Pitfalls of the New Code NLP?

[MrDigital]

Forgive me father for I may be going against the grain...

Whether you're New to New code NLP 'John Grinder' Style, or have used some of the techiniques exstensively. I'd like to hear your opinions on the models and how you incorporate them into your daily practice...

Have you set out and used the new code change formats and (dare I say it) FAILED... Believe me I have had some hammer over using the word 'fail' as if it blasphemes the NLP world (to some people). Well, that is not my intention so call it whatever you like even my favorite MIS-TAKE if you care. And after testing the patterns and maybe sometimes them not working what did you decide about the New Code...

How do you incorporate it into what you do?

Did you think allelujah it's the best thing since sliced bread?

Or did you decide it wasn't the difference that was making a difference?

I am a certified NLP Trainer in New Code NLP... I have tested the patterns and I work with people that have tested the patterns far far more than I... In everyday 'real life' one to one situations...

I'm not here to defend anything or anyone but to open a dialogue about a subject I think people will enjoy participating...


Wayne

[Poodle]

How does one find out all about the New Code? I have bits and pieces of it in Dilts' encyclopedia. Allelugia is not in the encyclopedia.

I don't think we have a whole bunch of New Code readers around here. I know we have another Grinder person if he shows up.

You may be having a discussion with only yourself :eek:

[MrDigital]

Discussions with myself are an ongoing process my dear :p

Nearest thing literature wise would be JG's book whispering in the wind... And jorgen Rasmussens Provocative Hypnosis which includes plenty of new code principles... If I can find anything that may be of interest I will post up...

I considered not posting on this site but then the nature of experience on here I think some of you will very easily identify with some of the principles...

We'll wait and see..

Wayne

[Poodle]

I for one will buy one of the books you mentioned.

We have discussed DHE, NHR so I 'see' no reason for not discussing The New Code. These two are still the founders of our 'skills'. I will have lots and lots of reading time this summer.

[MrDigital]

OK here's an example using The New Code NLP at the level of Pure Process...

Utilising Process as 'Pure' as possible...

Client selects a specific 'context' (Spatially) from 3rd position (Observer) where they would like to experience difference/change etc

The coach has no idea or indication what the context is...

Client is guided and Enters context and associates... In this example, I mean reeeeeally associates... e.g (looks like their world is falling apart)...

Client Steps out of context and coach 'breaks state' & then initiates a new code game i.e NASA, Alphabet etc. thus resulting in creating a fantastic state of 'Flow' 'High Performance' or whatever you choose to label it...

Client is then guided to re-enter the context and there is an undeniably significant change... Client is proclaiming... "oh my god I feel fantastic, determined, I know exactly what I need to do now"...

Coach has calibrated significance of difference and considers it a job well done...

2 x weeks later the twin towers have been demolished...

A pitfall of new code or working completely content free?

Or maybe the pitfalls of working at pure process...

MrD

[Poodle]

What exactly is the difference between 'observer' and being disassociated, except in this one client has to return to associated in a very nonresourceful state? Seems rather cruel to me. Was experiencing it once 'not more than sufficient' in that client is REALLY ASSOCIATED in the nonresourceful state?

Why even bother with 'observer' or disassociated state if client has to actually really associate into a past totally NONresourceful state? :confused:

1. I am unable to understand or

2. This completely 'flies flat into the face' of NLP

3. Will have to wait to read the book obviously.

[MrDigital]

Are made explicit in the New Code so associated/dissociated is still a shift in perceptual positions.

Here is the new code change format: Spatially...

1 Client selects a context from 3rd position i.e observer or dissociated where they would like to experience difference...

Bear in mind that a person doesn't come for change work if they have no reason to. The question "what's the problem" could cause a similar unresourceful state...

However, the frame is a context or situation where you would like to experience difference or whatever you choose to language (process wise).

2 Client enters the context (coach calibrates state) and associates.

3 Client is removed from context (back out to 3rd/dissociated) when deemed appropriate by the coach (again calibration is fundamental)
*** Break State ***

4 New Code game to create 'no nothing' High Performance' 'Flow' state... Once calibrated that client is in a 'no nothing state' for example the coach directs the client into the context (with no words) other than maybe a sprinking of process based langauge... (and calibrates)

What we have found with New Code is that the more the client fully associates to the context the greater more impact for the client. Kinda like a perceptual contrast of before and after and a great convincer...

The client does not select consciously what resources they require and by entering the context with these high performance states they give responsibility to the unconscious to make the appropriate changes.

At the end of the day if we backtrack to the Fast Phobia Cure post it's not about the patterns it's a bout how well a coach can calibrate... In that sense I suppose New Code makes it much simpler... It can be a very elegant model to have in your toolkit... And Kids love it...

Anyway, Before I continue this changework is nothing that cannot be done with classic NLP and I'm not suggesting so...

Hope that gives a little understanding...

Not sure about your comments it falls flat in the face of NLP ???

And my friend you do not need to wait to read the book to learn about some of the principles as I am more than happy to discuss...

MrD

[Poodle]

is from the Bandler Camp wherein ONCE WAS MORE THAN SUFFICIENT. We would never put a person in a nonresourceful state on purpose.

Even in the PSTD Cure, Dr. G. goes one farther diss. than Bandler people do and I like it -- especially for returning vets.

This is why I wrote the NLP comment.

Hugs~Pood

ps - I'm gonna have to use the Spelling Strategy on myself as I never spell those two correctly. DARN!!

[MrDigital]

Asking a client to state a context where they would like to experience difference and then stepping into the context... You don't know if it's an un-resourceful place till they arrive there...

And then you are mindreading/calibrating...

It's done at the level of pure(ish) process...

However, knowing it's a context where they would like to experience difference then you could assume that its very possibly a context they are entering from time to time... And the reason they are selecting it is because they are responding in a way that is not serving them...

Thus they come to experience difference... Which you give them an experience of... And they have a perceptual contrast of how they responded to the context to how they are now responding...

And why limit yourself to what Dr Bandler thinks... Stretch and grow the field to the max... Let your clients be the judge of your methods and maybe teach Mr Bandler something...

MrD

[Poodle]

Don't think so friend. I have signed my life over to Richard three times now and it's completely and totally legal. I LOVE working under his name. I have my very own special number and his signature on all of my licenses. Connie calls him 'The King' and I call him 'The Boss'. Says it all where he is in our models of the world. :cool:

This does not mean that I am not allowed to read other people's work.


Be well~Pood :pood:

[MrDigital]

Of course you know I respect that fully...

Everyone I meet is Bandler in disguise ;D

MrD

[Poodle]

Did some work on this and got some great understandings. It's kewl and totally awesome. Thank you for presenting this. If others have not read it or done it, DO IT NNNOOOWWWWWWWW.

ALL learning is great. Now, just have to get this into the 'other mind' so it will be there when I need it. Sincerely doubt Bandler would be against it as it is Bateson and somewhat kinda mentioned in a way in Structure of Magic....just never finished.

Pood :pood: