey or what you want or want to receive. The following questions can be really useful: 1. Who? (subject - people, animals, plants, others), 2. What? (preached – actions that those in point 1 perform), 3. Where? (place or places where actions take place) and 4. When? (the time or period during which the actions of the actors in point 1 took place or took place). The language of the conscious must help us relate to reality (even from the point of view of our subconscious). This reporting can be done after an analysis of each process and with all the information necessary to assess a state of affairs, avoiding that some of the information is taken from the external reality and then related to associations and memories of the inner world, obtaining a distorted presentation of the facts.
I will give you an example (quite detailed) in this regard. You then hear a description of the incident: "From the moment he approached them, it was known that he was going to trample on them. He promised them a long time ago. He prepared for this moment for a long time and waited for the right moment. It's been a long time since he's got nothing in his way..." Then you don't hear anything but you remember him from work that he's a man,an individual who always speaks loudly, authoritatively.
You once "admired" him as he carried the closet by himself, proving his extraordinary strength and, hitting himself hard, how he had a nervous exit by kicking a chair, making him snadd. "It's not good to deal with such a man!" you thought then, even if he smiled tiredly, chirped by the pain caused by the initial blow, being relieved of his exit with the same baritone, authoritative, sweaty, red-faced, eyes out of his or her orbits. What do you think you'd have in place of the observer character?!? Especially since, when he went to the cashier to pay for the chair, he apostrophed the cashier who pointed out the rudeness of his gesture with a line like: "Please shut up lady! I'm paying for it! That's it! You'll now have a new chair so I did a good thing that I solved the problem with my gesture. No one else can have an accident after that. Here's the money and the rest is none of your business! I've had enough of the boss who cut my salary and threatened to fire me even though I was made to do something that was someone else's business"... What thoughts will you have now?!? And, what thoughts will you have when you get out of work you hear other details about the incident, like, "" Well, you should have seen them all! They were screwed by how much they fought to deal with it"... And finally come the clarification: "Yes, it was the case after how many hours of training in tennis he did! Sooner or later he had to become an acceptable player too." Here are the "traps" of conscious communication (without presenting possible associations made with memories stored in your subconscious related to large people, who seem aggressive)...
So, for starters, let's see what are the biggest mistakes that can be made in using the meta-model (or universal model - by this term we try to define a kind of model, how to use conscious and/ or subconscious language that makes it possible to systematically reduce the statements of a transmitter, individual or subconscious regarding his real or "recorded" experiences) and how you can avoid them. There are three big pitfalls that we need to be careful about when using the meta-model and that we can avoid by using the four types of questions described above: who, what, when and where. Every time we hear a certain thing, we are forced to procure a lot of the necessary information, from assumptions, even from the subconscious, empathizing with our own experiences and associations, reasoning, feelings or the like. To avoid this process, it is necessary to ask the question: "What do you really mean?" / "What is really said?", at which point at least one of the mistakes that we will discuss below may occur. If it is important to achieve certain objectives and do not settle for a beautiful dream, pay attention to the use of language in words that are subconscious (and that are trivialized by excessive use in communication from various circles, groups, etc.) such as "love", "light", "energy", "oscillation", "blockage", "development", etc.
The three mistakes are: 1. Lack of information necessary to understand an experience (real lack or related to one's own perception), a problem that can be solved simply by asking: who, what, when, where; 2. Limitations from the universal model through a. generalizations (universal quantifiers) and b. limited choice possibilities. In order to solve these problems, it is practical to focus attention on complementary, more thorough experiences where appropriate, in an effort to get out of the generality stage and get as much detail as possible, which structures the map of reality in a better resolution and on a larger scale (for example, from a distance of 1,000 meters all people look the same , while from one meter individual differences can be easily detected).
This also evolves awareness. Also in this case (b.), it is necessary to review the need for an attitude that is necessary only when we have at our disposal an optimal number of details that allow us to properly appreciate reality. If, in this framework "as if", as the process is also called, a number of alternatives of action are mentally re-examined which until that time have not been taken into account, increases the willingness to try other ways which, in this way, have proved to be possible rational solutions.
Many high-performance athletes, artists, managers and politicians today use this technique to be able to cope safely and flexibly with everyday tasks; 3. Limited experimental capacity (defective semantic formation), which means unilateral and often non-systematic interpretation of perceptions, which prevents a viable relationship with reality. In order for this rigid attitude to be restructured (reprogrammed, in the case of the subconscious) to become a realistic and multilateral one, a logical perspective is needed, aided by comparisons with deviant interpretations and by the practical examination of interpretations.
These three notions (main mistakes) can be (I will try to be) explained even more thoroughly (in the following). For understanding the next paragraph, the points "examples" and "clarifying questions" refer to the use of the language of the conscious as a possibility to understand differentiated reality, thus to create consciousness. The point "What would be used in everyday life" refers to the situation in which it is not necessary, even harmful to certain details with the help of "clarifying questions" about what was discussed above. Let's go, let's go, let's go, let's go, We'll start with the lack of information!
