|
This page provides the links to the backnumber
issues of the newsletter
written in Japanese by Taiten Kitaoka, a Japanese NLP trainer/facilitator.
Note: This "provocative" title of the newsletter is meant to suggest
that Taiten
Kitaoka's NLP work is the first attempt for the integrated NLP in the
Japanese market.
It is not meant to claim that his NLP work is genuine in a more general
sense.
************************************************************************
Issue #8: 2003.12.21.
'This is the Genuine NLP!'
************************************************************************
The author, who has been formally trained by the four most important co-developers
of NLP (Grinder, Bandler, Dilts, and DeLozier) will send newsletters containing
a variety of information concerning the advanced communication psychology/
pragmatic psychology known as NLP.
************************************************************************
"NLP FAQ, #1"
Hello everybody! I am Taiten Kitaoka, a Japanese NLP trainer/facilitator.
In this issue of the newsletter, I would like to answer NLP FAQ's (Frequently
Asked Questions). Some of the readers may already know these answers,
but I hope that even they would find some of these answers interesting
in terms of proper nouns, etc.
Q1: Who are the readers this newsletter is aimed at?
A1: The main target of this newsletter is defined as "NLP hardcore people",
that is, those who have already recognised the power of NLP and have been
applying NLP to their own professions (including NLP experts). For this
reason, most of the descriptions found in this newsletter have a strong
left-brain tendency. The content of the newsletter may necessarily turn
out to be difficult to understand for those who have not experienced NLP
through sessions or workshops.
Q2: Why is "Neuro-linguistic Programming", which the abbreviation NLP
stands for, such a complicated name?
A2: The full name of "Neuro-linguistic Programming" can be said to mean
that the purpose of NLP is to elucidate the basic relationship between
mind ("neuro") and language ("linguistic") and how their interactions
affect our body and behaviour ("Programming"). However, I think that the
name doesn't have a big or serious implication; it is just a name. The
term "NLP" seems to have begun to be used around 1980. Especially, in
the West, the word "Programming" tends to trigger strong allergic reactions,
and is usually associated with the image of "brainwashing", as mentioned
in the next FAQ question. This may have become a big obstacle for NLP
to be spread in Western countries. (I think that it is all the more striking
that NLP has become known in the West to this degree, because of this
obstacle.) In my own experience, it appears that the Japanese people may
not have such a strong adverse reaction towards the name as Western people.
This is probably partially because, even if the Japanese people, who like
abbreviations, hear the abbreviation of NLP, they may not automatically
think of its full name.
Q3: I think that NLP is after all a set of techniques for brain washing,
and an extremely dry methodology which ignores feelings and sensitivities.
Am I wrong?
A3: NLP is based on an epistemological approach which asks the question
"How do we know what we know?", and studies how feelings and sensitivities
are born, but doesn't try to ignore the existence itself of consciousness,
feelings or sensitivities, as the Behavioural Psychology a la Skinner
did.
That is to say, from the point of view of NLP, the fact that the kinesthetic
(feeling) experiences of a human being may be rule-governed, does not
mean that she/he is not having that very experience; on the contrary,
she/he may be able to experience such kinesthetic experience considerably
more intensively, when she/he knows that that experience is rule-governed,
and can control it, if she/he wants to do so.
Q4: What is the difference between the NLP "Co-founders" and NLP "Co-developers"?
A4: The NLP co-founders are John Grinder and Richard Bandler. The NLP
co-developers may mean, in the broadest sense of the definition, all the
"NLPers" (i.e., NLP experts) - in fact when I was trained by Bandler in
1995 as an NLP Trainer, all the participants in his training course were
given after it was finished a card mentioning "You are a co-developer
of NLP" by the Society of NLP - but they can be defined, in the narrowest
meaning of the term, as the American NLP trainers who were around the
co-founders of NLP at the time of the foundation of NLP, and who helped
them to develop NLP. For instance, such names can be enumerated as Robert
Dilts, practically the Number Three of NLP, Judith DeLozier, practically
the Number Four, David Gordon, the author of "Therapeutic Metaphor", Charles
Faulkner, the co-author of "NLP: The New Technology of Achievement", Steve
and Connie Andreas, the editors of "Frogs into Princes", Stephen Gilligan,
a researcher of Ericksonian Hypnosis, Leslie Cameron Bandler, Bandler's
ex-wife, etc. Furthermore, as someone from a younger generation, the name
of Anthony Robbins who wrote "Unlimited Power", and who has apparently
become a guru for many businessmen in the Sates and the UK, in particular,
may be mentioned here. Among these NLP co-developers, I have been an acquaintance
of the two co-founders of NLP, as well as Dilts and DeLozier.
Among the recent NLP co-developers in the UK, the following names may
be mentioned; Eileen Watkins-Seymour, an American NLP trainer who introduced
NLP to the UK for the first time, Julian Russell, an UK trainer who used
to be the promoter of Grinder's work in the UK, Michael Breen, who has
been recently co-organising NLP certification courses in the UK with Bandler,
Joseph O'Connor and John Seymour who are the authors of "Introducing NLP",
Ian McDermott, the head of ITS, Penny Tompkins and James Lawley, who have
been recently organising a series of co-workshops, and others. I either
have been an acquaintance of these UK trainers named here, or participated
with them in past trainings held by the "four most important NLP trainers".
Other NLP co-developers whom I have personally known include Lara Ewing,
who holds business oriented workshops, Sid Jacobson, the author of "Metacations",
Suzy Smith, a guest trainer at the NLP University, the late David Gaster,
who used to be very close to Grinder in the eighties, Joseph Riggio, an
American trainer whom I have been providing with my training services
in Kyoto every summer since 2000 (he also holds personal development workshops
based on Joseph Campbell), David Grove, a trainer from New Zealand, whose
unique workshop based on hypnosis and the "Inner Child" in 1988 was surprising
and interesting to me, and Charlie Badenhop, an American trainer who took
part in Grinder's training with me in 1989, and who has been recently
organising a series of "Seishindo" workshops as a combination of NLP,
Aikido, physiotherapy and hypnosis in Nakano, Tokyo, Japan.
Q5: Could you tell me what these four most important NLP Co-founders/developers
are like?
A5: John Grinder is academician-like (he is actually a linguist specialised
in transformational grammar), and rather reserved, and greatly contributed
to the theoretical development of NLP. When I took part in a workshop
entitled "Prerequisites to Personal Genius" as well as NLP certification
courses held by Grinder and Judith DeLozier during the late eighties,
I was quite impressed by the sharpness of his epistemological logic and
discussions. He has currently been continuing his NLP work with his current
partner, Carmen Bostic. I have currently been communicating with him.
He was born in 1940. I consider Grinder to be the best theoretician of
NLP.
Richard Bandler was a mathematician at the foundation of NLP. He was also
a Rock'n' Roll musician. In contrast with Grinder, he gives an impression
of a flamboyant showman. He expresses his opinions in an unrestricted
way even during his training. Bandler is sometimes described as a very
intuitive genius. I had a series of personal conversations with him during
his certification training course in Germany in 1995. His recent work
is based on submodalities combined with hypnotic inductions. Bandler was
born in 1950, so he founded NLP at the age of 25. I consider him to be
the best practitioner of NLP.
Robert Dilts is a very humble looking person, and gives the impression
of a born academician. He invented many of the important NLP Personal
Editing techniques. He is prolific, and the content of his books are very
left-brain oriented. This may be the reason why not many books of his
have been translated in to Japanese. I consider Dilts to be the best technique
inventor of NLP.
Judith DeLozier is an anthropologist and a dancer. Her work is intuitive,
and she is a trainer who very much emphasises "somatic" aspects. During
the late eighties she formed a partnership with Grinder, and currently
organises the NLP University with Dilts. DeLozier can be said to be the
best Intuitor of NLP.
Q6: I would like to know the position which NLP holds in modern psychology.