Just missing the information. Examples: "He is the best, many have become conscious, I am afraid". Clarifying questions: "What are you afraid of?", "What do you see, hear, feel, smell and what do you taste when you're afraid?". What can be useful in everyday life: the lack of information in verbal communication becomes problematic only when the missing information is not known to the receiver or when the transmitter does not know exactly what it wants to communicate; if both have certain information, it would be extremely complicated, time would be wasted and it would not be at all amusing for those known to be constantly introduced into the communication process. So, even an omission can sometimes be extremely useful.
Lack of relationship. Examples: "He shouldn't do that, it's not good, nobody likes me." Clarifying questions: "No one really?", "What concrete experiences have made you believe this?", "What should happen to know that someone likes you?", "Who exactly doesn't like you?". What can be useful in everyday life: and in this case the understanding can be made easier if the information that is not entered into the communication is known and consciously available to all who participate in it.
Words that designate tasks and that inaccurately describe a process. Examples: "By this I feel a lot. This impressed me deeply. I'm picking up a lot of energy." Clarifying questions: "What really happens in the field of sight, hearing, touch, taste and smell when you perceive these energies?". What can be useful in everyday life: in the presence of certain premises, it also leads to a smooth communication; about things that are not important objectively need to be reasoned in detail.
Frozen Processes: Nouns that designate something that cannot be accurately described (nominations). Examples: "Love is very important to me", "I have problems with it", "I want a relationship". Clarifying questions: "Who would you like a relationship with?", "What do you want as concrete experiences in this relationship?", "What period would you like to have this relationship?". What can be useful in everyday life: cursive communication and the fact that about unimportant things objectively should not be reasoned too much.
But if it was just a lack of information. We will now proceed to the "analysis" of limitations within the universal model (I will continue the numbering above, even if it will be another "group", in order to have a real scroll of the landmarks with which we are dealing).
Generalizations (universal quantifiers): Examples: "Today's youth is degenerate. You never help me. Everyone knows that." Clarifying questions: "Have you established without exception, from experience, that anyone you asked knew this?" "What people and what ages have you known to be degenerate?", "How should someone you designate to be degenerate now behave?". What can be useful in everyday life: generalizations help people connect isolated experiences with other situations; if someone has learned that a light bulb can be made to light up using a switch, he generalizes this experience and is able to turn on and off other bulbs, even if they have different switches; a useful generalization is also that if you have ever known a predatory animal, you have found that its teeth are an essential tool for it; in the future you can increase your ability to survive by being cautious in dealing with animals that have a strong teeth, for if they have a similar teeth, they are likely to use it in the same way; Besides, it may prove useful not to have to think and talk too much about non-essential things, which requires a waste of energy.
Apparent need: Examples: "It's important to dress decently. I can't stop doing this. I have to continue my marriage." Clarifying questions: "What will really happen if you act differently?". What can be useful in everyday life: a vitally resilient structure (moral, values, norms, ethics) creates the ability to guide decisions, in the sense that they are taken according to group rules in which people in the environment do not oppose actions or the person; if, however, the others are much more flexible than assumed, if there are no real constraints on certain decisions or where the social field can be changed profitably, totally or partially (a new group of friends, a new job, a freely chosen family instead of an imposed one), there is no justification for this 'atitudinal straitjacket'.
Now we will move on "analyzing" the limited experimental capacity or, as is still "formulated", the defective semantic formation.
Unrealistic connection between cause and effect: Examples: "I'm desperate because he wants to leave me. Your attitude annoys me." Clarifying questions: "What really happens to you when you think about leaving you?", "What exactly is done to get angry?". What can be useful in everyday life: Introducing causal links between the inner world (conscious ly-enextly subconsciously) in planning your own activities; if I really know that someone will bring me into a state of stress, through a certain attitude, I can bypass him or i can give him up until I am able to adapt to it.
Reading thoughts: Examples: He's only doing this to me off! He knows exactly how I feel. He just doesn't think about me." Clarifying questions: How do you know he acts like this to you off?, What is the sensory perception that makes you conclude that he knows how you feel?. What can be useful in everyday life: to get others to explain their actions or to provide you with the emotional energy needed for your own actions; sometimes these statements are based on real experiences and are appropriate to increase the planning capacity of actions; in addition, from actual insufficient information, action directives can be drawn up leading to logical results, especially in the case of emotional resonance.
Generalized Appreciations: Examples: "Who doesn't think like me, is wrong! It's not good to depend on others.' Clarifying questions: "Basically, what can someone who thinks differently than you and you would do if you were in his place?", "What practical effects would result for someone if they thought differently than you?", "What concrete situations do you refer to and what concrete effects does your way of thinking and acting in these situations?" , "In certain circumstances, for whom is it not good to depend on others?". What can be useful in everyday life: the elaboration of general values and rules, which link in acceptable structures the activities of members of a group, in order to meet their needs (an example for this are the rules of movement); and this behavioural model can be used so that, from insufficient principled information, functional action and appreciative directives are inferred (in order to understand their content, blurry paintings are completed in this relationship); every entrepreneur needs these techniques in order to be able to make decisions for which, in practice, there is only rarely enough information to rationally justify them.
And, I think all this is enough (they are the essential ones)! They complement your awareness-level analysis regardless of the benchmark in the anchor sheets or the cards that will be presented in future posts.
But some clarification is still needed. For example, another mistake that frequently occurs with the rational use of the language of the conscious is inconsistency. "I don't know anymore!", "I want love, it's not enough?!?", "This is what every normal person has to understand!" and the examples can go on. As you may have noticed, if certain concrete problems need to be solved, it is not enough to want to communicate only through the language of the subconscious (not even with yourself that you must clearly delineate the language of the conscious from that of the subconscious). Each individual or party must describe exactly what he or she means by doing so (see the questions above, otherwise the others will feel overworked or simply "parts" of you – the subconscious perceives love completely differently from the conscious even by providing the limited interpretation of the conscious's ability to manifest everything that it can assess).
Who does not know (does not want to know) what is, after all, important to him, will rarely get what he wants (really – elements of distraction/ addiction, thank God, come from everywhere and are accepted and used without reservation). Even if this is found very close to him, he will not be able to recognize what he wanted. That is why it is good to never settle for superficial answers, especially when, in order to be successful, it is important to know exactly what it is. Explains these correlations to people who prefer to find themselves in the world of dreams (in the sense of a world built and accepted by them, which can be described to be mostly imaginary, compared to the real part in which they live). Ask such people if they are satisfied with their own lives! And even we, how many problems we have to solve with ourselves, with the beliefs we have created over time, that are related to the world of dreams and have nothing to do with the real, real world. Maybe we're all in a situation where we have to try something new.
That is why it is good, indicated, imperative, depending on the conjuncture, to have reactions to the search for reality. And when we use the meta-model, we must bear in mind that most people (even if it seems like a generalization) will not be very willing to answer these insistent questions, ours or theirs and, depending on the circumstances, will often react with irritation. The language of the subconscious or a language compatible with their dreams will, however, be much more agreeable. Therefore, the use of the language of the conscious should not be transformed into an ideology or even an inquisition. It should only be used when necessary in the context of clarifying the topic (and not in other circumstances) and in relation to people who are open to new perspectives. If it is necessary to ask precise questions, clarify to the interviewee the purpose and meaning of the problem, so that it does not become rigid, but collaborates with you in discovering the treasure of truth. Besides, in the way the questions are formulated, the so-called "improvements" are also used: "I'm curious what really happened to you!", "It's great, says more about this!", "By that you mean this, or the other, or the other or what?", "Detail, details, I melt after details as you call them, I want details!" are some of the ways of using the meta-model in a way bearable for the interlocutor but also by us in our dialogues with ourselves (especially with the subconscious).
And finally this long post, let's see what to do with the language of the conscious in our own lives. So far we have identified anchors, assigned them to people in our past, present and, why not, future life (including us), identified the messages of the subconscious (feelings) and linked them to the "customized" anchor sheets, and now we understand some things about how we should "consider" everything consciously, in a language that is understandable to anyone and anyone. Now it's a little exercise that can change our lives if we take it seriously. This exercise will begin to "focus" everything on us, the main point of our universe. Let's go, let's go, let
From my experience (and those from which I have researched) I will list the central notions around which the structuring of the lives of many people (probably the majority) moves. They originate, in general and in particular (someone else wonder?!?), in the language of the subconscious, in the language of dreams. We've already identified everything with the records we've compiled so far. Read everything quietly and then write down behind each notion a concrete interpretation, corresponding to the meta-model that suits you. During this time, be careful to avoid the three big mistakes That I mentioned earlier when using conscious language (and use the "analysis details" presented later).
This will quickly clarify what you really expect from life and your fellow human beings and what is really happening to you and around you. Over time you will find other concretes that suit you (to make sense to you) and this can only be beneficial. In this way you create several possibilities of conscious options with which you can intervene "correctively" on the potential existing at the subconscious level. You will know if a certain concrete satisfaction is not possible and/ or you will turn to another that you can obtain at that time.
This way, your life will become more enjoyable overall. And if there are individuals in your environment who will envy you because suddenly you know what you want and you manage to get it, you can give them some directions. Caution, in order to develop more accurate descriptions, use the following knowledge (those in future posts) presented as sub-modalities.
So, in the records made so far, we will find at the first landmark related to us: Anchors: "Visual: eyes (light in them), Person: partner/ lover, Feeling: love". My comment, the author: all the primary feelings presented were related to needs flagged by the subconscious but love, love is not a need but a plus. My example is leaving with something directly related to your well-being and has nothing to do with any signal. Obviously, in this case, it doesn't mean that we won't move forward, that things can't get any better than that. And, we will proceed to "transposition" into the conscious, into its language. For starters, we're going to start saying something we'd like to do in addition to what we're doing. So our analysis could take the form of:
Statement: Love. Example: Someone feels loved when they suddenly receive a gift (what kind of gift, how precious and wrapped in what way), if when giving it someone looks him in the eye with thought and hears the other one say in a warm voice "This is for you because I love you!". During this time, it must be touched tenderly on the body, in at least one place (which, which is, no matter where).