A6: In my opinion as a person who has experientially seen almost all schools
of Western psychotherapy, there are no other schools of the late 20th
century both in therapy and in general psychology as systematic, or as
effective with experiential results, as NLP. According to one of my acquaintance
trainers, there is a school called "Emotional Freedom Technique (EFT)"
born after NLP, which may produce quicker therapeutic effects than NLP,
using "meridians", or energy spots, but it still appears that NLP exhibits
the quickest therapeutic effects as a purely "cerebral" or "cognitive"
school. In therapy, a school called "Family Constellation" has recently
become very popular, but NLP still appears to have a higher degree of
systemisation. In comparison with currently more and more known schools
like Coaching or Mentoring, NLP's system as a discipline seems to be bigger
than them.
Incidentally, I am of the opinion that, in order to successfully live
in this age of the 21st century's "Communication for Information Globalisation",
we should have ideally three sets of basic skills as our personal cultural
basis, just like the OS for a computer. They are (1) NLP skills required
to enhance our "Communication" skills, (2) the skills for operating computers'
GUI (Graphic User Interface) required for processing "Information", and
(3) linguistic skills to be "Global", especially English abilities as
the Internet language. I personally have consciously managed to acquire
the skills of all of these three areas, which enabled me to considerably
enhance my learning abilities in the area of my own expertise, other than
those areas. Also, I personally discovered that the rules governing how
the skills of these three areas are learnt and how their learning processes
can be accelerated are exactly the same. These "universal" rules for learning
are expounded in the fifth issue of this newsletter.
Q7: Why are Gregory Bateson and Milton H. Erickson called the "Fathers
of NLP"?
A7: If it hadn't been for Bateson who advanced Bertrand Russell's epistemology
based on British Empiricism of the 17th and 18th centuries, as the background
of NLP, as explained in the third issue of the newsletter, or if it hadn't
been for the Palo Alto Group guided by Bateson, which was "NLP's senior
brother", NLP would not have been born.
Also, from the point of view of NLP techniques and models based on the
application of Batesonian epistemology, the extensive study which the
two co-founders of NLP made on the hypnosis practiced by Erickson at the
initial stage of the foundation of NLP played a crucial role in further
developing the NLP technology.
In this way, because the two great giants were essential to the birth/initial
development of NLP, they are called "the Fathers of NLP". In a sense,
Bateson represents the left-brain oriented theoretical aspects of NLP,
and Erickson the right-brain oriented intuitive aspects.
Q8: Is it true that Bandler and Grinder were in litigation?
A8: Bandler and Grinder went their own respective way around the beginning
of the eighties. In my own understanding, around 10 years ago, Bandler
began law suits asking for damage compensation against Grinder and several
other prominent NLP trainers, by claiming that NLP was founded by himself
alone. In the final analysis, the court decided that NLP had been made
public for more than 20 years, and that it therefore could not be exclusively
owned by someone, and Bandler lost the case. The last page of the book
written by Grinder in 2001, "Whispering In The Wind" features a facsimile
copy of two co-founders' agreement signed by both, to the effect that
they recognise each other as NLP co-founders, and respect each other's
mutual contribution to NLP as well as mutual efforts the other had made.
Q9: Have any of the NLP techniques been trademarked or registered as trademarks?
A9: If Bandler had won the case in which he sued Grinder and other trainers,
the NLP technology would have been considered to be Bandler's intellectual
property, and people in the world would have needed to add "TM" after
"NLP" whenever they mentioned NLP. (Indeed, when Bandler was suing Grinder,
etc., he was encouraging NLPers to add "TM" to "NLP" like "NLP TM".) Now
that he has lost the case, NLP is not made subject to trademark.
However, a few of the NLP techniques have been trademarked by the inventors
of these techniques. For instance, "Time Line Therapy" has been registered
as a trademark by Tad James, and "Core Transformation" by Tamara Andreas.
However, in my opinion, these trademarked techniques compose only a small
part of the NLP body, and especially "Core Transformation" seems to be
very similar to Dilts' "Alignment of Neuro-logical Levels" (I am not sure
which technique was invented first). In this sense, whether these techniques
are worth being protected as trademarked intellectual property may be
controversial.
Q10: Why has NLP not become the mainstream in academic fields?