Of course everything we do can be carefully listed, but that's your job. The important thing is that the analysis brings you progress but also the complete enumeration has its purpose because it will be a list against forgetting the feelings of love that characterize you and, in the future probably, to follow it to preserve the intensity of your experiences. But let's take "in analysis" now in case a primary feeling arises.
Anchors: "Visual: the eyes (light from them). Person: partner/lover. Feeling: fear/fear".
Statement: Fear.
That's where things get complicated. I begin, first, with a comment, my own, the author's... One feels fear when the need, the need, the desire to be safe, to perceive the stability possible of our lives is not satisfied. This lack of stability can have many "landmarks" such as relationship uncertainty, partner's health, material instability reflected in our (or partner's) claims and partner's behaviour and do not continue with the examples. What we have to do is let us not forget that any success of "contentment" of the primary feeling will allow us to treat the next "problem" with more energy, with more chances of success.
The visual anchor signals our eye light (perhaps also the color) but is obviously related to a certain eye condition, usually associated with the well-being in our presence of the partner, eye contact. What's to be done?!? Visual contact and direct discussion with the partner to clarify the possibilities of eliminating the feeling of fear, what are its problems and how they can be solved. Attention, from my point of view (and not only), when the feeling of fear born of material considerations arises, it is no longer about love but about cohabitation because of your love. But for compliance, I'll go ahead and give an example. Let's say that the partner's response is "lack of material stability related to the future". Our analysis will take the form of:
Statement: I feel the future stable when. Example: Someone feels stability in terms of the future when he has a salary that allows him to cut "a", cut "b", cut "c" (carefully lists, conscientiously and carefully describes all the landmarks that you consider important), at the time "x" can have access to the "a" cut, then at the time "y" to have access to "b", etc. This list will place you forcibly in the conscious and you will see if it is worth having feelings of fear and not mistaken, they are feelings of loneliness, stress, inadequacy, etc.
Or, for example, especially in the case of weaker people, possibly of ladies, one can identify fear as actually being a sense of stress born out of lack of protection (by the way of the unstable future). In this case, after a procedure similar to the one above, one can reach a point of no return, awareness of the impossibility of achieving the "state of stability represented by the need for protection". Obviously, there are solutions here, too. In this case we need to weaken the intensity of the pressure of feelings of fear, identified as an insecurity related to lack of protection, by "helping" processes.
The subconscious makes no differences and only accumulates perceptions and, by a certain "insistence" of the practice will replace previous perceptions, "outdated" with new ones. Therefore, the rewriting of the old concepts will be made simple, following the example below.
Statement: I feel protected when. Example: Someone feels protected when lying in a warm, neck-deep bath with a sparkling with exotic flavors (what a particular flavor, try the flavor, how much foam). The bathroom door must be closed, sing a certain romantic, soothing melody and in the room must burn at least one aromatic candle placed on a stand (what format, what color).
Or...
Statement: I feel strong when. Example: Someone feels strong when they feel that their car (what model, how it should look) reacts to the throttle (how exactly it reacts, describes it) and immediately increases its speed (how much, it describes). During this time, a certain song must be heard in the audio installation (which must be the power, sound quality).
Of course the statements are so varied that there's no point in wasting our time on this. I can only help you with some suggestions like the ones below.
Other examples of ads might be: "I'm happy when...", "I know I'm successful when...", "I feel satisfied when...", "I feel tenderness when...", "For me, the development of consciousness happens when...", "I'm afraid when...", "I panic when...", "I feel confident when...", "I feel strength when...", "I trust when...", "Growing up means to me when..."... And the utterances continue according to the "particularity" of each of us.
But don't forget! These are simple examples of translation procedures between and with the help of the conscious and the subconscious. We still have enough to learn before we can move on to a real analysis of what we've discovered in the course of our efforts... But all this in future posts. That's enough for today!
Although the language of the subconscious is very useful in many situations, difficulties can arise when, in decisive situations, we do not discern reality and react according to it. That's why there will be some posts about the language of the conscious in which we will try to understand some possibilities and limitations. Firstly, with this language we can obtain, in a rather simple way, access to the reality behind illusions, anxieties and greed (and many other "stuff" of conscious life) and secondly we will be able to communicate more effectively, more "understandably" with the subconscious.
By being able to move from the language of the subconscious to that of the conscious, your ability to truly understand others as well as to make yourself understood by others and yourself will also increase. With the help of the meta-model, as the language of the conscious is called in the jargon of NLP/ SNLP, you can find out where the causes of the problems are found, why people are dissatisfied and what leads to the eternal misunderstandings between partners, friends and co-workers. And you'll be able to change all that! Anchor sheets and other "relationship", planning, description of objectives, etc., all become simpler and more practical by using the possibilities that offer them the meta-model. In short, the meta-model can: a. reduce the abstract information transmitted verbally to the concrete experiences that are behind them; b. be helpful in obtaining accurate important information for future activities; c. clarify the meaning of words and give precise definitions; d. flexibly identify and structure the limited images an individual has of the world and of himself; and e. to offer more opportunities for rational choice in decision-making situations.
Conscious language is characterized by the need to define exactly what you want or uses this "requirement" to find out exactly what the other wants (another person or one's own subconscious). There is no room for imprecise, metaphorical or symbolic clarifications, leaving open as many possibilities for interpretation as possible because everything can lead to interpretations that are not in tune with what you want to convey or what you want or want to receive. The following questions can be really useful: 1. Who? (subject - people, animals, plants, others), 2. What? (preached – actions that those in point 1 perform), 3. Where? (place or places where actions take place) and 4. When? (the time or period during which the actions of the actors in point 1 took place or took place). The language of the conscious must help us relate to reality (even from the point of view of our subconscious). This reporting can be done after an analysis of each process and with all the information necessary to assess a state of affairs, avoiding that some of the information is taken from the external reality and then related to associations and memories of the inner world, obtaining a distorted presentation of the facts.
I will give you an example (quite detailed) in this regard. You then hear a description of the incident: "From the moment he approached them, it was known that he was going to trample on them. He promised them a long time ago. He prepared for this moment for a long time and waited for the right moment. It's been a long time since he's got nothing in his way..." Then you don't hear anything but you remember him from work that he's a man,an individual who always speaks loudly, authoritatively.
You once "admired" him as he carried the closet by himself, proving his extraordinary strength and, hitting himself hard, how he had a nervous exit by kicking a chair, making him snadd. "It's not good to deal with such a man!" you thought then, even if he smiled tiredly, chirped by the pain caused by the initial blow, being relieved of his exit with the same baritone, authoritative, sweaty, red-faced, eyes out of his or her orbits. What do you think you'd have in place of the observer character?!? Especially since, when he went to the cashier to pay for the chair, he apostrophed the cashier who pointed out the rudeness of his gesture with a line like: "Please shut up lady! I'm paying for it! That's it! You'll now have a new chair so I did a good thing that I solved the problem with my gesture. No one else can have an accident after that. Here's the money and the rest is none of your business! I've had enough of the boss who cut my salary and threatened to fire me even though I was made to do something that was someone else's business"... What thoughts will you have now?!? And, what thoughts will you have when you get out of work you hear other details about the incident, like, "" Well, you should have seen them all! They were screwed by how much they fought to deal with it"... And finally come the clarification: "Yes, it was the case after how many hours of training in tennis he did! Sooner or later he had to become an acceptable player too." Here are the "traps" of conscious communication (without presenting possible associations made with memories stored in your subconscious related to large people, who seem aggressive)...
So, for starters, let's see what are the biggest mistakes that can be made in using the meta-model (or universal model - by this term we try to define a kind of model, how to use conscious and/ or subconscious language that makes it possible to systematically reduce the statements of a transmitter, individual or subconscious regarding his real or "recorded" experiences) and how you can avoid them. There are three big pitfalls that we need to be careful about when using the meta-model and that we can avoid by using the four types of questions described above: who, what, when and where. Every time we hear a certain thing, we are forced to procure a lot of the necessary information, from assumptions, even from the subconscious, empathizing with our own experiences and associations, reasoning, feelings or the like. To avoid this process, it is necessary to ask the question: "What do you really mean?" / "What is really said?", at which point at least one of the mistakes that we will discuss below may occur. If it is important to achieve certain objectives and do not settle for a beautiful dream, pay attention to the use of language in words that are subconscious (and that are trivialized by excessive use in communication from various circles, groups, etc.) such as "love", "light", "energy", "oscillation", "blockage", "development", etc.
The three mistakes are: 1. Lack of information necessary to understand an experience (real lack or related to one's own perception), a problem that can be solved simply by asking: who, what, when, where; 2. Limitations from the universal model through a. generalizations (universal quantifiers) and b. limited choice possibilities. In order to solve these problems, it is practical to focus attention on complementary, more thorough experiences where appropriate, in an effort to get out of the generality stage and get as much detail as possible, which structures the map of reality in a better resolution and on a larger scale (for example, from a distance of 1,000 meters all people look the same , while from one meter individual differences can be easily detected).
This also evolves awareness. Also in this case (b.), it is necessary to review the need for an attitude that is necessary only when we have at our disposal an optimal number of details that allow us to properly appreciate reality. If, in this framework "as if", as the process is also called, a number of alternatives of action are mentally re-examined which until that time have not been taken into account, increases the willingness to try other ways which, in this way, have proved to be possible rational solutions.