A10: Although NLP was founded during the early seventies by John Grinder
and Richard Bandler at the University of California Santa Cruz (UCSC),
under Gregory Bateson, who was a professor at UCSC, the Kresge College,
it is very interesting to note that it has not chosen the way of becoming
academically independent, by means of forming an academic forum, etc.
Certainly it seems that, at the time of the foundation of NLP, the counter-culture
on the West Coast was at its peak, which may have made the co-founders
of NLP consciously decide not to become the mainstream of the academic
environment, but to choose an "alternative" way. Yet, in my opinion, NLP
chose not to incorporate a so-called "scientific" methodology of first
forming hypotheses and then doing experimentation to verify whether those
hypotheses are indeed correct ones, but to take methodological steps of
first watching, observing, and experimenting with, what is going on in
reality, and then discovering and establishing only the ways which function
well in that reality, and finally proceeding to left-brain oriented theorisation
to explicate how they work. This methodology inherent to NLP seems to
be one of the biggest reasons why NLP has not been made an academic discipline
in a traditional sense, or why it cannot be made as such.
I personally believe that NLP models, which can achieve behavioural changes
on the live reality level, which epitomises what pragmatism is, have incomparably
higher values than the mere theories of the academicians living in ivory
towers, but was once flabbergasted when the participants of one of my
past workshops said to me "If there are academic theses at some universities
which statistically prove the effects of NLP, please show them to us first.
If there are such authoritative endorsements, then we will start to believe
in and accept NLP". As far as I was concerned, these participants seemed
to believe rather in the statistics which may turn out to be "desk theories"
than in what was happening in front of their very eyes (i.e., their experiences
in the NLP exercises given to them), meaning that they may have abandoned
from the beginning their efforts of verifying their own inner experiences
through their five sensory channels.
Q11: Is there any unifying NLP organisation in the world?
A11: There is no unifying NLP organisation in the world. On national levels,
interestingly there is no large NLP organisation in the States, and the
ones in the UK and in Germany seem to be large ones. Especially, the Association
for NLP (ANLP) in Britain seems to be the most important for the reason
that the internationally universal language of English is spoken in the
UK. The UK organisation has members based in as far as Hong Kong and South
Africa. The condition for the membership is an NLP Practitioner certificate.
This association of which I have been a member for 15 years had about
2,000 members three years ago, so the number of members may have reached
3,000 by now.
Incidentally, NLP has widely spread to Europe including Latin countries
and former Eastern European countries, and even Russia, though for some
unknown reason there seem to exist very few NLP trainers in Portugal.
This fact is all the more interesting because NLP is spread in Brazil
where Portuguese is spoken. Rita Belo, who is scheduled to take care of
part of my NLP courses, is a Portuguese NLP Master Practitioner trained
at the NLPU, born and raised in the UK.
Q12: Is there any unifying certification system of NLP in the world?
A12: There have been traditionally NLP certifications of "Practitioner",
"Master Practitioner" and "Trainer" (in some cases, there may be the certification
of "Master Trainer"), and, in principle, NLP trainers higher than Master
Practitioner have been certifying other trainers with their own responsibilities.
(Like an Aikido teacher with the second Dan being incapable of giving
the second Dan to other students, it is the logical sequel that a certificate
of "Master Practitioner" can be given only by NLP Trainers or above.)
There is no single unifying certification body of NLP in the world. For
instance, my "Practitioner" and "Master Practitioner" certificates were
given in 1988 and 1989 by GDA (Grinder, DeLozier & Associates) organised
by Grinder, the "Trainer" certificate in 1995 by the Society of NLP headed
by Bandler, and another "Trainer" certificate in 2002 by the NLP University
headed by Dilts and DeLozier.
As far as I am concerned, because there is no unifying certifying body
of NLP, what matters may be not from which certifying body an NLP certificate
is issued, but rather to what extent the trainer(s) who signed the certificate
are recognised by other trainers in the NLP community.
Incidentally, the well known NLP certifying bodies include, in the States,
the Society of NLP of Bandler, the NLP University of Dilts and DeLozier,
and NLP comprehensive in which many of the NLP co-developers in the narrow
definition are involved. (Grinder seems to have been giving his certifications
under his own name.) In the UK, PPD of Julian Russell and ITS of Ian McDermott
may be enumerated. Bandler has been organising UK certification courses
for the last several years with Michael Breen (my acquaintance for 15
years) and Paul McKenna, who is a worldly famous stage hypnotist.
Q13: Which NLP certificate(s) do I need to be an independent NLP trainer?
A13: Of course, whether someone can be an independent trainer depends
more on the quality, capabilities and experience of the person in question,
but it appears to be very difficult, if not impossible, for someone who
is qualified as an NLP Practitioner to start to teach NLP straight away.
In this connection, I wrote the following in the sixth issue of the newsletter:
"At least in the case of the Western NLP communities, in the NLP Practitioner
certification courses the participants study and master the details of
individual tube stations, i.e., individual NLP models, and their corresponding
exercises, and in the NLP Master Practitioner certification courses they
study the organic relations between the individual stations (individual
NLP models) already studied in the Practitioner courses, in order to become
versed in the structure of the overall network (the overall picture).
In Trainers' Training certification courses they obtain high degrees of
knowledge and know-how on the levels of both the overall network and individual
stations (models)."
Q14: Why should NLP have been born in the seventies in California, Santa
Cruz?
A14: I personally think that it was necessary that NLP was born in the
seventies in California, Santa Cruz. At that time, the West Coast had
been going through the high time of Counter-culture following the Hippie
culture born in San Francisco during the sixties, in the form of all kinds
of experimentation with altered states of consciousness including hypnosis,
meditation, drugs, etc. As far as my understanding is concerned, it appears
that there must have existed tens of thousands of freak people/schools
doing these experimentations at the time. I can imagine that almost all
these schools were probably "pocus bogus", but at the same time, I think
that there was a possibility for one or two among these tens of thousands
of schools to happen to turn out to be authentic and real, at least if
argued for statistics' sake. And I think that such a grain of sand found
in the vast desert, as a genuine school, was NLP. I suspect that the single
biggest (or probably even the sole) reason why NLP has not sunk into obscurity
like other contemporary schools is that it had that genius Gregory Bateson
as its epistemological background.
Q15: What were the influences made on modern thought on the part of Bateson
as a father of NLP?
A15: The profile of Gregory Bateson was detailed in the third issue of
this newsletter, but it seems that his influence on the so-called new
age thinkers is considerable.
That is, among the important scientists and/or thinkers of the "New Science"
are enumerated Fritjof Capra, the author of "Tao of Physics", Lyall Watson,
the author of "Lifetide", Rupert Sheldrake, who proposed the model of
morphic resonance in his "A New Science of Life", David Bohm, a modern
physicist who proposed the holographic theory, Karl Pribram, a brain physicist,
Illya Prigogine, a chemist who won a Nobel Prize for his theory of dissipative
structures, Francisco Varela, a researcher in Artificial Intelligence,
Peter Senge, who wrote "The Fifth Discipline" (the translation of this
best seller never got popular in Japan), etc., and it may not be too exaggerated
to say that almost all these thinkers have been directly or indirectly
influenced by Bateson.
Q16: What is the relationship between NLP and hypnosis?
A16: In terms of the obvious fact that one of the two fathers of NLP is
Milton H. Erickson, who was considered to be the most important hypnotherapist,
there is a strong relationship between NLP and hypnosis. In the very first
NLP book published in 1975, "The Structure of Magic I", as well as in
"Patterns of the Hypnotic Techniques of Milton H. Erickson M. D. I" published
in 1975 and "Changing with Families" in 1976, the two co-founders of NLP
successfully modelled three genius "wizards of magic", i.e., Fritz Pearls,
the founder of Gestalt Therapy, Erickson, and Virginia Satir, a family
therapist. In this sense, it is possible to consider NLP to have initially
been born as a new alternative school of psychotherapy. However, in my
opinion, NLP had transformed itself into a complete methodology of communication
psychology with more general applications by around 1980.