Many high-performance athletes, artists, managers and politicians today use this technique to be able to cope safely and flexibly with everyday tasks; 3. Limited experimental capacity (defective semantic formation), which means unilateral and often non-systematic interpretation of perceptions, which prevents a viable relationship with reality. In order for this rigid attitude to be restructured (reprogrammed, in the case of the subconscious) to become a realistic and multilateral one, a logical perspective is needed, aided by comparisons with deviant interpretations and by the practical examination of interpretations.
These three notions (main mistakes) can be (I will try to be) explained even more thoroughly (in the following). For understanding the next paragraph, the points "examples" and "clarifying questions" refer to the use of the language of the conscious as a possibility to understand differentiated reality, thus to create consciousness. The point "What would be used in everyday life" refers to the situation in which it is not necessary, even harmful to certain details with the help of "clarifying questions" about what was discussed above. Let's go, let's go, let's go, let's go, We'll start with the lack of information!
Just missing the information. Examples: "He is the best, many have become conscious, I am afraid". Clarifying questions: "What are you afraid of?", "What do you see, hear, feel, smell and what do you taste when you're afraid?". What can be useful in everyday life: the lack of information in verbal communication becomes problematic only when the missing information is not known to the receiver or when the transmitter does not know exactly what it wants to communicate; if both have certain information, it would be extremely complicated, time would be wasted and it would not be at all amusing for those known to be constantly introduced into the communication process. So, even an omission can sometimes be extremely useful.
Lack of relationship. Examples: "He shouldn't do that, it's not good, nobody likes me." Clarifying questions: "No one really?", "What concrete experiences have made you believe this?", "What should happen to know that someone likes you?", "Who exactly doesn't like you?". What can be useful in everyday life: and in this case the understanding can be made easier if the information that is not entered into the communication is known and consciously available to all who participate in it.
Words that designate tasks and that inaccurately describe a process. Examples: "By this I feel a lot. This impressed me deeply. I'm picking up a lot of energy." Clarifying questions: "What really happens in the field of sight, hearing, touch, taste and smell when you perceive these energies?". What can be useful in everyday life: in the presence of certain premises, it also leads to a smooth communication; about things that are not important objectively need to be reasoned in detail.
Frozen Processes: Nouns that designate something that cannot be accurately described (nominations). Examples: "Love is very important to me", "I have problems with it", "I want a relationship". Clarifying questions: "Who would you like a relationship with?", "What do you want as concrete experiences in this relationship?", "What period would you like to have this relationship?". What can be useful in everyday life: cursive communication and the fact that about unimportant things objectively should not be reasoned too much.
But if it was just a lack of information. We will now proceed to the "analysis" of limitations within the universal model (I will continue the numbering above, even if it will be another "group", in order to have a real scroll of the landmarks with which we are dealing).
Generalizations (universal quantifiers): Examples: "Today's youth is degenerate. You never help me. Everyone knows that." Clarifying questions: "Have you established without exception, from experience, that anyone you asked knew this?" "What people and what ages have you known to be degenerate?", "How should someone you designate to be degenerate now behave?". What can be useful in everyday life: generalizations help people connect isolated experiences with other situations; if someone has learned that a light bulb can be made to light up using a switch, he generalizes this experience and is able to turn on and off other bulbs, even if they have different switches; a useful generalization is also that if you have ever known a predatory animal, you have found that its teeth are an essential tool for it; in the future you can increase your ability to survive by being cautious in dealing with animals that have a strong teeth, for if they have a similar teeth, they are likely to use it in the same way; Besides, it may prove useful not to have to think and talk too much about non-essential things, which requires a waste of energy.
Apparent need: Examples: "It's important to dress decently. I can't stop doing this. I have to continue my marriage." Clarifying questions: "What will really happen if you act differently?". What can be useful in everyday life: a vitally resilient structure (moral, values, norms, ethics) creates the ability to guide decisions, in the sense that they are taken according to group rules in which people in the environment do not oppose actions or the person; if, however, the others are much more flexible than assumed, if there are no real constraints on certain decisions or where the social field can be changed profitably, totally or partially (a new group of friends, a new job, a freely chosen family instead of an imposed one), there is no justification for this 'atitudinal straitjacket'.
Now we will move on "analyzing" the limited experimental capacity or, as is still "formulated", the defective semantic formation.
Unrealistic connection between cause and effect: Examples: "I'm desperate because he wants to leave me. Your attitude annoys me." Clarifying questions: "What really happens to you when you think about leaving you?", "What exactly is done to get angry?". What can be useful in everyday life: Introducing causal links between the inner world (conscious ly-enextly subconsciously) in planning your own activities; if I really know that someone will bring me into a state of stress, through a certain attitude, I can bypass him or i can give him up until I am able to adapt to it.
Reading thoughts: Examples: He's only doing this to me off! He knows exactly how I feel. He just doesn't think about me." Clarifying questions: How do you know he acts like this to you off?, What is the sensory perception that makes you conclude that he knows how you feel?. What can be useful in everyday life: to get others to explain their actions or to provide you with the emotional energy needed for your own actions; sometimes these statements are based on real experiences and are appropriate to increase the planning capacity of actions; in addition, from actual insufficient information, action directives can be drawn up leading to logical results, especially in the case of emotional resonance.
Generalized Appreciations: Examples: "Who doesn't think like me, is wrong! It's not good to depend on others.' Clarifying questions: "Basically, what can someone who thinks differently than you and you would do if you were in his place?", "What practical effects would result for someone if they thought differently than you?", "What concrete situations do you refer to and what concrete effects does your way of thinking and acting in these situations?" , "In certain circumstances, for whom is it not good to depend on others?". What can be useful in everyday life: the elaboration of general values and rules, which link in acceptable structures the activities of members of a group, in order to meet their needs (an example for this are the rules of movement); and this behavioural model can be used so that, from insufficient principled information, functional action and appreciative directives are inferred (in order to understand their content, blurry paintings are completed in this relationship); every entrepreneur needs these techniques in order to be able to make decisions for which, in practice, there is only rarely enough information to rationally justify them.
And, I think all this is enough (they are the essential ones)! They complement your awareness-level analysis regardless of the benchmark in the anchor sheets or the cards that will be presented in future posts.
But some clarification is still needed. For example, another mistake that frequently occurs with the rational use of the language of the conscious is inconsistency. "I don't know anymore!", "I want love, it's not enough?!?", "This is what every normal person has to understand!" and the examples can go on. As you may have noticed, if certain concrete problems need to be solved, it is not enough to want to communicate only through the language of the subconscious (not even with yourself that you must clearly delineate the language of the conscious from that of the subconscious). Each individual or party must describe exactly what he or she means by doing so (see the questions above, otherwise the others will feel overworked or simply "parts" of you – the subconscious perceives love completely differently from the conscious even by providing the limited interpretation of the conscious's ability to manifest everything that it can assess).
Who does not know (does not want to know) what is, after all, important to him, will rarely get what he wants (really – elements of distraction/ addiction, thank God, come from everywhere and are accepted and used without reservation). Even if this is found very close to him, he will not be able to recognize what he wanted. That is why it is good to never settle for superficial answers, especially when, in order to be successful, it is important to know exactly what it is. Explains these correlations to people who prefer to find themselves in the world of dreams (in the sense of a world built and accepted by them, which can be described to be mostly imaginary, compared to the real part in which they live). Ask such people if they are satisfied with their own lives! And even we, how many problems we have to solve with ourselves, with the beliefs we have created over time, that are related to the world of dreams and have nothing to do with the real, real world. Maybe we're all in a situation where we have to try something new.
That is why it is good, indicated, imperative, depending on the conjuncture, to have reactions to the search for reality. And when we use the meta-model, we must bear in mind that most people (even if it seems like a generalization) will not be very willing to answer these insistent questions, ours or theirs and, depending on the circumstances, will often react with irritation. The language of the subconscious or a language compatible with their dreams will, however, be much more agreeable. Therefore, the use of the language of the conscious should not be transformed into an ideology or even an inquisition. It should only be used when necessary in the context of clarifying the topic (and not in other circumstances) and in relation to people who are open to new perspectives. If it is necessary to ask precise questions, clarify to the interviewee the purpose and meaning of the problem, so that it does not become rigid, but collaborates with you in discovering the treasure of truth. Besides, in the way the questions are formulated, the so-called "improvements" are also used: "I'm curious what really happened to you!", "It's great, says more about this!", "By that you mean this, or the other, or the other or what?", "Detail, details, I melt after details as you call them, I want details!" are some of the ways of using the meta-model in a way bearable for the interlocutor but also by us in our dialogues with ourselves (especially with the subconscious).
And finally this long post, let's see what to do with the language of the conscious in our own lives. So far we have identified anchors, assigned them to people in our past, present and, why not, future life (including us), identified the messages of the subconscious (feelings) and linked them to the "customized" anchor sheets, and now we understand some things about how we should "consider" everything consciously, in a language that is understandable to anyone and anyone. Now it's a little exercise that can change our lives if we take it seriously. This exercise will begin to "focus" everything on us, the main point of our universe. Let's go, let's go, let
From my experience (and those from which I have researched) I will list the central notions around which the structuring of the lives of many people (probably the majority) moves. They originate, in general and in particular (someone else wonder?!?), in the language of the subconscious, in the language of dreams. We've already identified everything with the records we've compiled so far. Read everything quietly and then write down behind each notion a concrete interpretation, corresponding to the meta-model that suits you. During this time, be careful to avoid the three big mistakes That I mentioned earlier when using conscious language (and use the "analysis details" presented later).
This will quickly clarify what you really expect from life and your fellow human beings and what is really happening to you and around you. Over time you will find other concretes that suit you (to make sense to you) and this can only be beneficial. In this way you create several possibilities of conscious options with which you can intervene "correctively" on the potential existing at the subconscious level. You will know if a certain concrete satisfaction is not possible and/ or you will turn to another that you can obtain at that time.