This transformation of NLP seems to me to mean that, while the co-founders
of NLP initially modelled how the therapeutic effects achievable in the
somnambulistic state of deep hypnosis, which Erickson was very good at,
can be accessed, they subsequently found that similar or better therapeutic
effects could be achieved by utilising light "altered states of consciousness
(i.e., trance)" frequently happening in our daily life, instead of depending
on the deep somnambulistic state to do so. NLP Personal Editing techniques
are exactly the exercises which take advantage of such light entranced
states.
Q17: What is the relationship between NLP and meditation?
A17: NLP provides a set of a certain number of tools called "Personal
Editing" technique exercises, and the practitioners of these techniques
begin to notice at different levels the "elusive obvious" a la Moshe Feldenkrais
(who was a founder of the physio-therapeutic method of postural integration),
which they had failed to notice before, as important "secondary gains"
experienced through these exercises.
This "awareness" is something meditators tend to acquire in the process
of deepening their meditation with more and more strengthened observation
power, but it is not wrong to point out that, in NLP, that awareness begins
to happen more quickly, more stably, and more systematically in the practitioners
of NLP than these traditional meditators.
Q18: What is the relationship between NLP and psychotherapy?
A18: As stated in A16 above, NLP was initially born as a new alternative
school of psychotherapy. I myself had gone through over 1,700 hours of
psychotherapeutic sessions some 20 years ago, I was then not able to completely
eradicate the traumas I had been suffering from since my childhood. It
was NLP that subsequently enabled me to achieve this complete eradication
of the deep-seated traumas. For the details of the process of this eradication,
and the decisive differences between NLP and psychotherapy, please refer
to the fourth issue of the newsletter.
Q19: Is it possible for extreme cases of traumas to be overcome through
NLP techniques?
A19: As far as my own experience is concerned, the elimination of extreme
traumas through NLP is possible. This process is made possible though
continual and repetitive practice of a certain number of NLP "Personal
Editing" techniques. This topic is expounded in the fourth issue of this
newsletter.
Q20: Has the process of NLP modelling been made explicit as a learnable
set of tools?
A20: I personally don't think that the process of NLP modelling itself
has been made explicit as a learnable set of tools in NLP literature.
However, in an implicit sense, the steps and processes of "Elicitation
of Other People's Strategies" and of the series of NLP Personal Editing
techniques can, of course, be said to be using modelling methodology.
Incidentally, I wrote at the beginning of the fifth issue of the newsletter
that Grinder had been quite disappointed with the fact that there had
been only applications of NLP since it was founded, and it seems to me
that Grinder may be encouraging NLPers, in his recent "Whispering in the
Wind", etc., to go back to their initial "raison d'etre" (i.e., "how and
why NLP was born"), and to try to make the NLP modelling processes explicit
as a learnable set of tools (i.e., to model the modelling processes themselves).
However, It also seems to me personally that, because NLPers have not
been explicitly trying to model what Grinder and Bandler achieved some
30 years ago, even if Grinder (or other NLP trainers) has modelled the
modelling processes, there may be no further NLP experts who are ready
to go beyond that level of modelling (i.e., to "model the process of modelling
the modelling processes themselves").
Q21: I heard that NLP is sometimes called "Mental Aikido". Am I correct?
A21: At least during the late eighties when Grinder and DeLozier were
jointly delivering workshops and courses, there were additional "extra-curriculum"
exercises of the Feldenkrais Method or Aikido as bodily holistic work,
as something which compliments the mentally holistic work of NLP. (I heard
that my friend Charlie Badenhop used to teach Aikido in the courses held
by Grinder and DeLozier.) Especially, NLP was at that time called "Mental
Aikido" as opposed to (physical) Aikido.
Q22: Can my ability of learning English be considerably accelerated by
NLP?
‚`22: I myself used to be very good at foreign languages since I was
a student, and, for instance, I had acquired linguistic abilities enough
to write my university graduation thesis for a BA in French. In the last
20 years I spent in the Western countries, I have managed to acquire probably
a higher level of mastery of learning English in terms of the overall
reading/writing/hearing/speaking capabilities, despite my physical disabilities.