This way, your life will become more enjoyable overall. And if there are individuals in your environment who will envy you because suddenly you know what you want and you manage to get it, you can give them some directions. Caution, in order to develop more accurate descriptions, use the following knowledge (those in future posts) presented as sub-modalities.
So, in the records made so far, we will find at the first landmark related to us: Anchors: "Visual: eyes (light in them), Person: partner/ lover, Feeling: love". My comment, the author: all the primary feelings presented were related to needs flagged by the subconscious but love, love is not a need but a plus. My example is leaving with something directly related to your well-being and has nothing to do with any signal. Obviously, in this case, it doesn't mean that we won't move forward, that things can't get any better than that. And, we will proceed to "transposition" into the conscious, into its language. For starters, we're going to start saying something we'd like to do in addition to what we're doing. So our analysis could take the form of:
Statement: Love. Example: Someone feels loved when they suddenly receive a gift (what kind of gift, how precious and wrapped in what way), if when giving it someone looks him in the eye with thought and hears the other one say in a warm voice "This is for you because I love you!". During this time, it must be touched tenderly on the body, in at least one place (which, which is, no matter where).
Of course everything we do can be carefully listed, but that's your job. The important thing is that the analysis brings you progress but also the complete enumeration has its purpose because it will be a list against forgetting the feelings of love that characterize you and, in the future probably, to follow it to preserve the intensity of your experiences. But let's take "in analysis" now in case a primary feeling arises.
Anchors: "Visual: the eyes (light from them). Person: partner/lover. Feeling: fear/fear".
Statement: Fear.
That's where things get complicated. I begin, first, with a comment, my own, the author's... One feels fear when the need, the need, the desire to be safe, to perceive the stability possible of our lives is not satisfied. This lack of stability can have many "landmarks" such as relationship uncertainty, partner's health, material instability reflected in our (or partner's) claims and partner's behaviour and do not continue with the examples. What we have to do is let us not forget that any success of "contentment" of the primary feeling will allow us to treat the next "problem" with more energy, with more chances of success.
The visual anchor signals our eye light (perhaps also the color) but is obviously related to a certain eye condition, usually associated with the well-being in our presence of the partner, eye contact. What's to be done?!? Visual contact and direct discussion with the partner to clarify the possibilities of eliminating the feeling of fear, what are its problems and how they can be solved. Attention, from my point of view (and not only), when the feeling of fear born of material considerations arises, it is no longer about love but about cohabitation because of your love. But for compliance, I'll go ahead and give an example. Let's say that the partner's response is "lack of material stability related to the future". Our analysis will take the form of:
Statement: I feel the future stable when. Example: Someone feels stability in terms of the future when he has a salary that allows him to cut "a", cut "b", cut "c" (carefully lists, conscientiously and carefully describes all the landmarks that you consider important), at the time "x" can have access to the "a" cut, then at the time "y" to have access to "b", etc. This list will place you forcibly in the conscious and you will see if it is worth having feelings of fear and not mistaken, they are feelings of loneliness, stress, inadequacy, etc.
Or, for example, especially in the case of weaker people, possibly of ladies, one can identify fear as actually being a sense of stress born out of lack of protection (by the way of the unstable future). In this case, after a procedure similar to the one above, one can reach a point of no return, awareness of the impossibility of achieving the "state of stability represented by the need for protection". Obviously, there are solutions here, too. In this case we need to weaken the intensity of the pressure of feelings of fear, identified as an insecurity related to lack of protection, by "helping" processes.
The subconscious makes no differences and only accumulates perceptions and, by a certain "insistence" of the practice will replace previous perceptions, "outdated" with new ones. Therefore, the rewriting of the old concepts will be made simple, following the example below.
Statement: I feel protected when. Example: Someone feels protected when lying in a warm, neck-deep bath with a sparkling with exotic flavors (what a particular flavor, try the flavor, how much foam). The bathroom door must be closed, sing a certain romantic, soothing melody and in the room must burn at least one aromatic candle placed on a stand (what format, what color).
Or...
Statement: I feel strong when. Example: Someone feels strong when they feel that their car (what model, how it should look) reacts to the throttle (how exactly it reacts, describes it) and immediately increases its speed (how much, it describes). During this time, a certain song must be heard in the audio installation (which must be the power, sound quality).
Of course the statements are so varied that there's no point in wasting our time on this. I can only help you with some suggestions like the ones below.
Other examples of ads might be: "I'm happy when...", "I know I'm successful when...", "I feel satisfied when...", "I feel tenderness when...", "For me, the development of consciousness happens when...", "I'm afraid when...", "I panic when...", "I feel confident when...", "I feel strength when...", "I trust when...", "Growing up means to me when..."... And the utterances continue according to the "particularity" of each of us.
But don't forget! These are simple examples of translation procedures between and with the help of the conscious and the subconscious. We still have enough to learn before we can move on to a real analysis of what we've discovered in the course of our efforts... But all this in future posts. That's enough for today!
Love,
Gratitude and Understanding (Namaste)!!!
Dorin, Merticaru