(My French at the moment is unfortunately quite rusty.) This is said not
as boasting at all, but rather to convey my message to the readers that
I have been successful in accelerating the process of the learning areas
including the linguistic learning I used to be very good at, to considerable
degrees, by means of utilising NLP techniques and models.
Therefore, my answer to this FAQ is that it is possible to enhance the
English learning abilities considerably and quickly.
Incidentally, I have been incubating my own project of "CD-ROM software
for accelerating the learning of English according to the method a la
Kitaoka", and the patent for the ideas for the project has been applied
for and made public. I hope that some of the readers may be interested
in sponsoring such a project of mine.
Q23: What is the "NLP New Coding"?
A23: As far as I know, the term "NLP New Coding" began to be used by Grinder
and DeLozier in their series of workshops entitled "Prerequisites for
Personal Genius" held during the late eighties.
I myself think that the traditional NLP and the New Code NLP may not have
huge differences and are related to each other in a seamless manner, but
in my own understanding, the biggest characteristics of the New Code NLP
may be (1) that it frequently utilises "spatial sorting" a la Gestalt
Therapy (markings are made on the floor so that the practitioners of so-called
role plays can move around from one marking to another) and that (2) it
also frequently uses Personal Editing technique exercises based on the
spatial sorting.
DeLozier, who has been organising the NLP University after dissolving
her partnership with Grinder, has been inherited the NLP New coding.
Q24: I heard that there exists the "NLP Encyclopaedia". What is it?
A24: In 1980, Grinder, Bandler, Dilts and DeLozier published "Neuro-linguistic
Programming, I", and the publication of following volume(s) was planned,
but no more volumes were actually published (I think that the reason may
be that Grinder and Bandler stopped working together by then.) In order
to complete this unfinished project, Dilts and DeLozier published two
volumes of "NLP Encyclopaedia" from the NLPU in 2000. The look of the
two volumes of the encyclopaedia is very similar to that of "NLP, I",
but their size is A4, and each has 800 pages, totaling 1,600 pages. It
is very hard to carry them.
The content of the encyclopaedia mainly consists of new writing by Dilts
and DeLozier, and the existing writing by the four most important NLP
trainers. It is obvious that one can have an overall view of what NLP
is, if not the comprehensive understanding of everything about NLP, from
this work.
I have the intention to translate the encyclopaedia, but am not sure whether
there is a publisher in Japan who could undertake its publication.
Q25: Is it possible to distinguish those who practice NLP techniques consciously
in their daily lives and those who do so unconsciously after they have
spontaneously acquired those skills involved?
A25: I think that this matter depends on how much you can be consciously
aware of what other people do in front of you. The fact that someone does
NLP techniques consciously seems not to straight away indicate that their
behaviour looks artificial, because, usually, we tend to accept whatever
artificial behaviour other people may show to us, as natural behaviour
they may always be exhibiting.
Any way, except for extreme cases where too obvious impressions of artificiality
are given to other people, I don't think that how consciously other people
think of our behaviour, whatever it is, may become a very serious element
in terms of our inter-personal communication, as far as whatever natural
or unnatural behaviour we exhibit functions as our message sent to the
unconscious mind of other people. The same is the case with establishing
rapport.
Q26: How and to what extent do I need to study NLP, so that I may have
the overall view of NLP?
A26: For the answer of this FAQ, please refer to the sixth issue of the
newsletter.
Q27: "After learning NLP technique exercises, I don't know how to apply
them in my daily life. What should I do?"
A27: For the answer of this FAQ, please refer to the last part of the
seventh issue of the newsletter.
How did you find this current issue of the newsletter? If you have questions
and feedback, please contact me at magazine@creativity.co.uk.
Go to Taiten Kitaoka's Official Web site.
Go to the
site in English: Taiten Kitaoka's Newsletter: "This is the Genuine
NLP!".
Go to the
site in Japanese: Taiten Kitaoka's Newsletter:" ".
(c) Copyright 2003, Taiten Kitaoka. All rights reserved.
|
